Bleacher Bums Forum

General Category => Bleacher Bums Forum => Topic started by: Dave23 on May 09, 2013, 12:56:37 pm


Title: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on May 09, 2013, 12:56:37 pm
What's going on in the world today?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 09, 2013, 12:58:58 pm
Nothing
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 12, 2013, 10:17:07 am
Yeeeee HA!  The Cubs are going to win the WS this year!!!!

Hell has officially frozen over!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz2PLb2phcQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz2PLb2phcQ)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 15, 2013, 12:45:05 pm
Where's the spam I was supposed to remove?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ISF on May 15, 2013, 12:47:10 pm
Bears board. I think Dave may have to do it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 15, 2013, 12:49:38 pm
I removed some in a couple of our topics last night.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 17, 2013, 03:28:24 pm
I don't understand.  7 people were shot to death in Chicago this last weekend.  Impossible.  Guns are illegal in Chicago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 28, 2013, 03:21:38 pm
That does it.  Boycott this state: http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/28/world/europe/italy-politics-racism/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 18, 2013, 01:36:27 pm
Interesting interview by the Atlantic of David Boaz from the Cato Institute:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/americas-libertarian-moment/278785/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 29, 2013, 06:16:50 pm
That little traitor hiding in Russia has released the entire CIA budget, including the detailed listing of assets and programs and areas where our intelligence is lacking.

This is a perfect example of a situation where assassination would be not only justified, but desirable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 29, 2013, 07:38:12 pm
That little traitor hiding in Russia has released the entire CIA budget, including the detailed listing of assets and programs and areas where our intelligence is lacking.

This is a perfect example of a situation where assassination would be not only justified, but desirable.

You call his a traitor.

I call him one of the most important patriots of the last several decades.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 29, 2013, 07:39:36 pm
Where did you see that, Dave?  None of the major outlets are reporting it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 29, 2013, 07:48:19 pm
Oh, I see it now, but it's getting tertiary coverage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 29, 2013, 07:56:02 pm
"Patriot"? Patriots, ours or their's, usually stand for something. Stealing secrets in the name of freedom and then running away to hide in Russia, that bastion of "freedom"? 

"Patriot", nope.  How about "spineless hypocrite"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 29, 2013, 08:14:03 pm
Hmmm.  Secret papers are released and FDISK shows up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 29, 2013, 08:53:20 pm
1. I break into Curt's house and steal his laptop in the name of a "principle",
2. to keep Curt from posting nonsense on the Internet,
3. in the vain hope that millions of people will hail me as a hero when in reality only fringe elements will consider it patriotic,
4. sell the laptop to the highest bidder,
5. then instead of standing on my principles I run away,
6. And to top it all off, in the name of keeping nonsense off the Internet, I hide out in Jesbeard's house.




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 29, 2013, 09:30:56 pm
That's an excellent plan FDISK.... I keep my shotgun right inside the front door.... even though you would never need to use it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 29, 2013, 11:20:27 pm
You feel that someone that turns over the detailed budget and budget justifications of the CIA to the enemy to be a patriot?  That is the most idiotic thing I have ever heard you say.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on August 30, 2013, 12:40:13 am
That in itself speaks volumes...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 30, 2013, 06:13:37 am
davep, I feel that someone who lets us, the American citizen and taxpayers, know what our government is doing to us and doing to others in our name and hiding from us, and does so at considerable personal risk to himself, and who does so with the intent of allowing us, the American citizens, to influence future conduct of our own government, is not only a patriot, but also a hero.

The CIA never should get a single dime without that spending aired in public.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 30, 2013, 07:35:03 am
Jes - do you believe that the Government should have military secrets?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 30, 2013, 07:41:32 am
Damn few.

Of course time and manner and scope and targets of a military attack should be kept secret.... you know, the kind of thing Obama himself is strongly hinting at when he now speaks about Syria.

Nothing Snowden has released would come remotely close to qualifying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 30, 2013, 12:42:37 pm
So you think that there should be SOME secrets.

Do you think that anyone with access to these secrets should be allowed to make any of them public if they don't agree that they should be secret?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 30, 2013, 01:00:35 pm
If we are at war, which we are not, and if the secrets involve the time and manner and scope and targets of a military attack, I have no problem with classifying that information or criminally punishing someone who deliberately provided that information to the enemy for the purpose of allowing the enemy to use it against us in a pre-emptive or defensive manner.

None of that describes what Snowden did, though some of it does describe what Obama and Kerry are doing.

In a democratic society very little information about government actions, plans or expenditures, should be kept secret.

If you do not want a democratic society, then it is easy to justify keeping secret anything those running the show want to keep secret.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 30, 2013, 01:44:12 pm
The US wasn't at war when the Soviets stole the secrets for the H-bomb.

NATO wasn't at war when Philby exposed agents leading to scores of executions.

The US isn't at war with Iran, do you think our intelligence operatives and operations should be public knowledge?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 30, 2013, 01:51:07 pm
The US isn't at war with Iran, do you think our intelligence operatives and operations should be public knowledge?

Operations, yes.  Operatives, perhaps.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 30, 2013, 02:14:47 pm
What is the value added in exposing secret operations?  What wrong are you righting?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 30, 2013, 02:18:32 pm
FDISK, I don't quite understand the nature of a question asking about "the value added."

In a democratic nation, the idea is that the people govern and make decisions.  That can not happen in a meaningful manner if they are not at least allowed access to the information needed to make intelligent decisions.

This is a democratic republic, not a monarchy with a divine right of kings.

The idea was not that the President was our boss, but that we are the President's boss.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 30, 2013, 02:29:35 pm
Sounds great, you should make car commercials.

But you did touch on one important point, we aren't really a Democracy, are we?  We are federal republic.  Citizens don't make their own rules, they elect representatives to do it for them. Our duly elected representatives, our employees, made a decision a long time ago that it was in our best interest to have some secrets. Do you suggest that an individual is free to ignore the will of the many? To pick and choose which laws they will obey and to ignore the rest?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 30, 2013, 02:45:18 pm
FDISK, you seem to be trying to argue over what is or is not legal.  I have never said that what Snowden did was legal.

The existence of a law does not mean the law is MORAL or that it should be observed.  You are old enough to remember the Freedom Riders of the early 1960's.  They were breaking the law.  The law was wrong.  They did exactly as you suggest no one should do -- pick and choose the laws which they will obey or ignore.  They were patriots and they were heroes.

So is Snowden.

I have not said he did not break the law.  HE has not said he did not break the law.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 30, 2013, 04:15:17 pm
Snowden didn't sit in the front of the bus. He is a thief and a profiteer who has put innocent people's lives at risk. He has harmed his country. I'm not arguing what he did was illegal. Everyone knows it was illegal. I'm arguing it was immoral.

Snowden feels it's wrong for a free nation to spy on their own people. So...as a remedy...he hides out in Russia...a place where they have never dreamed of spying on their own people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 30, 2013, 05:14:47 pm
Snowden feels it's wrong for a free nation to spy on their own people. So...as a remedy...he hides out in Russia...a place where they have never dreamed of spying on their own people.

You really think Snowden went to Russia as a remedy for this country spying on its own people?

Really?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 30, 2013, 09:09:42 pm
Sure, what choice did he have. It was there or Ecuador. Patriot/Hero/Martyrs must suffer a little. I'm sure the Russians can afford to pay a little better.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 30, 2013, 10:19:10 pm
So you are backing away from your earlier suggestion that he is hiding in Russia as a "remedy" and are simply retreating to the land of smart-as$ed remarks.

Not surprising.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 30, 2013, 10:40:37 pm
The only thing I'll add to this discussion is that we're treading ground where a federal republic can begin to trip itself up: when it decides to take action upon the population without telling the population. When that happens we don't know what we're voting for. We cannot trust lawmakers because we don't know what they're doing behind closed doors. I understand that certain things need to be classified. I'm not so naïve as to suggest  there should be no government secrets. But there is a line that is crossed when certain basic liberties the general population believes it enjoys are infringed upon without their knowledge or consent. Many here are much more knowledgeable than me on this topic, but from what I've come to understand, not only has the NSA (along with other government agencies) collected data that most people would assume is off limits, some within the NSA have also taken it upon themselves to go above and beyond what is permitted to them by the FISA courts, etc. When secretive actions surpass their secretive systems of checks and balances, I think that is cause for concern. I am not justifying Snowden's actions, but in a topic so polarizing, it's easy to miss the other side of the argument.

I think Snowden has crossed the line, especially with some of his more recent leaks. If he had left it to simply showing the American population that they're surveilled quite a bit in ways that might surprise them, in ways that seem to bypass basic protections afforded by the Constitution, I think I'd be closer to jes' side of the argument. What continues to leak out though is increasingly damaging, and it's incredibly unfortunate that Snowden has decided to take it this far.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 30, 2013, 11:11:08 pm
tico, one of the problems of "simply showing the American population that they're surveilled quite a bit in ways that might surprise them," is that the government continued to lie and deny, and no pressure would have developed to do anything at all.  The thing that is incredibly unfortunate is that so many secrets exist in the first place and that the government was doing so much $hit it was lying to us about, and would STILL be lying to us about if not for Snowden.

In 1775, the terrorists were the Founding Fathers.

The real concern of the federal government is not so much foreign invasion, or even another idiot underwear bomber.

The real concern is that enough people become sick of what the federal government is doing that they internally, domestically, organize another revolution and truly throw the bums out.... and Big Brother is determined not to allow that possibility.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 31, 2013, 10:41:00 am
If we are at war, which we are not, and if the secrets involve the time and manner and scope and targets of a military attack, I have no problem with classifying that information or criminally punishing someone who deliberately provided that information to the enemy for the purpose of allowing the enemy to use it against us in a pre-emptive or defensive manner.

None of that describes what Snowden did, though some of it does describe what Obama and Kerry are doing.

In a democratic society very little information about government actions, plans or expenditures, should be kept secret.

If you do not want a democratic society, then it is easy to justify keeping secret anything those running the show want to keep secret.

So if we are NOT at war, there should be no Security Secrets?

By the way, you didn't answer my questions.  Since you agree that there should be SOME security secrets, do by believe that anyone with knowledge of them should have the legal right to publish them if he doesn't agree with keeping them secret?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 31, 2013, 10:48:36 am
If we are at war, which we are not, and if the secrets involve the time and manner and scope and targets of a military attack, I have no problem with classifying that information or criminally punishing someone who deliberately provided that information to the enemy for the purpose of allowing the enemy to use it against us in a pre-emptive or defensive manner.

None of that describes what Snowden did, though some of it does describe what Obama and Kerry are doing.

In a democratic society very little information about government actions, plans or expenditures, should be kept secret.

If you do not want a democratic society, then it is easy to justify keeping secret anything those running the show want to keep secret.

In the past, you have condescendingly reminding me that we do NOT live in a democracy - we live in a representative republic.  In a representative republic, we elect representatives who decide for us, among other things, what things are Governmental Secrets and what things should be made public.

Do you think Julius Rosenberg was justified in passing our atomic secrets to Russia, at a time when we were not at war with Russia?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 31, 2013, 12:20:07 pm
So if we are NOT at war, there should be no Security Secrets?

I can't think of any, but the question is not really relevant to the question at hand.  The question in classifying any document should not be determined based on whether there might be some situation in which a democratic government should keep something should be secret from the people who vote into and out of office those running the government, but instead whether the specific document at issue should be secret.

What we have seen time after time is that information is classified far, far to aggressively than can possibly be rationally defended.... and yet which you appear willing to defend.

By the way, you didn't answer my questions. 

If I didn't, perhaps you didn't ask them well, or they appeared too foolish to bother with, or I missed them, but arguing over whether you did or didn't ask them is counter-productive, so....

Since you agree that there should be SOME security secrets, do by believe that anyone with knowledge of them should have the legal right to publish them if he doesn't agree with keeping them secret?

Just so we keep the conversation clear, could you read that question aloud to yourself and then perhaps re-write it?  I think there may be a typo or some other error in it, and I don't want to assume what you meant, but instead to respond to a clear question.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 31, 2013, 12:34:05 pm
In the past, you have condescendingly reminding me that we do NOT live in a democracy - we live in a representative republic.  In a representative republic, we elect representatives who decide for us, among other things, what things are Governmental Secrets and what things should be made public.

There is a world of difference between accepting the concept of a representative republic making laws on general matters and deferring to those who are elected to determine what information the public will or will not have available in determining whether to leave them in office.

Do you think Julius Rosenberg was justified in passing our atomic secrets to Russia, at a time when we were not at war with Russia?

I never really thought about it before yesterday, but the question, as you have posed it, is whether he "was justified."  Without knowing everything that he knew, I won't try to second guess his justifications.  Clearly it was illegal.  It is not at all so clear as to whether the world was better or worse off as a result of his actions.  (Which amounted to sharing scientific information.... think about that for a moment.  What the nation had criminalized was the sharing of scientific information.)  The nation at the time had a number of folks with the mindset of Patton, Nixon or Joe McCarthy, and if not for Rosenberg allowing the Soviet Union to develop comparable weaponry, it is not at all hard to see the United States in the 1950's to have openly used nuclear weapons in "diplomacy" around the world, and to have vaporized at least a few more cities the way it did Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to coerce nations into compliance.

I think you may be intending to ask whether it SHOULD have been illegal for Rosenberg to have given that information to the Soviet Union.  To that I would answer no.  It should not have been.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 31, 2013, 02:55:06 pm
And that explains why libertarians so seldom (fortunately) achieve national office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 31, 2013, 04:38:34 pm
davep, had it not been for Rosenberg, the Soviet Union still would have been able to develop nuclear weapons, and presumably would have done so... unless good war hawks like yourself had nuked them first, totally destroying their capability of doing so.  You might want to live in a world in which the United States completely dominated the globe and from time to time nuked those who offended us.  I wouldn't, and I am happy that I don't.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 31, 2013, 08:54:54 pm
It is easy to win an argument (at least in your own mind) when you ascribe actions and wishes to the other side.

When have I ever said that we should nuke someone that is on the verge of developing their own nuclear weapons.  Even you must realizing that giving away our secrets is not quite identical to nuking other nations when we are not at war.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 31, 2013, 11:42:12 pm
It is easy to win an argument (at least in your own mind) when you ascribe actions and wishes to the other side.

When have I ever said that we should nuke someone that is on the verge of developing their own nuclear weapons.  Even you must realizing that giving away our secrets is not quite identical to nuking other nations when we are not at war.

Talk about projection.

When did I say you felt "we should nuke someone that is on the verge of developing their own nuclear weapons"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 01, 2013, 10:20:41 am
unless good war hawks like yourself had nuked them first, totally destroying their capability of doing so

If I have to read you posts, the least you could do is read them yourself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 01, 2013, 10:31:35 am
Reading comprehension, davep, reading comprehension.

You are a war hawk.  And those who would urge pre-emptive nuclear strikes would be war hawks.  That is not to say that YOU feel "we should nuke someone that is on the verge of developing their own nuclear weapons."

X is a number.  Two numbers added together equal 8.... that is not to say that X is either of the numbers which total 8 when added together.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 01, 2013, 04:46:19 pm
If you are going to make a meaningless statement like that, Jes, you have to try to add at least a little meaning to it by defining what a "War Hawk" is, and explain why you feel I fit into your definition.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 01, 2013, 04:53:50 pm
Short lob.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 01, 2013, 09:00:14 pm
If you are going to make a meaningless statement like that, Jes, you have to try to add at least a little meaning to it by defining what a "War Hawk" is, and explain why you feel I fit into your definition.

If it is meaningless, why bother adding any meaning?

You have for several years now made clear that you have very few reservations about the use of force (i.e. war) in order to further American interests, and that you have relatively little concern about blowback from that use of force.  I consider that a war hawk, which is the way the term has been used for more than 200 years now in American history, dating back to as least the War of 1812.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 01, 2013, 09:52:27 pm
You have obviously misread my posts for the past several years.  I have never advocated the use of force to advance American Interests.

I HAVE advocated the use of force for those who threaten America and their allies.  That is quite a different thing.

But although you defended the use of the term War Hawk, you failed to define it.  Exactly what is a War Hawk.  If it is merely someone that advocates the use of force to advance American Interests, then I clearly am not one, since there are a great many American Interests that I would NOT use force to advance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 01, 2013, 10:48:41 pm
davep, whether you are or are not a war hawk, I did define it.  I referenced you, and then wrote, "I consider that a war hawk."  In other words, "that is my definition of a war hawk."

Do you need it set out for you as Webster's would?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/war%20hawk
Definition of WAR HAWK
: a person who clamors for war; especially : a jingoistic American favoring war with Britain around 1812


I also referenced history, and even a specific period in history (the War of 1812.... you and Curt probably remember it).

At that time two of the more the prominent war hawks were  Henry Clay and John Calhoun.  The term has been around a long time.  Even has a wikipedia entry for it.

But a war hawk need not call for using military force to advance any and all American interests, and nothing in the definition I offered would suggest that.

Now, to try to clarify whether you are or are not, what military involvement of the U.S. since WWII have you supported, and what proposed or actual involvement have you opposed?  When have you supported remaining long than we did and when have you supported leaving before we did?

You have made clear many times that you oppose any meaningful reduction in U.S. military bases overseas or the number of troops overseas and that you believe we need to be pretty much everywhere we are, and perhaps more.   You ridiculed Ron Paul for calling for major cuts in military spending and reducing overseas bases.  You seem to like the idea of the U.S. using force to get its way around the world, and were very upset by my suggestion that perhaps the world was made a better place by U.S. rivals having nuclear weapons to counter-balance the nuclear weapons of the only nation in the world to use them in combat.  You have before ridiculed the idea that U.S. involvement in the middle east might well result in more blowback harm to the U.S. than any benefit our level of involvement there might bring.

To me those are all rather hawkish attitudes.

Have I misread your positions?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 02, 2013, 02:43:28 pm
So your entire definition of War Hawks "have relatively little concern about blowback from that use of force."?  Then I am certainly not a War Hawk, since I have considerable concern from blowback from the use of force.  For this reason, for instance, I would not advocate a nuclear strike against a country that has the ability to strike us back with nuclear weapons.

Do you have a definition that would include ME in it, since you feel I am one?  Or are you merely trying to use an ad Hominem attack to support a weak or non-existant argument?

As far as your above statements are concerned, most are totally false.

I do not oppose any meaningful reduction in US military bases overseas or the number of troops overseas.  For instance, I think we should close down most or all bases in Europe and South  Korea.  That sounds meaningful to me.

I do not believe that we need to be pretty much everywhere we are.  As I said, we do not need to be in Europe, South Korea and several areas, and I think we can close at least half the bases in the United States.

I do NOT like the idea of the US using force to get it's way around the world, except those who are trying to do us physical harm, or support those that are trying to do us physical harm, or harbor within their borders those who are trying to do us physical harm.

I certainly do not believe that the world would be a better place by having countries that wish to harm us have nuclear weapons.  There aren't too many people insane enough to believe that.

I remember ridiculing the idea that U.S. involvement in the middle east might well result in more blowback harm to the U.S. than any benefit our level of involvement there might bring.  However, I do believe that there is no alternative than to risk it.

They may well be hawkish attitudes, but only one applies to me, and that only partially.

And yes, you have misread my positions, as you consistantly misread the opinions of almost every poster on the board.

Nor do you use consistancy when you do so.  Comparing the freedom riders of the 60s, who deliberately broke what they believed to be unjust laws and were willing to face the consequences of their acts, with a coward that releases military secrets and then flees to foreign countries to escape the consequences of his acts, buying sanctuary by giving away further secrets that do devastating harm to the us, goes beyond the bounds of logic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 02, 2013, 03:26:37 pm
So your entire definition of War Hawks "have relatively little concern about blowback from that use of force."?  Then I am certainly not a War Hawk, since I have considerable concern from blowback from the use of force.  For this reason, for instance, I would not advocate a nuclear strike against a country that has the ability to strike us back with nuclear weapons.

Do you have a definition that would include ME in it, since you feel I am one?

Yes, war hawk.

And I see your comments about your concern about blow back... and I have also read your posts here for quite some time.

Or are you merely trying to use an ad Hominem attack to support a weak or non-existant argument?

Support for what purpose?

We are not engaged in a debate with anyone keeping score, and it is not as if I am going to change your opinion or my opinion by pointing out that you are a war hawk.


I do not oppose any meaningful reduction in US military bases overseas or the number of troops overseas.  For instance, I think we should close down most or all bases in Europe and South  Korea.  That sounds meaningful to me.

I'm sure it does sound meaningful.... to you.



I do not believe that we need to be pretty much everywhere we are.  As I said, we do not need to be in Europe, South Korea and several areas, and I think we can close at least half the bases in the United States.

No, actually you said MOST or all, not all.  So is it ALL bases in Europe, and South Korea.... or MOST?  And what "several areas" are you talking about?

Much depends on perspective, and from my perspective, your positions as expressed here for years have been quite hawkisk.

I do NOT like the idea of the US using force to get it's way around the world, except those who are trying to do us physical harm, or support those that are trying to do us physical harm, or harbor within their borders those who are trying to do us physical harm.


Nice abstractions, but considering your prior posts I somehow think that when push came to shove you would come down on the side of hawkish positions.... that was why I asked a couple of questions to try to address where you actually stood, though you ignored the questions.

I will offer them again: what military involvement of the U.S. since WWII have you supported, and what proposed or actual involvement have you opposed?  When have you supported remaining longer than we did and when have you supported leaving before we did?


Quote
I certainly do not believe that the world would be a better place by having countries that wish to harm us have nuclear weapons.  There aren't too many people insane enough to believe that.

Great straw man argument, but it indicates that either YOU are now advancing a position to help in an argument when there is not debate judge and your comment certainly is not going to influence either you or me.... or you are misreading someone else's opinion.  It is not that the world would be a better place by having countries that wish to harm us have nuclear weapons.  It is instead that the world is a better place when no single nation, even one like the United States which likes to consider itself as saintly, having weaponry which would allow it to dominate the globe and run roughshod over everyone else.


Quote
I remember ridiculing the idea that U.S. involvement in the middle east might well result in more blowback harm to the U.S. than any benefit our level of involvement there might bring.  However, I do believe that there is no alternative than to risk it.

Hawks routinely talk about their concerns (John McCain is a great example), but also routinely ultimately conclude that there is no other alternative.

Quote
And yes, you have misread my positions, as you consistantly misread the opinions of almost every poster on the board.

So far you haven't offered any examples in this discussion of my misreading of your position, but simply have disagreed with my characterization of your position.

Quote
Comparing the freedom riders of the 60s, who deliberately broke what they believed to be unjust laws and were willing to face the consequences of their acts, with a coward that releases military secrets and then flees to foreign countries to escape the consequences of his acts, buying sanctuary by giving away further secrets that do devastating harm to the us, goes beyond the bounds of logic.

Apples and oranges.  The freedom riders HAD to allow themselves to be arrested, or beaten or jailed to make their point.  That was not needed for what Snowden did, and had he allowed himself to have been jailed, he would also have eliminated his opportunity to respond to the next government lie in response to his disclosures or to disclose anything else.


Quote
.... a coward that releases military secrets and then flees to foreign countries to escape the consequences of his acts, buying sanctuary by giving away further secrets that do devastating harm to the us, goes beyond the bounds of logic.

What harm to us as a nation?  The harm to us was in the form of the spying on us.   As to him "buying sanctuary by giving away further secrets," that's a nice leap of logic, but on not supported by evidence.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 02, 2013, 05:38:30 pm
You keep mentioning that I have made many posts that prove your point, but you have failed to point to a single one.

But you are right.  We are certainly not engaged in a meaningful debate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 02, 2013, 06:47:23 pm
Talk about mis-reading... nowhere did I write were were not engaged in meaningful debate.  I said there was no one SCORING a debate, and pointed out that neither of us would likely be swayed by ad hominems (your wording was "trying to use an ad Hominem attack to support a weak or non-existant argument").  That is not at all the same as saying the debate (or discussion) was not meaningful.

Of course it might be more meaningful if you would at least attempt to respond to the rather simple questions I posed, intended to flesh out just how hawkish you might be... since my reading of your posts leads me to conclude that you are, and your claim is that you are not.
 
So, for the third time now: what military involvement of the U.S. since WWII have you supported, and what proposed or actual involvement have you opposed?  When have you supported remaining longer than we did and when have you supported leaving before we did?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 02, 2013, 07:03:11 pm
You keep mentioning that I have made many posts that prove your point, but you have failed to point to a single one.

Re: Politics, Religion, etc. etc.
« Reply #139 on: May 14, 2011, 01:49:25 pm »
"t also doesn't mean you get to violate international law... nor does being a liberal, since Obama was the one doing the violating here."

If a foreign country protects a terrorist that has wreaked destruction in America, I could care less about criminal international law.  When Tunisia gave safe harbor to pirates, Jefferson went in after them.  It was the right thing to do.  When Cambodia gave safe harbor to the Viet Cong, we went after them.  It was the right thing to do. When Pakistan gives safe harbor to the Taliban, we go after them.  It is the right thing to do.


Do you want more?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 02, 2013, 07:53:47 pm
As I said above

I do NOT like the idea of the US using force to get it's way around the world, except those who are trying to do us physical harm, or support those that are trying to do us physical harm, or harbor within their borders those who are trying to do us physical harm.

Cambodia was giving safe harbor to the Viet Cong, who were trying to do us harm.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 02, 2013, 08:18:56 pm
No, davep, the Viet Cong were trying to conquer South Vietnam.  They were not trying to do us harm.  Had we not been there helping South Vietnam, they wouldn't have cared about us at all.  We were there trying to kill them.  They fought back.  This is a lot like much of the blowback we suffer from our activities in the middle east....

And for a fourth time: what military involvement of the U.S. since WWII have you supported, and what proposed or actual involvement have you opposed?  When have you supported remaining longer than we did and when have you supported leaving before we did?

Oh, and since we are close to your comment about my misreading of your posts, I had to laugh a few minutes ago when I ran across one of your earlier claims that I had "misread" what you had written.

Quote
Quote from: davep on May 24, 2011, 01:38:43 pm
Jes - you are once again resorting to the extreme.  I never said that there were ZERO small farmers.


Dave, here is what you wrote: But my point was that without the subsidies, the small farmers would no longer exist.

True enough that you did not say there would be "ZERO small farmers."  You just said "small farmers would no longer exist."  Excuse me if I took those to mean the same thing.


Quote from: davep on May 24, 2011, 01:38:43 pm
And I never said that a politician has to be pro-ethanol subsidy in order to win in Iowa.  Merely that announcing that you are anti-ethanol subsidy will lose more votes than it wins in Iowa.


What you wrote was Some people are indeed willing to vote for the national interests over their own narrow interests.  Unfortunately, not enough to actually win an election over those that DO vote in their own narrow interest.

Again, excuse me if I see those posts as in conflict.  You apparently are able to reconcile them.  I bow to your clearly superior command of the language, because I can't.


That is pretty common for the exchanges when you contend I "misread" what you wrote, though the problem more often appears to be that I simply read the words in context and apply standard meanings to them, even if sometimes you fail to write what you actually meant... those two examples immediately above might help to illustrate my point.  (You will find the original here: http://bbf.createaforum.com/archives/politics-religion-etc-etc/210/ )
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 02, 2013, 08:20:34 pm
 ::)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 02, 2013, 09:28:30 pm
No, davep, the Viet Cong were trying to conquer South Vietnam.  They were not trying to do us harm.  Had we not been there helping South Vietnam, they wouldn't have cared about us at all.  We were there trying to kill them.  They fought back.  This is a lot like much of the blowback we suffer from our activities in the middle east....

And for a fourth time: what military involvement of the U.S. since WWII have you supported, and what proposed or actual involvement have you opposed?  When have you supported remaining longer than we did and when have you supported leaving before we did?

Oh, and since we are close to your comment about my misreading of your posts, I had to laugh a few minutes ago when I ran across one of your earlier claims that I had "misread" what you had written.

That is pretty common for the exchanges when you contend I "misread" what you wrote, though the problem more often appears to be that I simply read the words in context and apply standard meanings to them, even if sometimes you fail to write what you actually meant... those two examples immediately above might help to illustrate my point.  (You will find the original here: http://bbf.createaforum.com/archives/politics-religion-etc-etc/210/ )
 

Don't be an idiot.  The Viet Cong were trying to harm our troops.  We sent them there, and they are us.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 02, 2013, 09:50:52 pm
davep, we sent our troops to their home.  Not surprisingly, they did not welcome us.  Had they landed in the U.S. and begun shooting at us, I would agree with your position.  They did not.

We can not put our troops all over the world and then act surprised when locals who do not want them there shoot at them.  The Viet Cong did not give a damn about our troops, other than the degree to which they interfered with what they were trying to do in their own homeland.

But the real thrust of my last post was to ask you the question which was set off in boldface to make it easier for you to see.  It was the fourth time I asked it in an effort to try to determine how much or how little of a war hawk you might be.  For the fourth time you have chosen not to answer.

It would appear that you don't really want to discuss whether you actually are a war hawk, but simply want to assert you are not and let it go at that.

That being the case I am left with my impression, and feel quite comfortable I have been right from the start, and you have yours, but there appears to be little more to discuss on the issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 03, 2013, 10:07:30 am
If you were to keep your posts to a reasonable length, you would get more answers for those towards the bottom.

what military involvement of the U.S. since WWII have you supported, and what proposed or actual involvement have you opposed?  When have you supported remaining longer than we did and when have you supported leaving before we did?

I was strongly against fighting in Viet Nam, but once there, felt that we should have put the necessary assets into it to end it and go home.  I was never in favor of just giving up without winning, once entered.

I thought that going into Greneda was silly.

I was too young to have a view on Korea, but if I had, I would again have been against it, but once there,

would have fought to win.

I was against going into Lybia, and am against going into Syria.

I would have gone into Iraq, and would have remained as an occupying force for approximately the same length of time as in Germany and Japan, building democracy from the bottom up as we did there.

The same applies to Afghanistan.

I have been against almost all limited actions.  We should not put soldiers in harm way unless we plan to put enough resources to win.

I would not use nuclear weapons against a country that had no nuclear weapons.  But I would certainly use all other force to prevent an avowed enemy like Iran to get them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 03, 2013, 01:20:02 pm
If you were to keep your posts to a reasonable length, you would get more answers for those towards the bottom.

Bold face at the conclusion of a post is not enough?  And 7 lines exceeds a reasonable length?


I was strongly against fighting in Viet Nam, but once there, felt that we should have put the necessary assets into it to end it and go home.  I was never in favor of just giving up without winning, once entered.

Hawkish.

I thought that going into Greneda was silly.

One of the few uses of force I would agree with -- very limited in scope, for the purpose of protecting American life, short in duration, little risk of collateral damage or actual collateral damage, easily justifiable on what amounted to self-defense grounds.

I was against going into Lybia, and am against going into Syria.

.... because?

I have been against almost all limited actions.  We should not put soldiers in harm way unless we plan to put enough resources to win.

Again, a rather hawkish attitude, much like McCain, not a real opposition to using force, but instead an inclination to use a very heavy hand when using force, an inclination to use more force, not less.


I would not use nuclear weapons against a country that had no nuclear weapons.  But I would certainly use all other force to prevent an avowed enemy like Iran to get them.

Is my memory wrong, or have I mis-read your prior posts, or have you not in the past strongly supported Truman's decision to use nuclear weapons to vaporize a couple of hundred thousand civilians in a "country that had no nuclear weapons"?


But I would certainly use all other force to prevent an avowed enemy like Iran to get them.

You seem to miss the irony in Iran being an avowed enemy as a result of our involvement in removing the pre-Shaw government, installing the Shaw, and then propping up the Shaw and his oppressive regime.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 11, 2013, 11:05:11 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slkg_wnHFS8
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 11, 2013, 04:41:04 pm
Has the Nobel Committee ever asked for a return of the Peace Prize?  Just wondering.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 12, 2013, 12:03:18 am
What did he win it for?... Oh yeah, absolutely nothing. Shouldn't be too hard to take it back, then.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 12, 2013, 11:21:49 am
They should have just given it to George W Bush for stopping being US president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 12, 2013, 11:38:25 am
They should have just given it to George W Bush for stopping being US president.

Look at the Obama presidency... there is a strong argument to be made that the Bush presidency never did stop.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 12, 2013, 11:40:45 am
They should have just given it to George W Bush for stopping being US president.
That would have been equally ridiculous.

Who was the last American to really deserve one?  Dennis Rodman?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on September 12, 2013, 12:03:57 pm
That would have been equally ridiculous.

Who was the last American to really deserve one?  Dennis Rodman?

This lady who won in 1997 helped lead an effort to ban and clear up land mines.  That sounds pretty deserving.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jody_Williams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jody_Williams)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 12, 2013, 01:10:00 pm
What, JR, are you suggesting that Al Gore was undeserving?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 12, 2013, 11:21:04 pm
They should have just given it to George W Bush for stopping being US president.

Sorry, but there's not as big a difference between Bush and Obama as you'd like to pretend. All the major stuff that Obama campaigned against Bush on... can you tell me what's changed?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 13, 2013, 10:13:39 am
Wilson was as much a pacifist as you could find in his campaign days.  Roosevelt was antiwar.  Nixon campaigned on ending the war. 

Once you actually have the responsibility, you take a more realistic view of things.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 13, 2013, 11:30:37 am
I just think that's how much the Nobel committee and the international community hated George Bush.  If we hadn't just had eight years of George Bush, there's no way Obama wins the Nobel.  I don't agree with it; I'm just calling it how I see it.

Along those lines, Obama has been very different in my mind.  George Bush and friends manufactured a war against Iraq where there shouldn't have been one.  Again, the vast public sentiment against strikes in Syria is largely because of the war weariness stemming from Iraq.  Obama didn't cowboy up and attack Syria.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 13, 2013, 01:41:21 pm
Wilson was as much a pacifist as you could find in his campaign days.  Roosevelt was antiwar.  Nixon campaigned on ending the war. 

Once you actually have the responsibility, you take a more realistic view of things.
Bull.

Wilson and FDR both WANTED to enter into the war, and Nixon could have ended it at virtually any time on virtually the same terms he DID end it on, which is to say the U.S. simply cutting and running.

None of those three in any way support your contention that, "Once you actually have the responsibility, you take a more realistic view of things."

What in the world was accomplished by Nixon remaining in Vietnam as long as he did, other than killing another 35-40K U.S. troops, probably more than another quarter million Southeast Asians, helping Pol Pot come to power and ****ing billions down a rathole?

Staying did not help the South Vietnamese, and the videos of our final evacuation show that we were literally turning and running.

FDR was in no way antiwar, though the nation was, and Wilson merely mouthed promises of staying out of war in order to get re-elected.

It was not that "responsibility" changed their views.  It was simply that they lied to the voters to get re-elected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 13, 2013, 05:05:16 pm
I just think that's how much the Nobel committee and the international community hated George Bush.  If we hadn't just had eight years of George Bush, there's no way Obama wins the Nobel.  I don't agree with it; I'm just calling it how I see it.

Along those lines, Obama has been very different in my mind.  George Bush and friends manufactured a war against Iraq where there shouldn't have been one.  Again, the vast public sentiment against strikes in Syria is largely because of the war weariness stemming from Iraq.  Obama didn't cowboy up and attack Syria.

I'd suggest you either haven't been following the Syrian narrative very closely or your blinders are on waaaaaaay too tight here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 13, 2013, 07:27:03 pm
Blinders?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 13, 2013, 08:45:26 pm
Obama has tried his darndest to "cowboy up" and attack Syria, after painting himself into a corner with his shortsighted "red line" chest beating. He has since rather absurdly tried to walk back those comments after finding himself completely alone and unable to lead anyone over to his side of the line. For all his intentions of attacking Syria, he has even less constitutional grounds to authorize force than Bush did in Iraq. As a result, he has requested the permission of Congress to attack Syria and there is a vote pending on the floor in which he will come up short. 

While Obama has been pressuring members of Congress to vote in his favor, his own Secretary of State torpedoes the plan with an ad lib, screw-the-playbook compromise proposal that Russia has immediately seized upon and is in the process if forcing down the Administration's throat. Putin is bullying the US to do his bidding via the UN, and Obama is about to be strung up by the "red line" of his own creation while showing himself to be incapable of leading members of his own party and staff, let alone the international community, who are instead rallying around the great peacemaker Vladimir Putin.

It's amateur hour in the foreign policy comedy club. But you go ahead and blame Bush.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 13, 2013, 09:03:21 pm
(https://scontent-b-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/1240403_657225910955706_1268426740_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 13, 2013, 09:08:34 pm
Nothing I said is countered by what you just said unless you are equating Iraq and Syria, which is just nutty.  I didn't say anything about Obama doing well on foreign policy or Syria.  If anything, Obama backed himself into a corner on attacking Syria with the whole red line comment.  I do maintain that pre-Iraq, public opinion on a limited strike against a hated dictator who had used chemical weapons against his own people wouldn't have been anything like what it is today.

It sounds to me like you're miffed that I dissed George Bush.  Yes, I do blame Bush for the disaster that was Iraq and for generally being a crappy president.

Having said that, I'll get the hell out of this topic. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 13, 2013, 10:39:23 pm
What was the US response when Saddam gassed the Kurds? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 14, 2013, 12:14:58 am
I see no evidence that either Wilson or FDR wanted to go to war when they were first elected.  Can you cite any?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 14, 2013, 10:05:15 am
What was the US response when Saddam gassed the Kurds? 

Relative silence.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 14, 2013, 03:24:58 pm
I see no evidence that either Wilson or FDR wanted to go to war when they were first elected.  Can you cite any?

I see no relevance to the issue you raise, that being what their views were in November of 1912 and November of 1932, respectively.

The issue was whether the circumstances and realities they learned of after their last election before they pushed for war became some new "responsibility (causing them to) take a more realistic view of things" and to support entry into war when before that election (of 1916 for Wilson and of 1940 for FDR) they had been "antiwar."

Both them campaigned with promises to keep the U.S. out of war, while planning to do the exact opposite, just as Nixon campaigned on a promise of having a plan to end the war in Vietnam (he never called in a "secret plan".... he just refused to ever explain what the plan was), when in fact his plan was to continue the war and escalate it.

Less than a year before Pearl Harbor FDR asked his advisers to tell him what would need to be done to force Japan into a position in which it would initiate war with the U.S. and provide a justification for the U.S. to enter the war... and then he did exactly what they advised.

The idea that those three were pacifists and were only forced to change course by the realities of the world is a bit bizarre.  The justifications commonly cited for Wilson in April of 1917 calling for the U.S. to enter WWII are the following:

1) Sinking of the Lusitania;
2) Germany's attempts to get Mexico to join the Axis;
3) Germany's announced plans to use submarines to sink any vessels supplying the Allies;
4) That Germany had spies in the U.S. spying on what we were doing.

To deal with those, in order:
1) A German sub sunk the Lusitania sunk in May of  1915, so that was certainly well known before the 1916 election.  The Lusitania was also carrying war munitions to England and it was at the time within what was the declared "zone of war."
2) Germany's efforts to get Mexico to join the Axis powers -- the fact that one nation in a war should try to get other nations to join it should come as no surprise to anyone.  In all likelihood both the Axis powers and the Allies at different times before then had tried to get the U.S. to join them in the war.  In fact the way the U.S. learned of Germany's effort to recruit Mexico was itself in an effort by England to get the U.S. to join the Allies.  Granted this issue is somewhat complicated by the fact that the cable exchange the English intercepted between Germany and Mexico included the Germans trying to persuade Mexico to invade the U.S. if the U.S. joined the Allies, there was a massive IF in there, and if Mexico had joined the Axis and the U.S. did join the Allies, a state of would would have automatically existed between them the two nations.... AND Mexico clearly rejected the proposal (a proposal which itself made clear the desire of keeping the U.S. neutral in the war).
3) Germany's intention of sinking ships supplying the nations it was at war with is pretty routine in war.  I believe the United States did the same when it blockaded naval ports serving the Confederacy in the Civil War.
4) Spies.... the presence of spies as a basis for going to war?  Really?

None of those constitute real changes of anything meaningful after the 1916 election.

So with Nixon, FDR and Wilson, the best evidence of what they intended to do when the elections is not anything they said, but what they actually did right after they won the election before they took (or in Nixon's case continued) the U.S. to war.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 14, 2013, 04:39:45 pm
You seem to be agreeing with my position.  You have given absolutely no evidence that when they campaigned in 1932 and 1916 that they were in favor of going to war for any of the reasons mentioned, or for any others.  But once they assumed the responsibility, their pacifism disappeared, just as has that of Obama, and every other President we have ever had.

Did they lie during their campaigns and hide their "real" intentions?  Probably.  But nothing you say gives any proof thereof.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 14, 2013, 05:28:00 pm
davep, what a person says, particularly what a politician running for office says, often discloses very little to nothing about their real intentions.  What they DO, however, generally discloses a great deal.  If you genuinely consider what I pointed out to constitute no proof, that discloses a good deal about you.

As to your comment that that "once they assumed the responsibility" of governing, "their pacifism disappeared" ignores (and I would guess deliberately) what I have now pointed out at least twice now.  Let me run it by you a third time so you can again pretend not to see it.

FDR's position when he ran in 1932 and Wilson's position in 1912 (when they ran for the presidency initially) is irrelevant to the discussion.  The relevant question is the position they ran on in the election immediately before they called for the nation to go to war.  In other words we are talking about the 1916 election for Wilson, when he ran on a campaign which centered on, "He kept us out of war," and the 1940 election for FDR, when he promised to keep the U.S. out of WW II.  At the time FDR was campaigning on that promise he was having his adviser prepare him a memo outlining what he would have to do to bait the Japanese into attacking the U.S. in order to provide justification for the U.S. to enter WW II.... and then he followed that advice.

With neither FDR nor Wilson can you contend that they lacked the responsibility of the presidency when they were running on the promise of staying out of war.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 14, 2013, 08:34:10 pm
I agree that what they DO discloses their actual current intentions.

But what they DO does not reveal what their PAST intentions were.

Even you must realize that people sometimes change their minds when confronted with information and responsibility that they did not previously have.

Obama is certainly not a pacifist NOW.  Nor were Wilson and FDR when they entered into war.  That is not proof that they were lying when they previously said they were.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 14, 2013, 08:56:27 pm
You continue to ignore the fact that when he was campaigning in 1940, FDR directed his advisers to tell him what he needed to do to provoke Japan to initiate war, and then did exactly that.  And while it is entirely possible for someone to change his mind, I also ran through the reasons given for Wilson supposedly changed his... and for wach of them pointed out how the claim made no sense.  What is left when the reasons are dismissed as nonsense is that he lied.  I also notice that you don't even bother making any effort to defend Nixon or pretend that that sorry piece of sh!t was doing anything other than lying in the '68 campaign about having a plan to get the U.S. out of Vietnam.

You asked me for evidence that they were lying.... what evidence is there that any of them was being truthful?  They were pandering to voters they needed to win elections, and each very quickly acted in ways directly contrary to what they had told voters, voters they absolutely had to have in order to win.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2013, 10:26:43 pm
"It sounds to me like you're miffed that I dissed George Bush."

I have no problem with the idea that you disapprove of Bush's presidency. I'm miffed by your connection of Bush to the current Syrian mess. Syria is one giant Obama screw up; bringing up Bush as a means of distracting from that fact is classic liberal knee-jerk nonsense. Thus the blinders comment. You asked me to flesh out that idea, so I did. You want to talk about the Iraq war, great. You want to talk about Syria, great. They're separate things, and I'm not the one who attempted to compare them. You did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 16, 2013, 12:32:50 pm
You continue to ignore the fact that when he was campaigning in 1940, FDR directed his advisers to tell him what he needed to do to provoke Japan to initiate war, and then did exactly that.  And while it is entirely possible for someone to change his mind, I also ran through the reasons given for Wilson supposedly changed his... and for wach of them pointed out how the claim made no sense.  What is left when the reasons are dismissed as nonsense is that he lied.  I also notice that you don't even bother making any effort to defend Nixon or pretend that that sorry piece of sh!t was doing anything other than lying in the '68 campaign about having a plan to get the U.S. out of Vietnam.

You asked me for evidence that they were lying.... what evidence is there that any of them was being truthful?  They were pandering to voters they needed to win elections, and each very quickly acted in ways directly contrary to what they had told voters, voters they absolutely had to have in order to win.

You continue to ignore the fact that I have acknowledged that presidents can change their mind when situations change.  Is there any evidence that FDR was a hawk, to use your term, previous to his election in 1932?

You say that the reasons that Wilson gave made no sense, but that is your opinion only.  And like all presidents, he could easily have lied about the true reasons.  Once again, do you have any evidence that Wilson was a hawk before assuming the responsibilities of the presidency?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 16, 2013, 12:52:48 pm
FDR's position in 1932 is irrelevant.  War was not even an issue in the campaign.  His position in 1940 is the relevant one, and in 1940 he RAN on the promise of keeping the U.S. out of war, at the very time he was asking his advisers what he needed to do to provoke Japan to attacking first and giving him the justification for entering.

On Wilson, are you really going to suggest that the sinking of the Lusitania, in 1915, a year and a half before Wilson won re-election on the assurance of keeping the U.S. out of WW I, DID make sense as a reason to enter the war in April of 1917?  The others are similar -- the reasons make no sense.  But, again, even with Wilson, it is not a question of what his position was when initially ran in 1912 -- war was on no one's horizon at that time.  His campaign position in 1916 is relevant, and he ran as a peace candidate, and then promptly move to enter the war, citing reasons which simply make no sense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 16, 2013, 02:44:40 pm
I have no idea what caused Wilson to enter the war.  But the decisions of a man who bears responsibility are often different than a man who can indulge his principles in a vacuum.  I have no reason to believe that Wilson lied when he said that he wanted to keep the country out of war, although I admit the possibility.

But possibility is not proof.

I have heard it said that Wilson believed that the only way to ensure world peace was to create a world government, and the only way to do that was to form a united nations, and the only practical way to do that would be to have a "War to End All Wars".

I think that is idiocy, but then, most pacifists are idiots.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 16, 2013, 06:32:01 pm
davep, let's try to quickly run through something.  Simple yes/no questions, though certainly you could explain why you answered that way if you would like.

Do you personally believe FDR when he campaigned for re-election in 1940 sincerely planned and expected and intended to keep the U.S. out of WW II?

Do you personally believe FDR at that time did not plan or expect to look for an opportunity or excuse to enter the war and to try to shift public opinion to allow him to do so?

And do you personally believe Wilson when he campaigned for re-election in 1918 sincerely planned and expected and intended to keep the U.S. out of WW I?

Do you personally believe Wilson at that time did not plan or expect to look for an opportunity or excuse to enter the war and to try to shift public opinion to allow him to do so?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 16, 2013, 07:32:09 pm
Jes - you need to read my posts.  I never said anything about FDR being a pacifist in 1940.  He did not seem to be by that time.  What I said was that he seemed to be a pacifist BEFORE he took office in 1933.  So your first two questions are meaningless to the discussion.

Similarly, your next two questions are meaningless to the discussion, since what I said was that Wilson seemed to be a pacifist before he entered office in 1913.

It would be helpful if you stuck to the original argument.

By the way, even if I believed both of them to be liars during their original campaign, that would not prove anything.  So I ask you again.  Do you have any evidence that either FDR or Wilson were NOT pacifists prior to taking office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 16, 2013, 07:59:18 pm
Jes - you need to read my posts.  I never said anything about FDR being a pacifist in 1940.  He did not seem to be by that time.  What I said was that he seemed to be a pacifist BEFORE he took office in 1933.  So your first two questions are meaningless to the discussion.

Similarly, your next two questions are meaningless to the discussion, since what I said was that Wilson seemed to be a pacifist before he entered office in 1913.

It would be helpful if you stuck to the original argument.

By the way, even if I believed both of them to be liars during their original campaign, that would not prove anything.  So I ask you again.  Do you have any evidence that either FDR or Wilson were NOT pacifists prior to taking office.

davep, I have read your posts, and have repeatedly pointed out that your reference to the original campaigns is irrelevant.  In the original campaigns war was not even an issue, and that is why my first response addressed the campaigns which were relevant to your position -- 1916 and 1932.

This was your original post in the thread:
Wilson was as much a pacifist as you could find in his campaign days.  Roosevelt was antiwar.  Nixon campaigned on ending the war. 

Once you actually have the responsibility, you take a more realistic view of things.

Wilson was not a pacifist in 1912, because the issue simply did not come up in 1912, and FDR was similarly not "antiwar" in 1932, because there was no war for him to oppose.  The pacifism and anti-war positions they took were in 1916 and 1940, respectively, when both of them were lying through their teeth to voters in order to remain in office.

So, to try to actually advance the discussion, let me ask again, simple yes/no questions, though certainly you could explain why you answered that way if you would like.

Do you personally believe FDR when he campaigned for re-election in 1940 sincerely planned and expected and intended to keep the U.S. out of WW II?

Do you personally believe FDR at that time did not plan or expect to look for an opportunity or excuse to enter the war and to try to shift public opinion to allow him to do so?

And do you personally believe Wilson when he campaigned for re-election in 1918 sincerely planned and expected and intended to keep the U.S. out of WW I?

Do you personally believe Wilson at that time did not plan or expect to look for an opportunity or excuse to enter the war and to try to shift public opinion to allow him to do so?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 16, 2013, 08:19:17 pm
My original statement was that "Once you actually have the responsibility, you take a more realistic view of things."

Nothing you have said or posted refutes that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 16, 2013, 08:53:42 pm
davep, neither Wilson nor FDR were making ANY comments about war or peace before they first took office.  Their comments came in re-election campaigns, well after they had "the responsibility," and when they were simply lying.

Now, I have not been trying to "refute" what you have posted, but instead to have a discussion with you -- refuting what someone has written is not always required.  The questions I posed were intended to help clarify your position and to advance the discussion.

Once more,  simple yes/no questions, though certainly you could explain why you answered that way if you would like.

Do you personally believe FDR when he campaigned for re-election in 1940 sincerely planned and expected and intended to keep the U.S. out of WW II?

Do you personally believe FDR at that time did not plan or expect to look for an opportunity or excuse to enter the war and to try to shift public opinion to allow him to do so?

And do you personally believe Wilson when he campaigned for re-election in 1918 sincerely planned and expected and intended to keep the U.S. out of WW I?

Do you personally believe Wilson at that time did not plan or expect to look for an opportunity or excuse to enter the war and to try to shift public opinion to allow him to do so?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 20, 2013, 12:48:52 pm
I believe that Wilson and FDR lied, as all politicians do, when they campaigned.

It is my contention that they changed their minds when circumstances changes.  It is your contention that they always had those beliefs.  I see no evidence that you are right, and you advance no evidence to support your contention.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 20, 2013, 04:07:45 pm
I believe that Wilson and FDR lied, as all politicians do, when they campaigned.

It is my contention that they changed their minds when circumstances changes.  It is your contention that they always had those beliefs.  I see no evidence that you are right, and you advance no evidence to support your contention.

davep, I have really tried to have this exchange as an actual discussion, explaining my belief and trying to understand yours, and then discussing them, and that is one of the reasons I have at least three times now asked you the following (and I am asking them again now by repeating them):
simple yes/no questions, though certainly you could explain why you answered that way if you would like.

Do you personally believe FDR when he campaigned for re-election in 1940 sincerely planned and expected and intended to keep the U.S. out of WW II?

Do you personally believe FDR at that time did not plan or expect to look for an opportunity or excuse to enter the war and to try to shift public opinion to allow him to do so?

And do you personally believe Wilson when he campaigned for re-election in 1918 sincerely planned and expected and intended to keep the U.S. out of WW I?

Do you personally believe Wilson at that time did not plan or expect to look for an opportunity or excuse to enter the war and to try to shift public opinion to allow him to do so?


But, since you don't seem much interested in a real discussion, I will engage here in some of the typical political exchange, starting by asking you to point to where it is that I have ever (here or anywhere else, anytime ever) contended that FDR or Wilson held any particular belief regarding the use of military force when they initially ran for the presidency (I would have to have presented such a position for there to be any truth in your claim that it is my "contention that they always had those beliefs").

Despite your claim that it is my "contention that they always had those beliefs," if you had ever followed your own admonition for more careful reading of what is being responded to, you would have noticed that the only election positions I have addressed for either Wilson or FDR are the positions in the elections immediately before they asked Congress to declared war.   In Wilson's case that was less than six months earlier, and nothing had really changed.  In FDR's case it was 13 months later and the only thing to have changed was what he had deliberated taken steps to provoke.

You contend that is no evidence and, instead of contending that they MIGHT have changed their minds, and simply saying you are unwilling to go so far as to conclude they lied, you offer the conclusion that "they changed their minds when circumstances change[d]," but you offer no evidence to support that conclusion.  I understand that you reject the evidence I offered leading to my conclusion, but you have presented an alternate conclusion, have asserted it no less positively than I have mine, and do not even offer evidence to support it, distort my position to such a degree that it would seem you are doing so deliberately, and repeatedly refer to the evidence I present as "no evidence" instead of simply saying you are unpersuaded by it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 20, 2013, 11:35:26 pm
This is silly.  You refuse to stick to the original discussion, while accusing me of that.

It is my opinion that Wilson and FDR changed their minds when faced with a changing situation.  It is your opinion that they did not.  I do not submit evidence to support my position, other than to say that it seems more reasonable than the alternatives.  You do not submit evidence to support your position, other than to say that it is more reasonable to you than the alternatives.

There does't seem to be much to discuss, so you are probably right when you say that I am not much interested in your idea of a discussion.  If you refuse to respond to my posts, and instead ask questions that are irrelevant to the discussion, it is probably time to give it up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 21, 2013, 12:19:55 pm
This is silly.  You refuse to stick to the original discussion, while accusing me of that.

This is why things get tedious....

The following, from you, is the first post to reference Wilson or FDR:
Wilson was as much a pacifist as you could find in his campaign days.  Roosevelt was antiwar.  Nixon campaigned on ending the war.  Once you actually have the responsibility, you take a more realistic view of things.
[/color]

No one previously had mentioned Wilson, FDR or Nixon.  Your post quoted no one, but did immediately follow a comment from Tico about how Obama's presidency in many regards was a continuation of the Bush presidency:
Sorry, but there's not as big a difference between Bush and Obama as you'd like to pretend. All the major stuff that Obama campaigned against Bush on... can you tell me what's changed?

Now, let's look again at what you wrote:
  Wilson was as much a pacifist as you could find in his campaign days.  Roosevelt was antiwar.  Nixon campaigned on ending the war.  Once you actually have the responsibility, you take a more realistic view of things.
[/color]

War was not an issue at all in the 1912 election, nor in the FDR elections of 1932 or 1936.  The only elections for either of them where they were "anti-war" or "pacifists" was the election immediately before they asked Congress to declare war.  THAT is what I have focused on in every post.  You now contend that I "refuse to stick to the original discussion."  Could you cut and paste any quote any language from me in this exchange where I have done that?   Now, while I did focus my initial comments entirely on the elections when each of the presidents you mentioned did campaign as anti-war (the elections of 1916, 1940 and 1968) and the year or in Nixon's case the years immediately after that election, YOU came back with your second comment in the exchange saying you saw "
no evidence that either Wilson or FDR wanted to go to war when they were first elected,
" and asking if I could cite any.  Knowing that you are prone to typos, but generally think straight, I continued to focus my response on the elections when FDR and Wilson actually took campaign positions on war and peace and not to the utterly irrelevant elections of 1912 and 1932, and I also made clear what I was doing and why.

While I would still like to see your reference to why I was straying off topic, the only way YOU were staying ON topic was if in your original post you actually were referencing the elections of 1912 and 1932.... in which case you were utterly wrong about Wilson running as a "pacifist" and FDR as "anti-war" and your entire comment was nonsense.

I will let you sort out which it was.  Forgive me for assuming you actually knew what you were talking about and were making sense but had made what amounted to a typo if in fact you did not know what you were talking about and were not making what amounted to a typo.


It is my opinion that Wilson and FDR changed their minds when faced with a changing situation.  It is your opinion that they did not.  I do not submit evidence to support my position, other than to say that it seems more reasonable than the alternatives.  You do not submit evidence to support your position, other than to say that it is more reasonable to you than the alternatives.

Excuse me, but I DID submit evidence that each changed their positions from the ones they campaigned on in the relevant elections, the elections less than a year before they asked Congress to declare war.  Their positions in 1912 and 1932 are both irrelevant and unknown, at neither time was war even an issue.


There does't seem to be much to discuss, so you are probably right when you say that I am not much interested in your idea of a discussion.  If you refuse to respond to my posts, and instead ask questions that are irrelevant to the discussion, it is probably time to give it up.

You want to discuss a change in their positions from 1912 and 1932?

REALLY?

Let's start by offering anything from 1912 or 1932 to establish their positions in those years.

I have responded to your original post in the only form in which it offered a modicum of sense, applying your contention to the elections of 1916 and 1940 when each did make their war and peace positions central to their campaigns.  Actually applying your contention to the years of 1912 and 1932 makes no sense whatsoever, though I will be very happy to look at anything you can find which suggests otherwise, that either of them actually ran as a "pacifist" or "anti-war" candidate in their initial campaigns as presidential candidates, the campaigns when they were elected to office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: buff on December 30, 2013, 08:42:43 am
Im rebuilding so if anyone has interest in josh hamilton or jose bautista make me an offer
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 30, 2013, 09:15:51 am
I pray this will work out for you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 30, 2013, 09:23:22 am
Josh is going into politics and Jose is becoming a priest.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 30, 2013, 10:26:10 am
Isn't Jose the current Pope?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 30, 2013, 12:10:19 pm
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Francis the current pope was born Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on April 05, 2014, 02:39:43 pm
I haven't done much digging into this, but I just read an article on Politico on Michael Lewis's new book "Flash Boys" about high frequency traders manipulating the stock market.  I wonder if that might bring some scrutiny to TD Ameritrade or not.  Some very quick web searches on Michael Lewis and Ameritrade bring up a couple of articles that doing a very quick scan of them don't seem to be too flattering to TD Ameritrade.

It might not lead to much, but the Ricketts family might have some more issues to deal with besides Wrigley expansion and the rooftop owners.

http://www.ibtimes.com/michael-lewis-flash-boys-exposes-shady-world-dark-pools-some-funds-have-already-pulled-out-1564881

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/31/speed-reading-michael-lewis-s-flash-boys.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 07, 2014, 06:25:28 pm
It might not lead to much, but the Ricketts family might have some more issues to deal with besides Wrigley expansion and the rooftop owners.

http://www.ibtimes.com/michael-lewis-flash-boys-exposes-shady-world-dark-pools-some-funds-have-already-pulled-out-1564881

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/31/speed-reading-michael-lewis-s-flash-boys.html

And that is just one of the reasons owners hire General Managers... another being that the folks hired as GM's generally know a heck of a lot more about baseball and running a franchise than the owners who hire them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 11, 2014, 01:56:43 pm
I must be reading it wrong.  What does dark pool trading have to do with the Ricketts family.  Was it mentioned in either article?  I probably missed it, but I am not going to read it twice.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 11, 2014, 02:28:33 pm
The Ricketts haven't been running the day to day operations of TD Ameritrade since 1999, well before the high frequency stuff started.  They've been on the board, but I doubt the board would have been getting briefed on something like this.  The only way it would hurt the Ricketts family is if the stocked dropped.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2014, 08:47:35 pm
The Cubs have the State of Nebraska behind them now:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/04/pete-ricketts-nebraska-gubernatorial-race_n_5917218.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 04, 2014, 09:03:27 pm
FWIW, Pete Ricketts will be the next governor of Nebraska.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 04, 2014, 10:42:04 pm
Ricketts was the next governor when the primary was over.  Agent Cooper, wherever he went, his buddies mom lost the her Senate seat as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 12, 2014, 10:22:27 am
Sullivan declared the winner in Alaska.  Louisiana is the last one standing until January 6.  Democrats have already withdrawn the money allocated for the runoff, realizing it is a lost cause.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 12, 2014, 03:01:07 pm
Which one was Sullivan?  R or D?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 12, 2014, 03:03:26 pm
Take a wild guess.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 12, 2014, 03:10:05 pm
He is the 53rd Republican Senator.  On January 6, there will be 54.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 12, 2014, 04:36:51 pm
You mean December 6?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 12, 2014, 05:17:06 pm
Yes.  Georgia would have been January 6, if they had one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 12, 2014, 05:28:31 pm
Manchin from WV will be number 55 from the looks of things.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 12, 2014, 06:12:14 pm
The rumors are that he is in negotiations with McConnell right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 12, 2014, 06:32:58 pm
Interesting
  He must believe that the republicans will hold the Senate a long time.   If not he'll be shunned.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 12, 2014, 06:34:00 pm
Is his first name Strom?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 12, 2014, 06:35:37 pm
I have been wondering whether there might be a couple of Democrats who cross the aisle.  Manchin would certainly be a logical first one to do so.  Not sure who else might even consider following.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 12, 2014, 06:38:32 pm
Harry Reid will come over if they promise to make him the majority leader.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 12, 2014, 07:33:35 pm
Harry Reid will come over if they promise to make him the majority leader.

If Reid were the 60th vote, I would hope McConnell had the sense to step down and encourage the Republican caucus to vote for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 12, 2014, 07:36:51 pm
You don't need 60 votes to get nothing done.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 12, 2014, 09:26:10 pm
If Reid were the 60th vote, I would hope McConnell had the sense to step down and encourage the Republican caucus to vote for him.

So you think that if he switches parties, he would switch actions?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 13, 2014, 04:40:08 am
I think Harry Reid should switch careers.  Maybe get into the dam building business.  He's pretty adept at holding things up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 13, 2014, 05:31:02 am
So you think that if he switches parties, he would switch actions?

Reid has not been single-handedly forcing his will upon either the Senate or the nation.  His actions are generally reflected the will of his caucus, and if it did not, his caucus would replace him.  The same would be true if he were leading the Republican caucus.

I am not for a moment suggesting this would happen, but merely pointing out that it could, and that if Reid truly simply craves power, as many of his critics contend, it actually would work, and he would just as eagerly carry out the bidding of his new caucus as he has done with his current caucus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 13, 2014, 10:00:54 am
Harry Reid COULD switch parties and actually act like a conservative.

Or, Harry Reid COULD retain power by convincing Cruz, Paul, Rubio and half a dozen others to become Democrats.

Baez COULD hit .400 with 65 home runs next year.

Lots of things COULD happen.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 13, 2014, 05:25:14 pm
Harry Reid will come over if they promise to make him the majority leader.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 13, 2014, 07:29:58 pm
Sorry.  I thought you understood the concept of sarcasm.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 14, 2014, 03:37:47 am
I do.  I also did at the time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 14, 2014, 06:52:08 am
That answer proves your point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 24, 2014, 08:46:07 pm
If you act crazy and then act like youre gonna pull a gun on a cop youre gonna get killed regardless of color.

Period end of story.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 24, 2014, 09:56:53 pm
Corey is growing up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 20, 2014, 01:33:43 pm
When I saw the first trailers for "The Interview" I thought it was in bad taste.  Too often we make bad taste a freedom of speech issue.  That said, we should drop a million dvd's of it on North Korea.

Actually, I think Sony hacked themselves so they wouldn't have to release it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 20, 2014, 01:37:55 pm
It looked to be a mediocre movie with mediocre revenue.  BUT now...it will be a monster hit when it is finally released.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on December 20, 2014, 01:49:01 pm
When I saw the first trailers for "The Interview" I thought it was in bad taste.  Too often we make bad taste a freedom of speech issue.  That said, we should drop a million dvd's of it on North Korea.

Actually, I think Sony hacked themselves so they wouldn't have to release it.

Yes... because DVD players are ubiquitous in north korea...

They should release the movie at all movie theaters... will end up being the largest gross for a movie in a weekend... I think Americans would show up in force just on principle.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 20, 2014, 01:53:23 pm
Yes... because DVD players are ubiquitous in north korea...

They should release the movie at all movie theaters... will end up being the largest gross for a movie in a weekend... I think Americans would show up in force just on principle.
Okay, drop DVD players too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 20, 2014, 01:57:35 pm
Releasing it currently in theaters doesn't seem to be an option for Sony.  Most theaters are refusing to show it.

The best thing they could do is release it on line for free.  That would punish North Korea, but might be extremely costly for Sony.  I have seen reports that if they do that, they will get no compensation from their insurance (assuming they have insurance for that sort of thing, which sounds reasonable).

Failing that, if they release it on DVD, they would probably still show a profit for it, or at least mitigate their losses.

By the way, Sony's only action right now is that they cancelled the December roll out at theaters.  They could still do any or all of the above.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 20, 2014, 02:06:53 pm
I think Sony will end up making money on the movie.  Kim Jong-un is temporary.

Someone told me that Geraldo was going to North Korea to interview Kim Jong-un. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 20, 2014, 02:17:50 pm
Releasing it currently in theaters doesn't seem to be an option for Sony.  Most theaters are refusing to show it.

The best thing they could do is release it on line for free.  That would punish North Korea, but might be extremely costly for Sony.  I have seen reports that if they do that, they will get no compensation from their insurance (assuming they have insurance for that sort of thing, which sounds reasonable).

Failing that, if they release it on DVD, they would probably still show a profit for it, or at least mitigate their losses.

By the way, Sony's only action right now is that they cancelled the December roll out at theaters.  They could still do any or all of the above.
Other experts are saying that Sony is worried about what else got stolen and will be released if they proceed to distribute.

BTW: I thought several celebrities were right to point out that even if North Korea did the hacking, it was the American media that published the embarrassing private emails.  We're our own worst enemy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 20, 2014, 02:34:35 pm
I thought several celebrities were right to point out that even if North Korea did the hacking, it was the American media that published the embarrassing private emails.  We're our own worst enemy.

Why should media outlets not have published the embarrassing private emails?  The news media is not the agent of Sony.  It has no duty of loyalty to Sony.  No fiduciary duty toward Sony, and even if you are of the opinion that all news outlets in this country have some patriotic duty toward the nation as a whole or toward the people in the nation, this mess did not hurt the country or the nation as a whole or the people in it.  It hurt Sony.  It certainly raises concerns about what the hackers might do next or might do or how they MIGHT hurt the nation as a whole or the people in it, but THIS mess did not do that, nor did the publishing of the embarrassing private emails.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 21, 2014, 04:59:23 pm
There is no legal or fiduciary in this situation, but there certainly was a moral duty.  The news networks were trafficking in stolen property, which they knew at the time was stolen.

This was not leaks about our government, which could be construed to be in the public interest to make known, but strictly private property that was none of the public's business.

But media failing in their ethical duties is hardly news, and is in itself none of the Government's business.  Doesn't change the fact that the media was acting in an unethical manner.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 21, 2014, 05:39:14 pm
There is no legal or fiduciary in this situation, but there certainly was a moral duty.  The news networks were trafficking in stolen property, which they knew at the time was stolen.

This was not leaks about our government, which could be construed to be in the public interest to make known, but strictly private property that was none of the public's business.

But media failing in their ethical duties is hardly news, and is in itself none of the Government's business.  Doesn't change the fact that the media was acting in an unethical manner.
Poor taste, poor judgement, poor logic, poor morals, whatever you call it, if they hadn't been published, North Korea loses.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 21, 2014, 05:40:23 pm
BTW, yesterday North Korea said we were trying to frame them.  Today they say even worse is coming.  LOL  "Did you see my client's face when he stole your purse?"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 21, 2014, 08:23:16 pm
[quo ie author=davep link=topic=96.msg205254#msg205254 date=1419202763]
There is no legal or fiduciary in this situation, but there certainly was a moral duty.  The news networks were trafficking in stolen property, which they knew at the time was stolen.  This was not leaks about our government, which could be construed to be in the public interest to make known, but strictly private property that was none of the public's business.  But media failing in their ethical duties is hardly news, and is in itself none of the Government's business.  Doesn't change the fact that the media was acting in an unethical manner.
[/quote]

Trafficking in stolen property?

Really?

If so, in the case of websites, TV stations or radio, to whom did they sell it?

Traffinking in stolen property is an incredible stretch.  They paid no one for it, and sold it to no one.  If THAT were to be considered "trafficking in stolen property," then any virtuall time the news media obtains any confidential information and discloses it, without the consent of all involved, they would be trafficking in stolen property.  That interpretation would pretty much eliminate news.

You consider the news media to have been acting in an unethical manner.  You would be very hard pressed to find anyone in news, anyone who actually addresses such issues on a regular basis and thinks about them, who would agree with you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 21, 2014, 08:45:40 pm
I would be amazed if anyone in the news field agreed with me.  That says more about those in the news field than it does about my statement.

The media knew that the emails were stolen.  Yet they publicized them to get readership and listenership, which results in income to them.  That is certainly trafficking in stolen property.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 21, 2014, 09:07:53 pm
Then if you listened to or read any of the stories, you were equally guilty of being in possession of stolen property, and of engaging in a conspiracy to traffick.  And if you did NOT listen to or read any of the contents, then you aren't really in a position to comment because you at the very least would not know whether there was a legitimate public interest in any of them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 21, 2014, 10:48:18 pm
Cute, but silly, on a par with many of your posts.  While watching the news, they do not warn you of everything they are going to say.  Even you know that.  Nor did I profit from the information.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 21, 2014, 11:28:00 pm
There is no requirement that a person profit from being in possession of stolen property for the crime to be committed, nor is there any requirement that one participating in a criminal conspiracy profit in any manner.

As to my comment being cute but silly, yours was only the latter.

Your idea that the news media reporting what had been stolen, and in the case of virtually every news outlet other than the first one disclosing the content simply repeating what had already been disclosed and which by that disclosure ceased to be confidential, sort of defines silly.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 22, 2014, 08:57:14 am
Ethics is hardly a silly subject.  And unethical actions are hardly silly actions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 22, 2014, 06:50:29 pm
Ethics is hardly a silly subject.  And unethical actions are hardly silly actions.

Agreed.

You simply do not know what is or is not ethical in news.  Your comments on this issue rather clearly establish that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 22, 2014, 07:12:07 pm
Funny thing.   Norh Korea is experiencing severe internert problems at this time.  Fascinating
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2015, 01:09:12 pm
Clearly France needs gun control
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on January 07, 2015, 02:21:47 pm
Ummmm... Wow.  This topic has either been dead or something fishy is going on...

Quote
Jes Beard
Hero Member
Posts: 7933

Re: Politics, Religion, etc.

« Reply #156 on: December 22, 2014, 07:50:29 pm »


Quote from: davep on December 22, 2014, 09:57:14 am

Ethics is hardly a silly subject.  And unethical actions are hardly silly actions.

Agreed.

You simply do not know what is or is not ethical in news.  Your comments on this issue rather clearly establish that.



Report to moderator   74.193.25.75 (?)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CurtOne
Administrator
Hero Member
Posts: 11455

Re: Politics, Religion, etc.

« Reply #157 on: December 22, 2014, 08:12:07 pm »


Funny thing.   Norh Korea is experiencing severe internert problems at this time.  Fascinating

Report to moderator   75.132.234.230 (?)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CurtOne
Administrator
Hero Member

Posts: 11455

Re: Politics, Religion, etc.

« Reply #158 on: Today at 02:09:12 pm »


Clearly France needs gun control
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 07, 2015, 02:23:00 pm
I think we need more BEERFAN posts about President Obama.  That's what the topic is missing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2015, 02:27:02 pm
Obama is toast
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 11, 2015, 03:26:57 pm
Interesting.  A guy on MSNBC is saying that the shooter in the French Grocery store was an African American that was born in France.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 11, 2015, 04:02:30 pm
"an African American that was born in France."

It was MSNBC.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on January 12, 2015, 11:18:30 am
Quote
an African American that was born in France.

I guess you could be an African American born in France if your parents are U.S. Citizens.  It would be cool to be a French African American with the duel citizenship though.  I would insist that everyone call me a French African American.  I think the law is if you are born in France you have to wait till you are 18 years of age to apply for duel citizenship.  Until then you are American.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 12, 2015, 01:46:07 pm
It is quite possible to be an African American born in France if your parents were US Citizens.  However, this gentleman's parents were born in Senegal, and were not American Citizens.

Not only was it poor reporting, but it also shows a rather odd mindset that conflates Americans with African ancestry with every black person outside of Africa regardless of location.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 12, 2015, 05:20:31 pm
.... an African American that was born in France.

So far the comments have only been on the nationality/race issue.

There is another problem, too, one which is actually more serious, and which goes hand in hand with the racial prism by which MSNBC views the world: ".... an African American that was born in France.

Unless the reference was to a dog or some other NON-human, "that" was the wrong pronoun.  Of course, liberals such as MSNBC can be given a pass since it could not possibly indicate racism on the part of good liberals....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 12, 2015, 08:36:28 pm
That may have been my error rather than that of MSNBC.  I know I have said in the past that I have a grandfather that was born in Holland.  Certainly was poor English, but to be honest, I meant no disrespect to my grandfather or his race and didn't mean to imply that he wasn't a human being.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 12, 2015, 09:47:35 pm
I have a border collie that insists he is a who.

Has anyone noticed Fox "News" isn't on Dishnet any more? Evidently it is a contract thing. Probably, and unfortunately, temporary.

I notice that Fox is paying for advertisement on Dishnet channels featuring Blowhard Bill claiming Dishnet is "censoring the news".   I find that sort of humorous on couple levels.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 12, 2015, 02:18:49 pm
Headline in ABC News feature:

Fresh Offensive, Hezbollah Troops Fast Approaching Israeli Border From Syrian Side

And the first sentence (my emphasis):  "Bolstered by the Lebanese Shiite militant group Hezbollah and its patrons in Tehran, the Syrian Army continued its rapid advance into southern Syria today, inching closer to the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights"

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 26, 2015, 11:20:00 pm
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/12566473/man-accused-punching-ex-st-louis-cardinal-curt-ford-telling-go-back-ferguson

This is sad.  I spent time with Curt Ford a few summers ago in Springfield when he was managing the wood bat college summer league team.  He's a class act and all the kids on the team who happened to be white, showed nothing but respect for him and became better ball players.  Sorry to see this.  Even if he was a Cardinal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on April 08, 2015, 02:27:27 pm
Mitt Romney kicked butt on his NCAA tournament bracket.

http://games.espn.go.com/tournament-challenge-bracket/2015/en/entry?entryID=11705084
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 02, 2015, 05:09:29 pm
Anyone know how bail works?  Specifically, one of the accused policemen in Baltimore has been left out on 350 thousand dollar bail.  Does he get that money back when he shows up in court?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 02, 2015, 05:25:42 pm
Most of it.  I think the bondsman keeps a percentage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 02, 2015, 07:17:30 pm
Does the Government keep any of it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: AndyMacFAIL on May 03, 2015, 12:46:53 am
Anyone know how bail works?  Specifically, one of the accused policemen in Baltimore has been left out on 350 thousand dollar bail.  Does he get that money back when he shows up in court?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail_bondsman

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 03, 2015, 08:05:32 am
Not sure what wikipedia says, but the process varies from state to state, but in general it is as follows:

1) If the accused uses a bail bondsman, he gets NOTHING back of what he pays to the bondsman, who is not giving anything to the courts UNLESS the defenant fails to appear in court.  At that time the bondsman is given a period of time to produce the defendant before the court or the bondsman is required to pay to the court the entire amount of the bond.  This is consistent with the entire idea of bond -- that it is not intended to punish, but merely to assure the defendant shows up fr trial.  Generally bondsman reguire the defenant to pay them (the bondsmen) 10% of the amount the court set for the bond in order for the bondsman to make the bond.  Sometimes, for any variety of reasons, a bondsman might make a bond without being paid anything (or agreeing to take considerably less than 10%) and other times a bondsman might require more, or might require some further security in case the defendant fails to show (though this practice is generally frowned on by courts, sometimes is prohibitted by statute, and can result in a court removing a bondsmna or bonding company from the approved list of bondman).  The bonding company is essentially an insurance company, insuring that the defendant appear in court when required.
2) If the accused uses a cash bond, the accused deposits the money with the clerk of the court and gets every cent back if he appears in court at all times as required.  If he fails to appear, the court keeps the money.
3) If the accused uses a property bond, the accused executes what amount to conditional deeds to the court clerk for real estate appraised at a value as great as or greater than the bond amount, and he gets it back if he appears.  If he fails to appear, he, or the foolish relative or friend to put up their home, loses the property to the court.

The bonding system is subject to considerable abuse, and some jurisdictions are trying to get rid of it.  The abuses include courts of requiring bonding companies to pay up when a defendant fails to appear, bondsmen being given what amount to police powers (and sometimes more) when going to get a defendant to appear in court (sometimes after the bonding company failed to inform the defendant of a court date); and a cozy relationship between bonding companies and judges such that some judges consistently set bonds far higher than appropriate in order to enrich the bonding companies.... who often are the largest contributors to judicial campaign funds.

Frequently decent judges will set lower bond amounts for cash or property, or will set lower bonds if the defendant has hired private counsel since that is taken as an indication the defendant is more likely to appear in court as required.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 03, 2015, 10:54:21 am
Thanks, Andy and Jes.

The problem with the process is obvious.  Take, for example, the policeman that has a bail of 350,000 dollars.  Since he is not likely to have that much cash or even that much property, he must come up with about 35,000 dollars of his own money, which he does not get back.  I suppose I won't feel sorry for him if he is convicted, but it seems a miscarriage of justice for him (or her, don't know which) to lose 35,000 dollars even though being not guilty of the charges.

It seems to me that the Government should reimburse those found not guilty for out of pocket costs of bail.  Even more than the grand jury system, it might discourage the government to indict people if their case is questionable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 03, 2015, 11:48:58 am
A couple of points for you to consider, davep --

1) In THIS case it is unlikely that any of the six cops actually had to put up anything for their bond.  Just as bonding companies court favor of the judges with campaign contributions, often they do favors for other folks in making bond (I had a bondsman twice bond ME out of jail at no charge when I had no cash on me to make bond and had to either wait until morning when I could have someone bring cash or wait until a court appearance and an O.R. bond), and in the case of police officers bonding companies will sometimes curry favor with police by either making their bonds without payment (or assurance of payment) or with a heavily compromised charge.  And more importantly fellow officers would almost certainly have quickly rallied together to put up property bonds so no one lost anything -- three modest homes would be more than enough to cover a $350K bond, and it would be very surprising if there were not that many officers owning their homes free and clear in Baltimore and eager to help their brother in blue.

2) That is frequently NOT true for schmucks like Freddie Gray who get arrested, often on utterly bullshit charges, such as the bogus "switchblade knife" charge the officers in this case filed against Gray.  Those folks, freguently poor and with no one in their family or among their close friends owning real estate or having mush cash themselves, frequently are unable to make even relatively modest bonds of perhaps $5,000, and when they have to await trial in jail, often knowing it will be a year or more before they go to trial on a charge when they might face a maximum of 11 months and 29 days in jail if they were convicted, did not get probation and served every last day in custody (something very unusual, and on misdemenor charges in many jurisdictions those convicted of misdemenors serve no more than 50% of their sentence even if they are a repeat offender), you have tremendous coercive pressure on pervectly innocent defendants to plead guilty at a preliminary hearing or initial appearance or a status conference when he comes to court and learns that if he just pleads guilty right then and there he will be immediately released, though remain on probation.  This is the way a great many poor folks in general, and poor, black, inner-city kids in particular, end up with ugly criminal records, often without actually even engaging in the behavior for which they were charged and pled guilty.

My understanding is that in the Freddy Gray case, he had at least 18 arrests between 2007 and 2015 (and since he was only 25, that would have only been his ADULT arrest record, with his record before age 18 likely sealed and unavailable, but also likely to have reflected even more arrests):
    March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
    March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault
    January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing
    January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute
    December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
    December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing
    January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana
    September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape
    April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation
    July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute
    March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute
    February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation
    August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana
    August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)   
http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/04/30/freddie-gray-arrest-record-criminal-history-rap-sheet
http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/freddiegray.asp

With that many arrests, and as little time as he served in prison as a result of them, there are some reasonable conclusions:
A) He likely was arrested multiple times on utterly bullshit charges where there was little to no evidence and the prosecution ended up unable to prove its case, the kind of thing which frequently happens when cops make utterly unwarranted arrests;
B) He likely spent a fair amount of unwelcome, and undeserved, time sitting in jail waiting for cases to get before judges who dismissed them after a minimal review of the evidence;
C) He ended up spending a significant sum of money paying bondsmen;
D) It is perfectly reasonable that he would run from police if he saw them, even if he was doing nothing at all wrong at the time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 03, 2015, 12:32:26 pm
Whether or not Fredie was right or wrong, and whether or not the charged police are guilty or innocent, the fact remains that the Government can cause a great amount of damage by charging an innocent person, even when they are not convicted.  I think we should do the same thing her as we should in civil cases.

In civil cases, the loser should pay reasonable court costs.  In criminal cases, the Government that fails to win a conviction should make the person whole.

Not to the point where the Government should foot the bill for million dollar lawyers.  But certainly bail costs.  If he posts bail and then the charges are dropped or he is not convicted, any out of pocket costs should be reimbursed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 03, 2015, 12:55:09 pm
In civil cases, the loser should pay reasonable court costs.  In criminal cases, the Government that fails to win a conviction should make the person whole.

I am not disagreeing with your position on reimbursement of bond costs, and would even extend it to reasonable reimburcement of legal costs, even when they would be large sums, but the difference between civil and criminal cases is not just the burden of proof, but also that in civil cases the party being forced to pay a judgment actually feels it and therefore has an actual incentive not to bring unwarranted actions, while in criminal cases government is not known for similar sensitivity to cost concerns.  There is no difference to believe it would make the slightest difference in the number of bad arrests made or bogus charges or the number of times prosecuting attornies pursued to trial cases they should never have allowed to appear in court for an initial appearance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 03, 2015, 01:15:11 pm
I don't agree.  I believe that if the town/state (perhaps not federal) had to budget for repaying money in those cases, there would be substantial pressure not to arrest without at a reasonable chance of prosecution.

But that isn't the point.  Whether it reduces false arrests or not, at least it would mean the arrestee would be made whole for out of pocket bail money.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 03, 2015, 01:34:49 pm
I don't agree.  I believe that if the town/state (perhaps not federal) had to budget for repaying money in those cases, there would be substantial pressure not to arrest without at a reasonable chance of prosecution.

Considering the lack of sensitivity government generally has to cost concerns, why would it exist here?  It simply would be a demand for greater revenue, not for any increased responsibility.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 06, 2015, 08:07:02 am
Clearly the Chicago city flag is causing mindless violence.  Ban it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 25, 2015, 01:09:53 pm
Freedom of speech.  Freedom to misspeak.  Freedom to apologize.  Freedom to make an ass of oneself.  ESPN has released Cowherd, in spite of his profuse apologies.  Of course, he was leaving this month anyhow.  The WWE has fired Hulk Hogan in spite of his prolific apologies.  Of course, Donald Trump lost some business for his idiot remarks, but he didn't apologize.  Over the last ten years or so we've seen a large number of politicians, tv personalities, Hollywood actors who've made gaffs and are pilloried.  Seems to me we will soon have nothing but commentators who are so milk toasty because they're afraid something they say might offend an Amish Eskimo albino that all they give us are shots of Bartman trying to catch a foul ball.  Give it a break.  Accept apologies.  I'm willing to bet all of us have said something in our lives about a race, a culture, a lifestyle that we wish we could obliterate.  Social media and THE media have made it all but impossible to hide all our transgressions.

I hope the suppression of the freedom of expression doesn't make us all a boring stewpot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on July 25, 2015, 01:20:26 pm
Some people have even said bad things about the Dutch Race.  But those of us in the master race merely consider the source and make excuses for their idiocy.

Just out of curiosity, what did Cowherd say?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 25, 2015, 01:22:31 pm
He was quoting some stats about undereducated ball players.  It's at that link I posted yesterday on that other topic.  Go to espn.com, you'll find it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 25, 2015, 01:22:59 pm
And, every thing I've ever said about Dutchbags is true.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on July 25, 2015, 10:51:20 pm
Is he the one that was talking about DR players?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 25, 2015, 11:15:30 pm
yes
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on July 25, 2015, 11:44:49 pm
Why did he apologize?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 01, 2015, 08:00:25 am
It's almost enough to turn me into a Sox fan:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/31/politics/walker-5-million-cubs-family-ricketts/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 01, 2015, 09:03:50 am
Odd.  Almost makes me more interested in Walker.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 01, 2015, 09:24:22 am
Odd.  Almost makes me more interested in Walker.

That, and the fact that otto hates him, are so far about the only things that have interested me in Walker.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 01, 2015, 11:03:59 am
The fact that he took on the Government Employees Union and mostly won was enough to win my support.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 01, 2015, 11:10:08 am
Yeah...he takes on a liberal special interest union using conservative special interest PAC money. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 01, 2015, 11:15:34 am
Exactly.  Might as well at least even things up a little bit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 01, 2015, 11:22:33 am
Agree.  But it's not like Walker gets St. George status for trying to slay a dragon.  Special interest isn't special.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 01, 2015, 11:30:53 am
That is why I didn't use the term special interest.  Some special interests are bad for the country.  Some special interests are good for the country.  Most are both at different times, or at best neutral.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 01, 2015, 11:32:05 am
Same could be said for your average teacher's union.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 01, 2015, 03:17:22 pm
True.  And, of course, the average political contributor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 01, 2015, 04:05:15 pm
I wish I was "Rickett's Average".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 01, 2015, 05:02:05 pm
Sorry.  I wasn't going to say anything, but sometimes unions don't really represent.  Yes, many teachers in Wisconsin opposed Walker, but I know a number who supported him.  About 15 years ago, the teachers union in Minnesota would only support abortion choice candidates in spite of a poll among it's members that was more than 72% opposed  such a policy.  Didn't matter.  Here in Illinois, Rauner is facing the same thing.  Since I lived in Springfield, I had a number of friends in the state government.  They were forced to support Democrats.  They were also forced to work overtime, making phone calls for candidates they didn't like.  When we lived in Sheboygan Wisconsin, the Kohler Company went on strike in spike of a 60-40 vote against a strike because, as the union leader told them, "We're not striking for us.  We're striking for our brethren in Michigan."  Unions are great ideas gone awry.  As a former teacher, unions do more to protect crappy teachers than supporting good ones.  It would be great if it wasn't so.  Of course, doctors aren't unionized and they protect their crappy colleagues, too.  I'll grant that.

So, in an argument like this, for me, it's a pox on both their houses.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 01, 2015, 06:59:19 pm
I agree completely.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Pistol on August 01, 2015, 10:22:51 pm
That's the smartest thing Curt has ever said.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 02, 2015, 10:47:03 am
Damning with faint praise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 02, 2015, 11:44:37 am
I think unions have generally lost their way.  On the other hand, political action committees never really had any redeeming qualities.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 02, 2015, 11:49:35 am
Guilds, the ancestors of unions, seem to do a better job of policing their own and protecting rights.   Interesting that many new unions do an excellent job of improving working conditions and protecting workers...then it always breaks down when greed (and corruption) creep in. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 02, 2015, 11:56:24 am
Sort of like investment banks...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 02, 2015, 11:59:51 am
Or political parties...or democracies...or home owner associations...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 02, 2015, 12:01:19 pm
Or Roman Republics...or Animal Farms...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 02, 2015, 12:13:57 pm
Or Gardens of Eden...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 02, 2015, 12:22:16 pm
Is there a less appetizing matchup next year than Clinton-Bush?  Just wondering.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on August 02, 2015, 12:22:59 pm
Is there a less appetizing matchup next year than Clinton-Bush?  Just wondering.

Right now they all look like unappetizing matchups to me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 02, 2015, 12:24:44 pm
I'm hoping Biden jumps in for no other reason is to hear Obama's linguistic gymnastics trying to stay neutral.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on August 02, 2015, 12:25:37 pm
I'm hoping Biden jumps in for Biden's  linguistic gymnastics.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 02, 2015, 12:26:28 pm
LOL
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 02, 2015, 12:28:25 pm
Bernie!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 02, 2015, 12:37:25 pm
Bernie v Rand would be interesting.  Polar opposites who often express respect for one another.  I wonder how long it would take to get dirty.  A week?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on August 03, 2015, 01:53:37 pm
The team is from the town of Liberal, Kansas.   

Read the many heartfelt comments.   And then consider the yahoo who couldn't resist sniping at the name "Liberal".  There's a time and place for everything but I can't recall anything more objectionable than what this guy said.

Just a response to this post in Around Baseball that I thought was more appropriate here, but I was reading a story on legal immigration this morning on Breitbart and the comments there were just disgusting.  The top comment with 174 likes was from someone who mentioned how they wished Obama was dead for policies like that.   

I'm a little bit of a Politico junkie, but the comments sections on stories there are just cesspools of really disturbed, hateful people from all political persuasions. 

As low as our voter turnout in this country is, it's pretty disturbing to think that perhaps a sizeable portion of the people who do actually vote are the types of people you wind up seeing commenting on places like Politico, Breitbart and the like.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 03, 2015, 02:02:36 pm
Bernie v Rand would be interesting.  Polar opposites who often express respect for one another.  I wonder how long it would take to get dirty.  A week?

My wife and I were just having this conversation this morning. Those are the only two I would vote for right now, because I think they actually believe in something and haven't completely given in to political charade and nonsense. I'd rather have someone in office I can respect than someone I agree with. Paul is the guy I want, through and through, but if one of the assclowns on the Republican side beats him out, and Bernie as on the Dem side, I'm voting Bernie. For real.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 03, 2015, 02:02:49 pm
Political comment sections are the only ones that make sports message boards look sane.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on August 03, 2015, 02:03:17 pm
Political comment sections are the only ones that make sports message boards look sane.

Yeah no kidding.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 03, 2015, 02:20:10 pm
Quote
I'm a little bit of a Politico junkie, but the comments sections on stories there are just cesspools of really disturbed, hateful people from all political persuasions.

Fun with democracy:  their vote counts just as much as yours.  This is why I don't believe in encouraging (all) people to vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 03, 2015, 03:19:05 pm
Terrorist!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on August 03, 2015, 03:34:35 pm
Political comment sections are the only ones that make sports message boards look sane.
What about political comment section ON a sports message board?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on August 03, 2015, 05:20:53 pm
The Bears board sets the floor for that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 03, 2015, 07:42:57 pm
What about political comment section ON a sports message board?

Depends. Sometimes it can be civil, but most times if there are significant differences it will be just slightly better than the political site comment section.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 03, 2015, 07:43:58 pm
Depends. Sometimes it can be civil, but most times if there are significant differences it will be just slightly better than the political site comment section.
go to hell
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 03, 2015, 09:14:06 pm
Curt is just afraid of being alone.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 03, 2015, 09:15:31 pm
go to hell

💔
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 04, 2015, 01:28:10 pm
See.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 13, 2015, 05:26:36 pm
At least three, and very likely more attacks have taken place in France.  More than 30 people reported dead, and reports of several more attacks going on currently.  The attacks include both shootings and suicide bombings.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 13, 2015, 05:31:25 pm
60 reported dead at this time...probably will grow.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 23, 2015, 10:50:56 am
My views on gun control are likely to the left of most people on this board, but I found this now deleted tweet my Doug Gottlieb pretty funny.

"Not sure how many people understand, our "right to bear arms" is not in the constitution- it is an AMENDMENT to the document."

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 23, 2015, 11:45:47 am
My views on gun control are likely to the left of most people on this board, but I found this now deleted tweet my Doug Gottlieb pretty funny.

"Not sure how many people understand, our "right to bear arms" is not in the constitution- it is an AMENDMENT to the document."

To some of us it is no more funny than those who believe the language, "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," actually means government can restrict, limit or prohibit that right without infringing on it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 25, 2015, 12:30:46 pm
No more or less funny when people conveniently leave out the first two clauses on the amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,..."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 25, 2015, 01:09:50 pm
No more or less funny when people conveniently leave out the first two clauses on the amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,..."

Those two clauses do not alter the meaning of the rest of it.  If anything, they amplify the meaning.  Those two clauses simply emphasize that the reason for the substantive language (which I quoted), is in recognition of what is pointed out in the first 13 words.  If you actually speak English, and apply the normal rules of construction of language to those two clauses, there is no way they alter the meaning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 25, 2015, 01:13:36 pm
Since I don't speak English I will have to take your word on it...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 25, 2015, 01:35:57 pm
Since I don't speak English I will have to take your word on it...

If you dispute what I wrote about its meaning, why not explain how and why I am wrong?

Use the standard rules of construction to explain how or why it means anything else.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 25, 2015, 02:23:18 pm
Tis the season for giving, Jes. I gave you something to rant about.  You're very welcome!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on December 25, 2015, 03:10:07 pm
Great.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 25, 2015, 03:57:03 pm
Tis the season for giving, Jes. I gave you something to rant about.  You're very welcome!


Whether you are referring to my three line post or my two line post, if either are rants, I must be getting very efficient at it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 15, 2016, 10:25:54 pm
Iowa, just wanted to say from following your FB posts that I'm glad we're on the same page on this year's election this time around.  :)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 25, 2016, 03:35:16 pm
(https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/tT37Y05UxKVoHJwXOUG2AaeAlAE=/600x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3985396/gun%20ownership%20states.png)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 25, 2016, 03:57:58 pm
Does that chart include gun suicides?  If so, it is pretty meaningless.

Can you give us one that only compares gun MURDERS?  Or would that show that guns are good, rather than bad for citizens?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 25, 2016, 04:05:56 pm
Yes it does.

You can sort columns by the arrows.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 25, 2016, 04:34:48 pm
That settles it.  Ban charts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 25, 2016, 05:46:55 pm
So in DC gun ownership is the lowest at nearly 3.6% yet gun murders are more than double the next highest at 16.5%.  So is that chart supposed to be damning to gun ownership?  Unless I am reading it wrong the percentage of gun ownership is not a predictor of gun murders.  In fact it's all over the place.  i guess like with most stats, you can pull out whatever you want depending on your agenda.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 25, 2016, 07:16:06 pm
when did we start moving the crazy from bears over to here?

To robb's point you can probably charge Gun Murders vs Population of people earning below 2x poverty lvl and get the same graph you have above with a trend line slapped onto it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 25, 2016, 08:34:48 pm
So is that chart supposed to be damning to gun ownership? 

My chart?  Nope, just the raw numbers that Dave was asking for. Through in population density to the poverty that Method mentioned and I think you'd get a much more meaningful graph for murders.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 25, 2016, 09:15:04 pm
when did we start moving the crazy from bears over to here?

Davep has always been here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 25, 2016, 10:36:42 pm
ISF, just wondering what are the tea leaves telling you in Iowa?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 26, 2016, 12:23:58 am
That we're "F"d whether we end up with Hilary or Trump.

But that's the last time Ill even click on this topic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 26, 2016, 12:52:34 am
That we're "F"d whether we end up with Hilary or Trump.

But that's the last time Ill even click on this topic.

Actually that's probably the best, most accurate post in the history of the Politics topic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 26, 2016, 09:59:52 am
For decades, we have had to choose which candidate was least bad.  This year, it might be a tie.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 26, 2016, 10:38:48 am
I am not excited about anybody on either side.  If this country can not only elect, but overwhelmingly reelect Obama, I have no faith whatsoever things will ever change.  Throw Republicans in the White House and you'll just get more of the same.  Throw Dems in charge in Congress and more of the same.  They are all beholden to their donors.  Re-election is the most important consideration on every vote and bill.  Growing the power of the government is all they ever do, both sides.  This will seemingly never change until it all blows up like Greece.  Although Greece is a firecracker to our nuke.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 26, 2016, 04:48:32 pm
The closer we get to Donald Trump winning the nomination, the more I think we should have stuck with the "smoke filled rooms" method of selecting presidential nominees.

I'm still totally mystified on how he's still on top of the polls and looking like he'll soon be winning both Iowa and New Hampshire.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 26, 2016, 05:06:03 pm
I'm still totally mystified on how he's still on top of the polls

How about because there are a shitload of really, really dumb voters out there?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 26, 2016, 06:03:17 pm
I dont give a damn about Isis or any of the mess people want to **** about or truthfully politics in general but if this country is really in need of something new so bad that we're even considering Donald Trump we're in trouble.

The problem is as a God fearing Christian man I doubt Hilary's any better.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 26, 2016, 06:19:50 pm
I'm still totally mystified on how he's still on top of the polls and looking like he'll soon be winning both Iowa and New Hampshire.

FWIW, fivethirtyeight.com still has Cruz with a 49% chance to win Iowa compared to Trump's 42% in their polls-plus forecast (in addition to state polls, these forecasts factor in national polls and endorsements).  Of course, I don't think Cruz is any better than Trump.  In some ways, I think he's worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 26, 2016, 06:37:50 pm
Cruz isn't my favorite, but he is light-years better than Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 26, 2016, 07:07:01 pm
I think John Kasich is by far and away the best guy of anyone who's running, but his chances of being elected aren't much better than CurtOne's. 

I think Cruz would be better than Trump, but I still couldn't vote for him.  I think he's a snake oil salesman and a charlatan.  The government shutdown was nothing more than a reckless act of self promotion on his part, and that automatically disqualified him in my eyes.  I also have a lot of trouble with anyone running as a "constitutional" conservative who supported what Kim Davis did in Kentucky.  It's all well and good if you want to run against gay marriage and play to the evangelical crowd, but don't portray yourself as a "strict constitutionalist" and still stand on the same stage with someone who defied a constitutionally decided upon Supreme Court ruling.  He knows how to play to his crowd, and he's pretty much the ultimate in the say anything/do anything to be elected politician.  I seriously even think he'd make Nixon look like a pillar of ethics if he got elected. 

Rubio is my backup pick if/when Kasich loses whatever viability he has left, but I can't say I'm really in love with him either.  Still, he's a better person than Trump or Cruz, there's no way I can vote for another Bush, and he's less likely to say something he'll regret later than Christie.

It's a really ugly field of candidates we have to choose from this year. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 26, 2016, 07:09:55 pm
The government shutdown was nothing more than a reckless act of self promotion on his part, and that automatically disqualified him in my eyes.

The only thing wrong with the government shutdown was that it ended.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 26, 2016, 07:19:09 pm
FWIW, fivethirtyeight.com still has Cruz with a 49% chance to win Iowa compared to Trump's 42% in their polls-plus forecast (in addition to state polls, these forecasts factor in national polls and endorsements).  Of course, I don't think Cruz is any better than Trump.  In some ways, I think he's worse.

Yeah I don't think 538 has a great feel yet on that one.  They had a Trump/Iowa chat today, and the first thing they said right off the bat was, "Donald Trump has overtaken Ted Cruz as the most likely winner in the Hawkeye State, according to our polls-only forecast. (And he’s closed the gap on Cruz in our polls-plus forecast.)"

It seems like they have more confidence in the "polls only" approach, but we'll see. 

Nate Silver did have an interesting theory that we might find out that Trump's support in these polls might be overstated when people finally show up to actually vote.  We'll see how that works out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 26, 2016, 08:30:29 pm
I never went to a caucus because I was too young or in medical school before I moved out of Iowa, but from my understanding there is a far amount attempting to get people to switch their support to different presidential hopeful. The Cruz/Trump I doubt will switch. I do wonder if Kasich/Bush/Cristie supports will switch to Rubio and let him have a chance to out perform the polls.

I'm with JR. I can't vote for Cruz or Trump for the reasons he stated. If either one get the nomination I will be voting for the whackiest third party candidate.

I did enjoy Trump picking on Bob Vaderplaats (evangelical leader in Iowa) on Twitter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 27, 2016, 12:37:42 am
Bernie!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on January 27, 2016, 08:38:26 am
There's a glimmer of hope in my mind that Trump is just acting bat-**** crazy because he knows it's his best chance of getting elected, and if/once elected, he may turn more normal.  Cruz has already proven that he's legitimately bat-**** crazy as a Senator.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 27, 2016, 10:16:11 am
Until he starts rounding up brown people and deporting them for being muslims.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 27, 2016, 10:33:37 am
I'd vote for Bernie before any of Trump, Cruz, or Clinton.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 27, 2016, 10:39:20 am
If it winds up being Bernie against either Trump or Cruz, watch Bloomberg get in.  It's been very entertaining.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 27, 2016, 01:30:19 pm
Bernie will not get in.  If Clinton fails, for one reason or another, Biden will be the nominee.

Although there is a lot of talk about a Republican brokered convention, Democratic rules make it quite a bit easier to broker a democratic convention unless one person has a majority of votes bound by primaries.  Substantially fewer voters are bound by rule to primary winners.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 27, 2016, 03:16:51 pm
Vote Trump, he will take on China and ISIS, just see how well he resolves conflicts with a debate host....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on January 27, 2016, 03:43:05 pm
What's more beneficial for Trump?  Be a "normal" candidate, or make a big show out of a conflict with a TV host?

The latter, by far.  Which is why I hold out hope that he's actually just brilliant enough to realize that acting like a crazy person gives him the best chance to get elected and he's actually far more reasonable than he puts on.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't vote for Trump in a million years on the chance that I'm wrong and he really isn't acting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 27, 2016, 03:47:03 pm
The Trump supporters scare me more than Trump does.  Although the media usually portrays them as white and xenophobic, there are many races represented in his ranks.  His high rating does not come from Republicans.  Some, yes, but he has Democrats, Tea Party, and Independents who are disillusioned with career politicians and the status quo.  Just like the Germans who elected Hitler.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 27, 2016, 05:55:32 pm
Trump sticks his thumb in the eyes of all politicians, and since he stands for absolutely nothing politically, he is able to appeal to the ignorant voters on both sides of the political spectrum who feel that the "man" has held him back.  The victim mentality of both political parties can coalesce around him and convince themselves that he will "set things straight", regardless of what that means to them individually.

The same situation applied to Jesse Ventura who made it to the Governorship of Minnesota, one of the most liberal states in the country.  The idiots from both sides believed that his bluff and bluster would be used for the things they felt the "Government" was withholding from them.

He did absolutely nothing, which is the best we could hope for with Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 27, 2016, 07:19:12 pm
Trump is so popular because he a reality star and this is a reality tv populace.  The real Trump isn't even the guy he depicts on his reality show.  On the show he plays a character.  Essentially he is running as that character and the morons in this country are dumb enough to eat it up.   Obama was smart enough to appeal to that.  We don't care about qualifications any longer, we want celebrities.  Why?  Because with reality tv everyone can be a celebrity. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 27, 2016, 07:55:30 pm
I'd vote for Bernie before any of Trump, Cruz, or Clinton.

Of course.  Bernie is a socialist.  He would be attractive to you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 27, 2016, 08:02:54 pm
You folks seem to miss the fact that Trump has not yet broken a simple majority of support from Republicans.  Most prospective voters not only do not support him, most prospective voters view him very, very negatively.  Republicans do not make up a majority in this country, not even close to it, and Trump has not yet won even t he reluctant support of half of what is considerably less than 40% of the public.

His actual support is likely about 20% of the electorate as a whole.  In the primaries, that can result in a very strong victory.  In a general election, not so much,
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 27, 2016, 08:06:22 pm
Hilary's gonna be the president whether we like it or not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 27, 2016, 08:07:20 pm
The same can be said about every candidate on both sides.  No one has enough support to win a general election.

But there are enough Republicans that will vote for whoever is nominated by the Republicans, and enough Democrats that will vote for whoever is nominated by the Democrats, that each nominee, whoever it is, will get about 40% of the vote.  The winner will go to whoever can sway the most ignorant voters.

Trump against Bernie would probably be a close call.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 27, 2016, 08:07:51 pm
Hillary will be a convicted felon before she is president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 27, 2016, 08:12:08 pm
I think the Obama Administration will be able to delay things until after the election, if they choose to do so.  But I think that Biden would become the democratic nominee if it comes anywhere close to that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 27, 2016, 08:47:47 pm
I think the Obama Administration will be able to delay things until after the election, if they choose to do so.  But I think that Biden would become the democratic nominee if it comes anywhere close to that.

What do you suppose the longterm consequences would be of the Democrats nominating Biden if Biden does no make a song appearance in the primaries and Sanders gets a clear majority of primary votes?

It would turn off the very group of young voters the Democrats want to count on for several elections to come.  They would not only stay home in 2016, they would turn their backs on the Democratic party.

The Democrats can survive a bad thumping in a single general election, just as the Republicans did in 1964, and the Dems did in 1972 and 1980.  Surviving the rejection of the primary winner who turned on young voters would be much more difficult.  I doubt that convention voters would be so short-sighted.  If Sanders gets a majority in the primaries, and no skeletons fall out of his closet between the last primary and the convention, I think he will be the nominee.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 27, 2016, 09:18:29 pm
And Obama is toast.

Sanders would have to have about 80 % of the primary votes in order to get more than 50 % of the actual votes in the convention.  Almost 40 % of the delegates are appointed "at large" and although they usually vote along with their state delegations, they are not bound to do so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 27, 2016, 09:39:17 pm
And Obama is toast.

Sanders would have to have about 80 % of the primary votes in order to get more than 50 % of the actual votes in the convention.  Almost 40 % of the delegates are appointed "at large" and although they usually vote along with their state delegations, they are not bound to do so.

Obama is toast.  The guy has less than a year left.  He's done for.

And I saw it before any of you.

If Sanders gets more than 50% of the primary vote, the convention will not deny him the nomination in the absence of something falling loudly from a closet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 27, 2016, 09:45:10 pm
There is almost no way that the Democrats would nominate Sanders.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 27, 2016, 09:57:32 pm
How many steak dinners do you want to put on it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 27, 2016, 10:45:31 pm
There is almost no way that the Democrats would nominate Sanders.
]
Dave... is your real name Sisyphus?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 28, 2016, 09:16:51 am
]
Dave... is your real name Sisyphus?

No.

As I have said before, the Democrats are politically much smarter than the Republicans.  They do not knowingly nominate a candidate that has almost no chance of winning a national election.  The Republicans might nominate Trump, but the Democrats will not nominate Sanders unless the party elite has no choice.

A similar thing happened in New Jersey a few years ago.  The Senatorial nominee had a series of revelations that caused the polls to indicate that he would not win.  They took him off the ballot and replaced him with a former Senator that could, and did, win.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2016, 08:20:49 pm
No.

As I have said before, the Democrats are politically much smarter than the Republicans.  They do not knowingly nominate a candidate that has almost no chance of winning a national election.

1972 and 1980 would suggest otherwise regarding nominating a candidate with almost no chance of winning.  And as I pointed out, taking the nomination away from Sanders if he is widely and legitimately seen as having won the nomination in the primaries (i.e. getting more than 50% of the popular vote and winning a majority of the delegates up for bid), it would so strongly alienate young voters as to cripple the party for several elections to come.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 29, 2016, 11:51:14 am
br, Trump is now up in both the "polls only" and "polls-plus" Iowa forecasts on FiveThirtyEight.

I wonder if there's any chance skipping the debate hurts him, but it seems really doubtful.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on January 29, 2016, 11:57:48 am
If nothing he's done before now has hurt him, skipping the debate certainly won't.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on January 29, 2016, 12:26:33 pm
Especially considering he reportedly raised more than $6M for veterans' causes last night (1M out of his own pocket)...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 29, 2016, 01:01:41 pm
I really am starting to like Rubio after watching another debate.  although I would like to see Christie go after Hilary, I don't think he could ever get elected.  Rubio would have the best chance in the general against Hilary.  Trump will implode if nominated, maybe on purpose.  He was a friend and big admirer of the Clinton's before his "conversion" to conservatism.  His ego is boosting him now but I cuold see him growing tired of the whole thing long before the fall and tanking on purpose. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 29, 2016, 01:17:11 pm
Cruz and Rubio are the two best of those left standing, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 29, 2016, 01:18:21 pm
I really am starting to like Rubio after watching another debate.  although I would like to see Christie go after Hilary, I don't think he could ever get elected.  Rubio would have the best chance in the general against Hilary.  Trump will implode if nominated, maybe on purpose.  He was a friend and big admirer of the Clinton's before his "conversion" to conservatism.  His ego is boosting him now but I cuold see him growing tired of the whole thing long before the fall and tanking on purpose. 
i agree completely.  I'm still suspicious whether  Trump is making it easier for Hillary.  He's hoaxing Republicans and the American people.  It's the world's biggest punk.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 29, 2016, 09:31:35 pm
It might have started that way, bit if Trump actually is the Republican nominee, I suspect that any agreement that he may have with the Clintons would go by the wayside.  It would be a terrible temptation to be that close to being President and not really go for it.  He is not known for his small ego.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 29, 2016, 10:27:41 pm
Any agreement or understanding he might have had with Hillary will be when when she is not the nominee.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 12, 2016, 12:55:43 pm
I think Alan Grayson is a whack job. While he is out supporting the Occupy Wall Street Movement Grayson was running a hedge fund out of the Caymen Islands.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/12/us/politics/alan-graysons-double-life-congressman-and-hedge-fund-manager.html?_r=0

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 12, 2016, 08:37:56 pm
You only THINK he's a whack job?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 16, 2016, 09:23:54 pm
Whack job?

(http://1wdojq181if3tdg01yomaof86.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Marco-Rubio-Water.png)


Can anyone name an accomplishment from this one?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 16, 2016, 09:36:47 pm
otto is posting selfies?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 17, 2016, 07:41:23 am
Can anyone name an accomplishment from this one?

Before his nomination in 2008, can you name any accomplishments of Obama?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 17, 2016, 03:53:10 pm
legally addled
Quote
Before his nomination in 2008, can you name any accomplishments of Obama?


So, you can't name one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 17, 2016, 09:45:34 pm
legally addled

So, you can't name one.

Rubio is not my candidate and I won't be voting for him.  Why should I make any effort to name any accomplishment by him?

Obama, on the other hand, is your boy, and I don't seen any mention of any accomplishment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 18, 2016, 12:03:33 am
Trump is Toast.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 18, 2016, 01:42:39 am
Im fairly certain Rubio is my candidate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 18, 2016, 07:53:15 am
Most bizarre presidential primary season I can recall.  In the latest Qunnipiac national poll, my guy Sanders is ahead of all of the Republican contenders whereas Hillary is about even with them (actually, Hillary lags behind most of them).

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2324
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 18, 2016, 09:25:53 am
Legally Addled


I'm pretty sure President Barack Hussein Obama isn't running again and I will put either Democratic candidate up against any republic one in terms of accomplishments.

Additionally, a quick check of Wikipedia will give you your desired answer on marco rubio or our President.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 18, 2016, 10:36:23 am
Most bizarre presidential primary season I can recall.  In the latest Qunnipiac national poll, my guy Sanders is ahead of all of the Republican contenders whereas Hillary is about even with them (actually, Hillary lags behind most of them).

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2324

The frustrating thing to me is my man Kasich usually polls better general election wise than any Republican running and is a fairly popular governor in an important state, and he's having to move left for the Democrat/independent voters in these Republican primaries since he's not as famous or as crazy as Trump or as sleazy as Cruz. 

This year's election feels like it's coming straight from a dystopian novel.  It's just amazing how the extremes of both parties have taken control of our political processes. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on February 18, 2016, 10:41:47 am
As far as political candidates are concerned, the United States of America has "jumped the shark".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on February 18, 2016, 11:19:53 am
No surprise there - the media makes it easy to manipulate the mindless voters
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 18, 2016, 11:23:17 am
Our politicians reflect the voters they hope to lead.

Trump just didn't happen over night, he reflects the wants of a lot of white, xenophobic and somewhat bigoted authoritarian voters.

Cruz reflects those voters too, but his group includes the fundamentalist christian wing who don't want to participate in society, just rule over it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 18, 2016, 11:41:54 am
Unlike the far left who want health control, gun control, birth control, voter control, border control, control control...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 18, 2016, 11:44:47 am
Nearly all of our President's since the beginning have been Christians, even our current claims to be.  Other than lately, it seems to have worked out so far.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 18, 2016, 12:13:03 pm
Quote
As far as political candidates are concerned, the United States of America has "jumped the shark".

This is the best description I've seen of the presidential race.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 18, 2016, 12:35:39 pm
Yeah, Robb.  The current Muslim president has been a disaster.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 18, 2016, 12:52:15 pm
I don't think that Obama is a Muslim, but he certainly has been a disaster.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 18, 2016, 01:47:57 pm
Quote
Unlike the far left...


Anyone to the left of ted cruz would be far left to you. Also, is everyone on the left, far left? And is it close to far, far, far away land?

Quote
...who want health control...

Just how is expanding healthcare coverage to 10's of millions of people thru private health insurance companies control?

Quote
...gun control...

How has the gun out of control worked for you?

Quote
...birth control...

Having a choice to use contraception in family planning is considered control to you?

Quote
...voter control...

Voter ID to limit participation in voting, voter purges, closing of voter ID locations. limiting ID types for voting, requiring endless documents to get voter ID's. When do republic pols actually widen the path to voting?

Quote
...border control...

I do believe that a law requiring all kindergarten children to color within the lines in needed in this day and age.

Quote
...control control...

This usually happens when authoritarian republic pols are elected to office.

Can you name a republic law of recent conservative memory in which they expanded rights to Americans?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 18, 2016, 02:46:39 pm
P2, are you watching Fivethirtyeight? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 18, 2016, 03:30:05 pm
otto, that is one of the best, articulate posts you've ever made.  Very good.   Only miss was Cruz.  Can't vote for him.  Our country doesn't need another Bush or Clinton.  Trump is insane.  Doc Carson is uninspiring.  Maybe Kasich, maybe Sanders.  Bloomberg would be interesting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 18, 2016, 04:49:32 pm
No, DMF.  What is that?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 18, 2016, 05:51:59 pm
Fivethirtyeight.com.  Nate Silver and a bunch of other data-driven guys.  Four years ago he was blogging with the New York Times (I think) and correctly predicted more political outcomes than anyone else and then spun it into his own thing.  Sharp guy, good reading.  It's where I've been getting most of my political news.  They have some new stuff up about Bernie's road to the nomination.  It won't be easy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 18, 2016, 06:00:37 pm
My bad.  I follow Nate Silver some, but not much over the past year or so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 18, 2016, 07:00:51 pm
Playtwo, to be clear I never said Obama is a Muslim, I said he is a so-called Christian, there is a difference. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 18, 2016, 08:49:26 pm
If the Pope can question Trump's Christianity, I suppose you can question Obama's Christianity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 18, 2016, 10:34:00 pm
Playtwo, to be clear I never said Obama is a Muslim, I said he is a so-called Christian, there is a difference. 

As a non christian... i'd really like to know what the difference is... he seems to be pretty christian to me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 18, 2016, 10:40:26 pm
I have never heard Trump talk about his religious beliefs, but just in looking at what I know of his life and actions, I would have guessed that he was about as non-religious as anyone can get.  Please note that I do not equate non-religious with atheist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 18, 2016, 11:14:17 pm
Donald trump would only believe in god, if god was donald trump.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 18, 2016, 11:20:32 pm
Additionally, a quick check of Wikipedia will give you your desired answer on marco rubio or our President.

Could you point to where I "desired (an) answer on macro rubio or out president"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 18, 2016, 11:36:50 pm
Bloomberg would be interesting.

Bloomberg getting into a Trump vs. Sanders race would basically just gift wrap the election for Sanders, and word has it that would be the only way Bloomberg gets in.  I think Sanders would love it if he could portray himself as the man of the people versus a couple of ego driven billionaires trying to buy the presidency.


I'd be interested in voting for Bloomberg in that kind of race, but he'd be making a mistake if he ran. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 19, 2016, 07:30:18 am
Bloomberg getting into a Trump vs. Sanders race would basically just gift wrap the election for Sanders, and word has it that would be the only way Bloomberg gets in.  I think Sanders would love it if he could portray himself as the man of the people versus a couple of ego driven billionaires trying to buy the presidency.


I'd be interested in voting for Bloomberg in that kind of race, but he'd be making a mistake if he ran. 

Not at all.  It would seriously increase the odds a Republican would win.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 23, 2016, 08:52:36 am
Trump tweet

Donald J. Trump

‎@realDonaldTrump

I hear the Rickets family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $'s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!
8:42 AM - 22 Feb 2016
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 23, 2016, 09:03:28 am
Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse response to Mr Trump.

Ben Sasse ‏@BenSasse  16h16 hours ago
Ben Sasse Retweeted Donald J. Trump
Yeah, we should definitely put @realDonaldTrump in charge of the FBI and the IRS.
#WhatWouldNixonDo
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 23, 2016, 05:03:00 pm
Anyone but Trump. Seriously. Except maybe Cruz.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 23, 2016, 05:19:26 pm
Cant we just delay this for a year? see if more competent candidates come around?

I have changed my view on Trump, if enough people want to vote for him and he gets the crown.... so be it. they had it coming to em.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 23, 2016, 05:22:55 pm
He's gonna be the POTUS whether we like it or not.

Anyone but Hilary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 23, 2016, 05:36:52 pm
I'm to the point where I think Hillary is the least bad of all of them.  She and Kasich are the only two I don't think would be complete disasters (and don't get me wrong, I think both of them would be bad). I have no confidence in any of the other four governing on a daily basis.

It says a lot about the political system when someone who is as far right as Rubio is branded as the "establishment" candidate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 23, 2016, 06:50:28 pm
He's gonna be the POTUS whether we like it or not.

Anyone but Hilary.

The perfect Trump supporter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 23, 2016, 07:31:42 pm
I honestly don't know how far right Rubio is. I think he's pretty standard republican, which is obviously right of center, but I don't think Rubio is an extreme manifestation of right wing politics.

Paul was always the guy I wanted, but he was never going to get elected. I'd love Kasich, but that's not going to happen either. Even though I am actually very concerned about the practical outcomes of some of Bernie's more extreme leftist positions, the truth is that Washington is so gridlocked that I doubt he'd be able to accomplish much of the things on his furthest-left-leaning agenda. Within that context, I would gladly vote for Bernie over Hillary, Trump, and Cruz, because I think he is a truly decent man, someone who is honest and stands by principles, and someone not so pig headed as to be unreasonable. I'd vote for Hillary ahead of Trump or Cruz; Trump because he's a lunatic narcissist, Cruz because he's ideologically dangerous.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 23, 2016, 07:32:44 pm
Property in Belize is starting to become appealing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 23, 2016, 07:40:33 pm
, I would gladly vote for Bernie over Hillary, Trump, and Cruz, because I think he is a truly decent man

Yup.  It's always "decent" to forcibly take the earnings of one person to give them to another,

Can't get more decent than that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 23, 2016, 07:41:42 pm
I'm to the point where I think Hillary is the least bad of all of them.  She and Kasich are the only two I don't think would be
It says a lot about the political system when someone who is as far right as Rubio is branded as the "establishment" candidate.

With the Democratic party producing radical leftists like Obama and Sanders, it is going to make any mainstream politician look far to the right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 23, 2016, 08:00:27 pm
Clinton will become President, Democrats will regain the Senate, and then she'll name Obama to the Supreme Court.    The Republicans will have shot themselves in the foot with a shotgun.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 23, 2016, 08:10:13 pm
With the Democratic party producing radical leftists like Obama and Sanders, it is going to make any mainstream politician look far to the right.

The Heritage Foundation rates Rubio as the 4th most conservative senator, behind only Cruz, Mike Lee, and Richard Shelby.  And the Heritage Foundation doesn't like anyone who's not far right.  He's clearly far right, and nowhere close to being part of the same "establishment" of guys like Bush and Kasich. 

http://heritageactionscorecard.com/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on February 23, 2016, 08:34:20 pm
Bold prediction:  The Republican Party will NEVER AGAIN win a Presidential election as long as the United States of America exists.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 23, 2016, 08:34:37 pm
Rubio is fairly close to Cruz on how far right he is, he just isn't a jerk. I could vote for Rubio or Kasich. Anyone else and I'm finding out if I can write in none of the above or voting for the wackiest third party candidate I can find. I'd prefer Hillary or Cruz or Trump which really scares me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 23, 2016, 08:45:44 pm
The Heritage Foundation rates Rubio as the 4th most conservative senator, behind only Cruz, Mike Lee, and Richard Shelby.  And the Heritage Foundation doesn't like anyone who's not far right.  He's clearly far right, and nowhere close to being part of the same "establishment" of guys like Bush and Kasich. 

http://heritageactionscorecard.com/


What specific positions of Rubio's do you consider "far right"?  You shouldn't have any problem listing five or six,
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 23, 2016, 08:48:24 pm
The Heritage Foundation rates Rubio as the 4th most conservative senator, behind only Cruz, Mike Lee, and Richard Shelby.  And the Heritage Foundation doesn't like anyone who's not far right.  He's clearly far right, and nowhere close to being part of the same "establishment" of guys like Bush and Kasich. 

http://heritageactionscorecard.com/ (http://heritageactionscorecard.com/)

I don't like that Rubio doesn't have exceptions for ****/incest in his abortion platform, and I'm concerned as inexperienced as he is that he'll get pushed into a war that we don't absolutely have to be fighting, since he's definitely the most hawkish of the Republicans still in the race.  I'll still be interested in how he answers the no exceptions abortion question in the general election because that will be brought up in a debate.  Hopefully he'll be able to provide a better answer to that than Richard Mourdock or Todd Akin did. 

Aside from that, he's the best Republican still running besides Kasich.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 23, 2016, 08:58:03 pm
I don't like that Rubio doesn't have exceptions for ****/incest in his abortion platform, and I'm concerned as inexperienced as he is that he'll get pushed into a war that we don't absolutely have to be fighting.  He's definitely the most hawkish of the Republicans still in the race.  I'll still be interested in how he answers the no exceptions abortion question in the general election because that will be brought up in a debate.

Its actually a very simple question to answer.

The only justification for interfering with a woman's right to control her own body is that an abortion is not just controlling her body, but ending another human life which is entitled to the same protection from government as any other human life.

If the unborn child is in fact a human life, you do not kill that child just because of the circumstances of conception.

If you did, then a DNA test done on a five year old child showing that the child was the result of a **** instead of the mother's consensual sex with her husband would justify killing the child at age five.  And I am unaware of anyone who would support that.

If the unborn child is not a human life, the state has no basis to interfere with a woman's decision to abort.  If it is a human life, then the circumstances of conception do not matter.

The difficulty is not one of those opposed to abortion explaining their opposition.  The difficulty with with folks who are squishy on the issue never having really decided whether believe the unborn child is human, or, when the child becomes human after conception.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 23, 2016, 08:58:54 pm
Bold prediction:  The Republican Party will NEVER AGAIN win a Presidential election as long as the United States of America exists.

I'll be happy to take the over on that bet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 23, 2016, 09:11:03 pm
Aside from that, he's the best Republican still running besides Kasich.

Well, as much as I'm not a fan of Rubio, I'll agree with that.  But that's not saying much when the "besides Kasich" crew is Trump, Cruz, and Carson.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 23, 2016, 09:14:14 pm
The Heritage Foundation rates Rubio as the 4th most conservative senator, behind only Cruz, Mike Lee, and Richard Shelby.  And the Heritage Foundation doesn't like anyone who's not far right.  He's clearly far right, and nowhere close to being part of the same "establishment" of guys like Bush and Kasich. 

http://heritageactionscorecard.com/

I agree that he is much farther to the right than either Bush or Kasich.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 23, 2016, 10:11:40 pm
Well, as much as I'm not a fan of Rubio, I'll agree with that.  But that's not saying much when the "besides Kasich" crew is Trump, Cruz, and Carson.

Yeah that is damning with faint praise there . . .
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 23, 2016, 10:28:51 pm
I no longer care about "right" or "left".  I'm looking for "sane".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 23, 2016, 10:44:51 pm
And you thought you'd find it here?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 23, 2016, 11:15:51 pm
Im not a Trump supporter. I voted for Rubio. As a matter of fact I think it's a bad reflection on the state of our country that Trump is even seriously being considered and it makes me want to claw my eyes out to even hear the Trump supporters talk but as a God fearing Christian man I dont feel like I can vote democrat with a clear conscience so if Trump wins the ticket he'll get my vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 23, 2016, 11:21:22 pm
And the Trump insanity continues in Nevada.

The amazing thing reading through all these exit/entrance polls is that Trump is consistently 30-40% no matter what the demographic is.  It doesn't seem to matter if you're a high school graduate or have a post graduate degree.  It doesn't matter if you make $30,000 or $300,000.  It doesn't matter if you're evangelical or secular.  It doesn't matter if you're "very" conservative or moderate.  He's consistently getting that share of the vote with everyone. 

He just cannot be stopped.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on February 23, 2016, 11:47:18 pm
Donald Trump and catchers pitch framing.

Really.

Scroll down to middle of piece below.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/02/23/my-very-peculiar-and-speculative-theory-of-why-the-gop-has-not-stopped-donald-trump/?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-f%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 24, 2016, 12:04:34 am
So pitch framing is irrelevant now because umpires realize what's happening.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 12:16:27 am
Im not a Trump supporter. I voted for Rubio. As a matter of fact I think it's a bad reflection on the state of our country that Trump is even seriously being considered and it makes me want to claw my eyes out to even hear the Trump supporters talk but as a God fearing Christian man I dont feel like I can vote democrat with a clear conscience so if Trump wins the ticket he'll get my vote.

"Voted" is a past tense verb.

You live in Tennessee.

Tennessee has not yet had their primaries< meaning the only way you could have voted was to have fraudulently registered in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, or this evening in Nevada, and then driven their to illegally vote.... or you could have voted in your dreams.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 12:30:29 am
So pitch framing is irrelevant now because umpires realize what's happening.

LESS relevant.  Not IRrelevant.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 24, 2016, 12:47:23 am
I guess this shows that I dont have you on ignore but I early voted dumbass.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 07:40:01 am
I guess this shows that I dont have you on ignore but I early voted dumbass.

I forgot about the foolishness of Tennessee's early voting, allowing votes to be cast before late developments are even known, and allowing voters to voter for candidates who end up having dropped out of the race before election day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ray on February 24, 2016, 08:32:48 am
Bold prediction:  The Republican Party will NEVER AGAIN win a Presidential election as long as the United States of America exists.

I think the most interesting part of this declaration is the qualifier.....as long as the USA exists? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 24, 2016, 08:43:36 am
Michael Bloomberg will decide to enter the presidential race as an independent.   Enough of the electorate dislikes both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and the former NYC mayor wins the popular vote in a handful of states.  That results in none of the candidates winning a majority in the electoral college.

More confusion is added as both parties dispute the election in Illinois accusing the other side of fraud.     Appeals are filed and the case goes to the Supreme Court where no ruling is made because all votes end in a 4-4 tie. 

The election goes to the House of Representatives where the Republicans have maintained control.  The Republicans can’t bring themselves to vote for Hilary Clinton and dislike Donald Trump enough that no decision is made by Inauguration Day.

Meanwhile, the Senate, where the Democrats now have a majority,  selects the next vice-president from the top two vote getters in the electoral college and Hillary Clinton’s running mate becomes acting president until the House can finally come to a conclusion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 24, 2016, 11:08:09 am
Consider Rubio's abortion position to be the similar to the pro-choice position.  He is personally opposed to exceptions, but as a matter of law he isn't going to do anything to to enact it because that isn't supported by many Americans.  It would be where I am as well.

Just to give me a glimmer of hope if the election was thrown to House, is there anything in the constitution that says they have to pick from  Trump or Clinton?  Could they choose somebody that didn't run?  If Clinton wins the Democratic nomination Bloomberg won't get in.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 24, 2016, 11:54:59 am
Just to give me a glimmer of hope if the election was thrown to House, is there anything in the constitution that says they have to pick from  Trump or Clinton?  Could they choose somebody that didn't run?
The House would have to choose between the three top vote getters in the electoral college. 

What I neglected to say is that it would be one vote per state in the house.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 24, 2016, 12:16:23 pm
Welp, 4 years is a short time period.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 24, 2016, 12:19:42 pm
But Hillary,being indicted for the email scandal and, wanting a top legal mind as running mate, chooses Cruz as her running mate, thus making him acting president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 24, 2016, 12:28:25 pm
That's like the old Jesse Jackson-Jesse Helms ticket.  Let's offend Everybody.

Rubio is too far right to win, and he's too inexperienced (letting Christie dismantle him in the debate was shocking).  Kasich is interesting but doesn't have a prayer at the nomination.  Cruz is scary ideologically, plus I think someday we will find out he's a Frank Underwood level of slime.  Trump can't win a general election.  Looks like it will be Hillary to me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 24, 2016, 12:37:21 pm
Yup.  It's always "decent" to forcibly take the earnings of one person to give them to another,

Can't get more decent than that.

How absurdly reductionist of you. Our current system does this already, and basically any viable candidate supports a progressive tax system.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 24, 2016, 12:39:40 pm
I no longer care about "right" or "left".  I'm looking for "sane".

Bingo
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 24, 2016, 12:41:47 pm
trump can always go back to trump university to fleece more "students".

He'll be OK.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 24, 2016, 01:08:41 pm
And yet...somehow...383,259 people in Tennessee have already managed to vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 24, 2016, 01:12:00 pm
"I forgot about the foolishness of Tennessee's early voting,..."

Not quite as quickly as you managed to forget the foolishness of your last post.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 24, 2016, 02:59:24 pm
Consider Rubio's abortion position to be the similar to the pro-choice position.  He is personally opposed to exceptions, but as a matter of law he isn't going to do anything to to enact it because that isn't supported by many Americans.  It would be where I am as well.

I think the problem with Rubio's position is that more and more Republicans are against exceptions for **** and incest.  Paul Ryan is against exceptions.  Ted Cruz is against them.  Rand Paul is against them. 

The activists are pushing Republicans too far to the right on the issue, and if enough of them are taking that position and have expressed opposition against exceptions when running for office, it certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility that they would feel compelled to pass a bill with no exceptions that a President Rubio would feel compelled to sign. 

That of course being if the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade or if a Republican controlled congress and a Republican president wanted to pass a strong piece of legislation that would allow them to challenge Roe vs. Wade.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 24, 2016, 03:05:20 pm
Seriously, enough Republicans are taking a "no ****/incest exceptions" stance to abortion that it makes me think the pro-choice people have a point.

I'm against abortion on demand and think it ought to be restricted and should be illegal once a fetus becomes viable (except for ****/incest), but if you have enough people voted into office who think someone who got **** can't have one when they've found out they've become pregnant or that Plan B ought to be illegal, I can see the point of keeping choice open.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 24, 2016, 03:15:34 pm
Quote
Trump can't win a general election.

Actually, I wouldn't underestimate Trump's chances of winning the general election if he's nominated, and Hillary and the Dems would be making a big mistake if they did.  His chances of winning the nomination were already underestimated enough as it was, in spite of all the crazy things he's said and done already.

There might be enough independents who are nodding their heads at all the crazy things Trump is saying.  There might be enough "anybody but Hillary/Bernie" voters who will hold their noses and vote for him.  There might be enough people who simply think he's the lesser of two evils in the general election or that his business experience trumps (sorry) some of the extreme rhetoric he's spewed.  The young people who showed up to vote for Obama probably aren't going to do the same for Hillary, especially if those young voters wind up thinking Bernie got a raw deal in the nominating process.  He might have an outside chance of winning 20-30% of the African American vote since he's not a traditional Republican, and if he does that, he's going to have a big leg up on Hillary. 

Nobody's really been able to figure out Trump's appeal yet, and we might find out that it extends a lot further than just people showing up for Republican primaries for the first time to vote for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 24, 2016, 03:30:58 pm
Quote
Actually, I wouldn't underestimate Trump's chances of winning the general election if he's nominated, and Hillary and the Dems would be making a big mistake if they did.

Oh, I'm sure they're not.  It's a personal opinion.  The negative overall opinion numbers on Trump are really, really high.  Lots of people can't stand the guy, but they're not the ones showing up to vote in primaries.  I think if the Republican party had a compelling candidate to put up against Trump, he wouldn't have gotten this far, but so far it's been Amateur Hour, and now it's probably too late for anyone else.  A brokered convention would be awesome, though.

Hillary has been shrewdly conducting the general election all along.  She's been speaking to the moderate center rather than playing to the liberal fringe like Bernie.  I get that Bernie is telling what believes, but I think he's also unelectable--he's just too liberal.  Bernie can't win for the same reason that Cruz can't win.  Too far away from the center.  I think Hillary gets that.  Lots of people can't stand her, but I don't think it will be enough in the end.  As someone who would kind of like a few more years of the Bill Clinton administration, I'm okay with it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 24, 2016, 04:09:19 pm
If only we get a few more years of the 1990's economy, too....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 24, 2016, 04:11:04 pm
I'll go with the guy who sticks to principle and doesn't pander for votes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 24, 2016, 04:11:17 pm
And I don't mean Cruz.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 24, 2016, 04:12:22 pm
Hard to stick to principles you don't have. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 24, 2016, 04:14:55 pm
I'll go with the guy who sticks to principle and doesn't pander for votes.
So you don't support Hillary?  Or is "guy" generic?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 24, 2016, 04:15:22 pm
Although, I can remember one time in junior high when I was required to sit in the assistant principal's office all week.  I was certainly stuck then.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 24, 2016, 04:20:57 pm
The abortion issue is a good example of the "slippery slopism" prominent in both parties.   Republicans resist issues of gun control because it's a slippery slope to eviscerate the 2nd Amendment; Democrats resist limiting abortion because it's a slippery slope to eroding the woman's right to choose.   The whole "**** and incest" issue is the red herring because if any kind of compromise can ever be reached it means giving up something.  By giving up opposing "**** and incest" can end abortion on demand, Republicans will do it.   It's an attempt to get wiggle room in the negotiations.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 24, 2016, 04:27:08 pm
That of course being if the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade or if a Republican controlled congress and a Republican president wanted to pass a strong piece of legislation that would allow them to challenge Roe vs. Wade.

It wouldn't make abortion illegal in the US.  It would return the issue to the states.  Now someplace like Texas might propose a full out ban, but that won't be the the law of the US.  I think what Curt says is a smart analysis, boy that hurts.  If Rubio was given a bill that out lawed abortion except in the case of ****/incest/life of the mother he'd sign it in a heart beat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 24, 2016, 04:27:40 pm
"Republicans resist issues of gun control because it's a slippery slope to eviscerate the 2nd Amendment..."

I think Republican (or moderate Democrat) resistance to gun control has little to do with the proverbial slippery slope.  Much more to do with getting on the NRA's hit list.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 04:52:51 pm
"I forgot about the foolishness of Tennessee's early voting,..."

Not quite as quickly as you managed to forget the foolishness of your last post.

Not at all.  I admitted the fact that I was wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 04:54:05 pm
How absurdly reductionist of you. Our current system does this already, and basically any viable candidate supports a progressive tax system.

So the fact that something is done makes it either right, or at least acceptable?

I assume then that you support legalizing ****.  That also happens with great frequency.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 04:55:04 pm
That's like the old Jesse Jackson-Jesse Helms ticket.  Let's offend Everybody.

Rubio is too far right to win,

On what issues?  And I hope you can mention more than one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 24, 2016, 04:56:48 pm
"Republicans resist issues of gun control because it's a slippery slope to eviscerate the 2nd Amendment..."

I think Republican (or moderate Democrat) resistance to gun control has little to do with the proverbial slippery slope.  Much more to do with getting on the NRA's hit list.
The NRA is toast.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 04:57:21 pm
Consider Rubio's abortion position to be the similar to the pro-choice position.  He is personally opposed to exceptions, but as a matter of law he isn't going to do anything to to enact it because that isn't supported by many Americans.  It would be where I am as well.

Just to give me a glimmer of hope if the election was thrown to House, is there anything in the constitution that says they have to pick from  Trump or Clinton?  Could they choose somebody that didn't run?  If Clinton wins the Democratic nomination Bloomberg won't get in.

The House would have to choose between the three top vote getters in the electoral college. 

What I neglected to say is that it would be one vote per state in the house.

Bennett nails it.  And this means that since the Republicans have a stranglehold on the delegations of more than 30 states, if it ends up in the House, the Republicans will decide the winner.... though they would NOT have to pick the candidate who ran as a Republican.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 05:16:10 pm
I think the problem with Rubio's position is that more and more Republicans are against exceptions for **** and incest.  Paul Ryan is against exceptions.  Ted Cruz is against them.  Rand Paul is against them. 

The activists are pushing Republicans too far to the right on the issue, and if enough of them are taking that position and have expressed opposition against exceptions when running for office, it certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility that they would feel compelled to pass a bill with no exceptions that a President Rubio would feel compelled to sign. 

That of course being if the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade or if a Republican controlled congress and a Republican president wanted to pass a strong piece of legislation that would allow them to challenge Roe vs. Wade.

Most of the staunchest abortion opponents would also oppose an abortion ban at the federal level.  It simply is not an issue for the federal government to decide.  If a state wanted to legalize murder, not just of the unborn, but of anyone, it would have the power to do so.  There is nothing in the Constitution which would give the Federal government power to regulate the issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 05:17:18 pm
I think the problem with Rubio's position is that more and more Republicans are against exceptions for **** and incest.  Paul Ryan is against exceptions.  Ted Cruz is against them.  Rand Paul is against them.

So the problem with Rubio's position is not actually his position, but the position other Republicans have taken?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 05:21:51 pm
By giving up opposing "**** and incest" can end abortion on demand, Republicans will do it.   It's an attempt to get wiggle room in the negotiations.

No.  It isn't.  I know some folks wouldn't understand a principled position if it hit them in the face, but most abortion opponents oppose it because they consider abortion murder, and if so they oppose **** or incest exceptions, not because they want "wiggle room in the negotiations," but because they consider it murder.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 24, 2016, 06:54:44 pm
So the fact that something is done makes it either right, or at least acceptable?

I assume then that you support legalizing ****.  That also happens with great frequency.

Ahh, yes, the infallible logic of the mighty jesbeard. You win, jes. I am obviously pro ****.

Every once in a while, I peek beneath the ignored post banner, and every time, I am swiftly reminded why it is I blocked you in the first place.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 24, 2016, 07:13:38 pm
WHAT!!!???  You can block people? Geeze Louise, ten years worth of insults down the drain....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 24, 2016, 08:19:09 pm
Ahh, yes, the infallible logic of the mighty jesbeard. You win, jes. I am obviously pro ****.

Every once in a while, I peek beneath the ignored post banner, and every time, I am swiftly reminded why it is I blocked you in the first place.

If you do not, then you need to acknowledge that the excuse you offered as a justification for redistributing wealth is more than lame.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 24, 2016, 10:33:47 pm
Quote
Every once in a while, I peek beneath the ignored post banner

Sometimes I click, but life is too short to engage. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 26, 2016, 07:39:51 pm
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-dilemma-of-conservatives-who-say-theyll-never-vote-for-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true

It’s like Wolfgang Pauli’s famous crack, “That is not only not right, it is not even wrong.” He doesn’t even have a bad character. People with bad characters can have strengths. As far as I can tell he has no character. He’s a bully with subordinates. He does business in ways that good businesspeople despise—and he’s not even very good at that. He says things about people, especially his wives, that are so obnoxious that calling them obnoxious doesn’t come close to how awful they are. He constantly lies about things that can be checked. He brags incessantly—really unattractive in itself—but he doesn’t even brag about things that he could appropriately be proud of. The guy is pathetic.

The oddest thing about his popularity with white middle-class and working-class males is that if he lived next door to them, they would despise him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 26, 2016, 07:59:08 pm
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-dilemma-of-conservatives-who-say-theyll-never-vote-for-donald-trump?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true

It’s like Wolfgang Pauli’s famous crack, “That is not only not right, it is not even wrong.” He doesn’t even have a bad character. People with bad characters can have strengths. As far as I can tell he has no character. He’s a bully with subordinates. He does business in ways that good businesspeople despise—and he’s not even very good at that. He says things about people, especially his wives, that are so obnoxious that calling them obnoxious doesn’t come close to how awful they are. He constantly lies about things that can be checked. He brags incessantly—really unattractive in itself—but he doesn’t even brag about things that he could appropriately be proud of. The guy is pathetic.

The oddest thing about his popularity with white middle-class and working-class males is that if he lived next door to them, they would despise him.

He has two appeals.  He appeals to the true xenophobic bigots, and to the sort of true authoritarians who would love to have a Benito Mussolini as president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 26, 2016, 11:10:40 pm
Trump is a jackass, and much worse.  But his appeal is not only to xenophobics and fascists, which is a small part of his following.  Most of his followers are those who are sick and tired of being manipulated into being represented by people that are not willing or able to carry through on their campaign promises, and foolishly believe that just because Trump is a bully, he will be THEIR bully, totally forgetting that most of what he promises, he can NOT produce, and and what he WILL produce will be just the opposite of what they want.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 26, 2016, 11:32:28 pm
Trump is a jackass, and much worse.  But his appeal is not only to xenophobics and fascists, which is a small part of his following.  Most of his followers are those who are sick and tired of being manipulated into being represented by people that are not willing or able to carry through on their campaign promises, and foolishly believe that just because Trump is a bully, he will be THEIR bully, totally forgetting that most of what he promises, he can NOT produce, and and what he WILL produce will be just the opposite of what they want.
So how much are you giving his campaign?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 26, 2016, 11:51:29 pm
Democracy is a delicate enterprise. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 27, 2016, 04:12:45 am
Trump is a jackass, and much worse.  But his appeal is not only to xenophobics and fascists, which is a small part of his following.  Most of his followers are those who are sick and tired of being manipulated into being represented by people that are not willing or able to carry through on their campaign promises, and foolishly believe that just because Trump is a bully, he will be THEIR bully, totally forgetting that most of what he promises, he can NOT produce, and and what he WILL produce will be just the opposite of what they want.

I did not write "facists."  I wrote "authoritarians."  While facists are pretty much by definition authoritarians, not all authoritarians are facists.  I chose the word "authoritarians" for a reason.  I chose not to use the word "facist" for a reason.  (While Trump himself certainly appears to be facist, I am not suggesting that most of his supporters are... or would even understand the term.)  The reason I chose "authoritarian" instead of "facist," is that "authoritarian" fits, while facist does not, and there is sound evidence for the conclusion they are authoritarian, a conclusion which certainly did not originate with me.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533
My finding is the result of a national poll I conducted in the last five days of December under the auspices of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, sampling 1,800 registered voters across the country and the political spectrum. Running a standard statistical analysis, I found that education, income, gender, age, ideology and religiosity had no significant bearing on a Republican voter’s preferred candidate. Only two of the variables I looked at were statistically significant: authoritarianism, followed by fear of terrorism, though the former was far more significant than the latter.

Authoritarianism is not a new, untested concept in the American electorate. Since the rise of Nazi Germany, it has been one of the most widely studied ideas in social science. While its causes are still debated, the political behavior of authoritarians is not. Authoritarians obey. They rally to and follow strong leaders. And they respond aggressively to outsiders, especially when they feel threatened. From pledging to “make America great again” by building a wall on the border to promising to close mosques and ban Muslims from visiting the United States, Trump is playing directly to authoritarian inclinations.

Not all authoritarians are Republicans by any means; in national surveys since 1992, many authoritarians have also self-identified as independents and Democrats. And in the 2008 Democratic primary, the political scientist Marc Hetherington found that authoritarianism mattered more than income, ideology, gender, age and education in predicting whether voters preferred Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. But Hetherington has also found, based on 14 years of polling, that authoritarians have steadily moved from the Democratic to the Republican Party over time. He hypothesizes that the trend began decades ago, as Democrats embraced civil rights, gay rights, employment protections and other political positions valuing freedom and equality. In my poll results, authoritarianism was not a statistically significant factor in the Democratic primary race, at least not so far, but it does appear to be playing an important role on the Republican side. Indeed, 49 percent of likely Republican primary voters I surveyed score in the top quarter of the authoritarian scale—more than twice as many as Democratic voters.

Political pollsters have missed this key component of Trump’s support because they simply don’t include questions about authoritarianism in their polls. In addition to the typical battery of demographic, horse race, thermometer-scale and policy questions, my poll asked a set of four simple survey questions that political scientists have employed since 1992 to measure inclination toward authoritarianism. These questions pertain to child-rearing: whether it is more important for the voter to have a child who is respectful or independent; obedient or self-reliant; well-behaved or considerate; and well-mannered or curious. Respondents who pick the first option in each of these questions are strongly authoritarian.

Based on these questions, Trump was the only candidate—Republican or Democrat—whose support among authoritarians was statistically significant.




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 27, 2016, 09:30:30 am
So how much are you giving his campaign?

I give the same amount to all campaigns of all parties.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 27, 2016, 09:35:06 am
I realize that you used the term authoritarian.  I did not use it because the term is meaningless psychobabble.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 27, 2016, 10:22:46 am
I give the same amount to all campaigns of all parties.
So, if I run, you'll send me money?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 27, 2016, 12:44:15 pm
As much as I gave to Trump and Hillary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 27, 2016, 05:46:23 pm
I expect TEN times what you gave Trump and Hillary.

BTW, since Hillary always said in news conferences that "WE are the President," wouldn't this be a third term?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 27, 2016, 06:36:21 pm
I give the same amount to all campaigns of all parties.

Sounds like Donald Trump....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 27, 2016, 06:39:17 pm
I realize that you used the term authoritarian.  I did not use it because the term is meaningless psychobabble.

His next  the last paragraph provides a a working definition, which is neither meaningless nor psychobabble.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 27, 2016, 08:12:31 pm
Actually, it is a great example of psychobabble.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 27, 2016, 08:15:06 pm
I expect TEN times what you gave Trump and Hillary.

That is a coincidence.  I personally believe that you are worth exactly ten times what I gave Trump and Hillary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 27, 2016, 10:15:45 pm
C1 = TH
T = H/C1
H = T/C1

Odds are H/C1 or T/C1 are undefined.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 27, 2016, 10:33:25 pm
That is a coincidence.  I personally believe that you are worth exactly ten times what I gave Trump and Hillary.
Dave, a few years ago I told my board of directors that I was so pleased with the work of our volunteers that I had doubled their salaries.  A couple board members laughed, the rest were picking their jaws off the table...then you could see the lights coming on...very, very slowly.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 28, 2016, 11:10:44 am
Of COURSE he won't condemn the Klan -- condemning the Klan would be directly attacking his core supporters.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/28/468455028/trump-wont-condemn-kkk-says-he-knows-nothing-about-white-supremacists
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 28, 2016, 01:02:51 pm
Trump is a populist.  His one ability is to convince large numbers of disparate and even opposing groups that he is really on THEIR side.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 28, 2016, 01:30:40 pm
Trump is a populist.  His one ability is to convince large numbers of disparate and even opposing groups that he is really on THEIR side.

In this case, he is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 28, 2016, 05:31:35 pm
Trump is a populist.  His one ability is to convince large numbers of disparate and even opposing groups that he is really on THEIR side.
Trump is a jackass.

from my favorite pastor and writer:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/02/26/max-lucado-trump-doesnt-pass-the-decency-test/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 28, 2016, 05:52:35 pm
Hard to disagree but I'd vote for Ric Flair over Hilary.

Once again remember that I voted for Rubio but maybe Trump looks so good to some because of his competition.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 28, 2016, 06:29:19 pm
Hard to disagree but I'd vote for Ric Flair over Hilary.

Once again remember that I voted for Rubio but maybe Trump looks so good to some because of his competition.

Hey, MANY of us would vote for Rick Flair over Hilary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 28, 2016, 06:30:44 pm
Speaking of our former Secretary of State and the policies carried out under her....
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cia-weapons-syrian-jihadis-isis-selling-facebook/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 28, 2016, 06:33:52 pm
Captain Obvious would clearly be an improvement over Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 28, 2016, 07:58:57 pm
Hard to disagree but I'd vote for Ric Flair over Hilary.

Get him to run and I'm all in.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 29, 2016, 10:20:46 am
I'm starting to think CurtOne has a good point (yeah I said that) about Trump just being a Republican party troll.  How does anyone take this guy seriously?  Is he just running just to make some point about how many backwoods racists there still are in this country?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/28/politics/donald-trump-white-supremacists/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 29, 2016, 10:20:53 am
This man who has such a superior intellect, such great command of current issues and is surrounding himself with the best advisors doesn't know who David Duke is and doesn't have advisors who might be able to clue him in on David Duke?  Seriously?   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on February 29, 2016, 11:25:07 am
Maybe it's because I'm neither old nor southern, but I didn't know who David Duke was.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 29, 2016, 11:49:34 am
You arnt running for president either.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 29, 2016, 11:55:10 am
Likely cause your too young, I'm 39 and 1991 was around the time that I first started following politics so it was one of the first elections that I heard about.  Duke vs Edwin Edwards would be a lot like Trump vs Clinton.  Somebody made bumper stickers in support of Edwards, "Vote for the crook, it's important."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 29, 2016, 01:34:49 pm
I must also be young.  I remember Duke from one of the elections, but who is Edwin Edwards?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 29, 2016, 01:50:39 pm
The Democrat that Duke ran against.  16 years as Louisiana Governor, 10 years in federal prison.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 29, 2016, 02:08:14 pm
I thought only Illinois Governors went to prison.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 29, 2016, 02:44:39 pm
Maybe it's because I'm neither old nor southern, but I didn't know who David Duke was.

But I assume you know what the KKK is?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 29, 2016, 03:55:00 pm
Karen's Korner Kitchen!   When we lived shortly in Buckley, IL, the best restaurant in town was Karen's Korner Kitchen.  Right on the corner, it had a huge sign, KKK.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 29, 2016, 04:48:12 pm
This man who has such a superior intellect, such great command of current issues and is surrounding himself with the best advisors doesn't know who David Duke is and doesn't have advisors who might be able to clue him in on David Duke?  Seriously?

Trump actually DID know.  When he was thinking about running for president on the Constitutional Party ticket (I think that was the ticket), he finally bowed owed of consideration with an announcement which specifically referenced David Duke by name, and calling him a racist, and also mentioning that since Duke (and two other folks he mentioned, one of whom was openly a communist) was in the party, Trump did not want to also belong.  And then just Friday, two days before his Jake Tapper interview, he responded to questions about David Duke endorsing him and he specifically and by name disavowed Duke's endorsement.

When Tapper asked the question, he said he had not heard of Duke, that he did not even know who Duke was, which is why Tapper was so taken aback.

Trump was doing as Trump so often does, simply playing the media in order to seize control of another news cycle, without paying anything for ads.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 01, 2016, 05:45:48 pm
Most of my former co-workers were Republican.  Most of my family is Republican.  Many of my friends are Republican.  I don't believe a single one of them support Donald Trump.  All of them are agonizing over who they will vote for in November.  Then I realized something, they all have brains and values.  Go figure.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 01, 2016, 06:11:37 pm
You must have been adopted?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on March 01, 2016, 06:36:45 pm
John Oliver on Trump.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2016/02/29/john_oliver_shredded_donald_trump_for_20_straight_minutes_on_last_week_tonight.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_top
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 01, 2016, 07:07:21 pm
Make fun all you want but EVERYONE Ive spoken to in my neck of the woods supports Trump.

My dentist even said "Ill help him build that damn wall" and that's the only comments I could even post.

Most people are saying much worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 01, 2016, 07:12:12 pm
Where do you live? 1933 Germany?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 01, 2016, 07:12:43 pm
There are a lot of angry folks looking for scapegoats.  Trump would be their guy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 01, 2016, 07:35:45 pm
I dont live in Knoxville but I dont live but about 15-20 mins from there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 01, 2016, 07:37:04 pm
It's just like that story Curt posted.

People are voting with their middle finger.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on March 01, 2016, 07:43:24 pm
Look at the states where Ben Carson gets more votes than John Kasich.  Those are states I will never move to.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 01, 2016, 07:46:32 pm
Trump appears to be on track for a win in Georgia, Vermont, Virginia, Alabama, Mass, Tennessee.

Losing to Rubio in Ark, barely losing to cruz in Texas. 3 states not reporting anything yet as  polls still open.

Trump your 2016 GOP presidential candidate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 01, 2016, 07:56:26 pm
I sometimes wonder if Trump will be the last GOP candidate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 01, 2016, 08:48:49 pm
Most of my former co-workers were Republican.  Most of my family is Republican.  Many of my friends are Republican.  I don't believe a single one of them support Donald Trump.  All of them are agonizing over who they will vote for in November.  Then I realized something, they all have brains and values.  Go figure.
Make fun all you want but EVERYONE Ive spoken to in my neck of the woods supports Trump.

My dentist even said "Ill help him build that damn wall" and that's the only comments I could even post.

Most people are saying much worse.

Yeah it looks like Trump's support is mostly coming from backwoods, rural areas.  Just flipping through the Tennessee counties, granted Trump even wins the bigger counties like Davidson County where Nashville is, but his margins there aren't anywhere near what they are in the smaller counties, where he's winning 45-50% of the vote. 

I'm like Curt, I know of absolutely no one who is voting for Trump or at least is willing to admit it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 01, 2016, 08:54:54 pm
Look at the states where Ben Carson gets more votes than John Kasich.  Those are states I will never move to.

+1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 01, 2016, 09:03:52 pm
Although I guess on the flip side, I'm living in one of those states, haha.

I badly wanted to vote for Kasich today, but I knew it would be a wasted vote.  I wound up voting for Rubio, although not with a great deal of enthusiasm.

What might even be sadder about tonight than Trump sweeping Super Tuesday is that it looks like Cruz is going to win two states to Rubio's zero.  Cruz to me is pretty much as bad as Trump, but he's now going to have more of a case to call on Rubio to quit the race after tonight than Rubio will against Cruz.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ray on March 01, 2016, 09:11:30 pm
I know who both are, but then again, I was from louisiana. Duke versus Edwards was in my mid teens when I was a lot more interested in politics.  Talk about ashamed to even pick a side.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on March 01, 2016, 09:30:47 pm
Baseball related politics tweet...

Craig Calcaterra ‏@craigcalcaterra 
The Rubio love from conservatives is quickly becoming "sure, the Royals won the Series, but the Cards are the better team!" stuff.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 01, 2016, 10:19:51 pm
Where do you live? 1933 Germany?

Central eastern Tennessee.

Same difference.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 01, 2016, 10:21:48 pm
ruz to me is pretty much as bad as Trump

How?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on March 02, 2016, 06:52:18 am
How?

Cruz has proven himself as a hardline ideologue who thinks what Washington needs is someone who will draw a line in the sand, dig in his heels, and demand his way or the highway even more than what we've already had for the last decade.  In my opinion, he's MORE dangerous than Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 02, 2016, 07:03:00 am
Cruz has proven himself as a hardline ideologue who thinks what Washington needs is someone who will draw a line in the sand, dig in his heels, and demand his way or the highway even more than what we've already had for the last decade.  In my opinion, he's MORE dangerous than Trump.

Ah.... in other words he takes positions based on principles.

I can understand how some people don't like that.

Of course the failure of those in Congress to do that is what has given rise to Trump, but then you have already said you would prefer Trump.  Not surprising.

But which of Cruz's "hardline ideolog(ical)" positions is it that you find so troublesome?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 02, 2016, 07:03:50 am
When the final 5 are Sanders, Clinton, Trump, Rubio and Cruz you know this country just simply doesn't care any more.  Obama ushered in the celebrity president, which is why Trump is doing so well.  Trump doesn't even have to study the issues, he just tells us how great everything is going to be and the shills believe him because he fired people on Apprentice.  What is your stance on North Korea?  "We're going to have a great foreign policy, it will be beautiful, you won't even believe it."  What is your stance on the EU and bailing out failing members?  "The EU will love me, I do very well with the EU, we're going to have a great relationship with the EU."  What should we do in about Putin and Russia?  "Putin likes me, I do very well with the Russian people.  Have you seen my numbers there?  We're going to have a great relationship with Russia."  About the only policies he has espoused so far are kicking illegals out and starting a trade war with China and possibly Mexico.  Trump is so bad i could almost vote for Hillary.  Almost.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 02, 2016, 07:20:16 am
When the final 5 are Sanders, Clinton, Trump, Rubio and Cruz you know this country just simply doesn't care any more.  Obama ushered in the celebrity president, which is why Trump is doing so well.  Trump doesn't even have to study the issues, he just tells us how great everything is going to be and the shills believe him because he fired people on Apprentice.  What is your stance on North Korea?  "We're going to have a great foreign policy, it will be beautiful, you won't even believe it."  What is your stance on the EU and bailing out failing members?  "The EU will love me, I do very well with the EU, we're going to have a great relationship with the EU."  What should we do in about Putin and Russia?  "Putin likes me, I do very well with the Russian people.  Have you seen my numbers there?  We're going to have a great relationship with Russia."  About the only policies he has espoused so far are kicking illegals out and starting a trade war with China and possibly Mexico.  Trump is so bad i could almost vote for Hillary.  Almost.

Hit the nail on the head there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 02, 2016, 07:22:20 am
I'm not particularly fond of Hillary.  But I don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Trump to Hillary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on March 02, 2016, 07:28:50 am
Ah.... in other words he takes positions based on principles.

I can understand how some people don't like that.

Of course the failure of those in Congress to do that is what has given rise to Trump, but then you have already said you would prefer Trump.  Not surprising.

But which of Cruz's "hardline ideolog(ical)" positions is it that you find so troublesome?

Correct.  I think Trump is the 2nd worst of the 5 remaining likely candidates. 

You think the Congress has failed to take positions on principles?  That's why Congress has wasted their time by voting to repeal the Affordable Care Act over 60 times?

It's okay to have a position based on principles (even if they're principles I don't agree with), but Cruz has been among the leaders igniting the vitriol in 21st century politics.  Now we're at the point where the Senate is publicly refusing to do their job and even consider confirming a Supreme Court justice because we'll have a new president in 11 months.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on March 02, 2016, 07:29:49 am
I'm not particularly fond of Hillary.  But I don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Trump to Hillary.

I have a college-educated friend whose favorite candidate is Trump.  It blows my mind.

I'd prefer Kasich out of the current lot, but I realize his chances are pretty slim.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 02, 2016, 07:32:09 am
I'm not particularly fond of Hillary.  But I don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Trump to Hillary.

I don't, and Hillary would actually have a chance to convince me to vote for her in the general over Trump.

More than likely, though, I'll just find a third party candidate I can support with a protest vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 02, 2016, 08:10:43 am
Interesting juxtaposition of Trump and Goldwater:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/opinions/trump-vs-goldwater-zelizer/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 02, 2016, 09:15:26 am
Correct.  I think Trump is the 2nd worst of the 5 remaining likely candidates. 

You think the Congress has failed to take positions on principles?  That's why Congress has wasted their time by voting to repeal the Affordable Care Act over 60 times?

Voting for repeal of Obamacare is meaningless, since they know that the President would never sign such a bill.  But they could merely have passed spending bills that defund Obamacare, but have not had the nerve to do so.  The bills they have passed were meaningless on the face of it, and were merely a method of gaining votes for reelection.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 02, 2016, 09:17:12 am
I'm not particularly fond of Hillary.  But I don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Trump to Hillary.

I agree.  But I also don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Hillary to Trump.  They would both be equally horrible.  It is rather like choosing which incurable cancer you wish to die from.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 02, 2016, 09:43:19 am
Interesting juxtaposition of Trump and Goldwater:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/opinions/trump-vs-goldwater-zelizer/index.html


My guess of how it would play out.  Trump would fail to unify the Republicans and a larger than normal percentage won't vote for him, maybe 80% of registered Republicans.  This would lead to a fairly large win for Hillary.  People like myself will realize voting for a 3rd party is a vote for Hillary will make sure that they vote for Republicans for the Senate and House leaving a fairly split Senate and Republican House which leads to very little getting done for 4 years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 02, 2016, 09:57:32 am
The winning President is an extremely strong draw for both Senators and Congressmen.  If Hillary wins the Presidency, I think it is extremely likely that the Democrats will win back the Senate.  And the House has not shown itself to be willing to stand firm on it's principles in the face of media attack.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 02, 2016, 10:15:47 am
Decent chance the Democrats take the Senate no matter what happens with the Presidential election.  It would take a fairly large Republican wave to keep it.  Too many Republicans are running in blue and purple states this cycle.

What has the House passed other than a budget?  Shutting down the government for months doesn't sound like an appealing option.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 02, 2016, 10:58:11 am
Just wondering, what do you Nebraska people think about Ben Sasse?  He's kind of impressed me lately with how strongly he's come out against Trump.  He's one of the few Republicans in Washington who's had the guts to take a strong stand against Trump, and he's done a nice job articulating the case against him.  I'm just wondering if he's worth my time thinking about as a possibility for 2020. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on March 02, 2016, 11:03:38 am
The odds that Chris Christie will be Trump's running mate have to be pretty good right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 02, 2016, 11:39:12 am
Just wondering, what do you Nebraska people think about Ben Sasse?  He's kind of impressed me lately with how strongly he's come out against Trump.  He's one of the few Republicans in Washington who's had the guts to take a strong stand against Trump, and he's done a nice job articulating the case against him.  I'm just wondering if he's worth my time thinking about as a possibility for 2020. 

I can't speak for all of Nebraska, but I like him a lot.  He is smart and media savy.  His tweets during the Washington DC snow storm were hilarious when he was stuck on a train.  I would consider him to be Ted Cruz without the creepy personality and poor political judgement (shut down over Obamacare for example).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 02, 2016, 11:42:06 am
Interesting juxtaposition of Trump and Goldwater:

I mentioned that comparison to a co-worker the other day. (His only response was, "How old are you, anyway"?)

My guess is that Clinton will win convincingly, and people will want to blame Trump.  But really Trump is just the symptom, not the cause. Trump is just the puss oozing from an infection.  Ironically Ted Cruz is the Republican Party's last best hope, and yet it is Cruz and his Tea Party ilk who are much more responsible for the present dysfunction of government and the corresponding anger of voters. Come November, when the Republicans lose, there will be  much finger pointing. But the sensible Republican will understand that they have met the enemy and he is us.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 02, 2016, 11:44:22 am
Not me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on March 02, 2016, 01:05:59 pm
I think I'm buying into the argument that Trump is the Frankenstein's monster that the Republican party created.  Reap what you sow.

I loved the John Oliver take on Trump.  It should be required viewing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 02, 2016, 01:39:21 pm
I think I'm buying into the argument that Trump is the Frankenstein's monster that the Republican party created.  Reap what you sow.

I loved the John Oliver take on Trump.  It should be required viewing.

There are a fair amount of Trump voters that could also be Sanders voters, so I don't think it is just a Republican issue.  Trump is just has more of a draw then a Senator from Vermont.

Agree on John Oliver.  I wonder how much papa Drumpf left Donald?  It might be possible that adjusting for inflation Donald J Drumpf has lost money vs making it.

www.DonaldJDrumpf.com
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on March 02, 2016, 02:35:15 pm
Is there a bigger narcissist in the world than Donald Trump?  Maybe Kanye West?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on March 02, 2016, 02:38:34 pm
Is there a bigger narcissist in the world than Donald Trump?  Maybe Kanye West?

Definitely Kanye.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 02, 2016, 02:43:50 pm
I think everything is going exactly as Bill, Hillary, and Donald planned.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 02, 2016, 02:45:33 pm
Latest poll shows 6 out of 10 Republicans feel betrayed by their party and have no one to support this fall.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 02, 2016, 05:15:34 pm
I'm not particularly fond of Hillary.  But I don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Trump to Hillary.

Who said they would?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 02, 2016, 05:22:51 pm
Correct.  I think Trump is the 2nd worst of the 5 remaining likely candidates. 

You think the Congress has failed to take positions on principles?  That's why Congress has wasted their time by voting to repeal the Affordable Care Act over 60 times?

It's okay to have a position based on principles (even if they're principles I don't agree with), but Cruz has been among the leaders igniting the vitriol in 21st century politics.  Now we're at the point where the Senate is publicly refusing to do their job and even consider confirming a Supreme Court justice because we'll have a new president in 11 months.

The question was very simple, and very narrow.  For whatever the reason might be, you did not even begin to address it.

To help out, here, again, is the question: But which of Cruz's "hardline ideolog(ical)" positions is it that you find so troublesome?

Your first paragraph above simply says you don't like him.

Your second paragraph refers to what CONGRESS has done, not any position Cruz has taken, and most of the 60 votes you reference have been in the House, not even the chamber of Congress Cruz is in.  Cruz is in the Senate, and has virtually no control or influence in getting matters voted on there.

Your third paragraph refers to "vitriol," without mentioning anything about his positions, and then goes on to say that "he Senate is publicly refusing to do their job" regarding consideration of a Supreme Court nominee.... who has not even been named.

So, again I ask, which of Cruz's "hardline ideolog(ical)" positions is it that you find so troublesome?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 02, 2016, 05:25:59 pm
My guess of how it would play out.  Trump would fail to unify the Republicans and a larger than normal percentage won't vote for him, maybe 80% of registered Republicans.  This would lead to a fairly large win for Hillary.  People like myself will realize voting for a 3rd party is a vote for Hillary will make sure that they vote for Republicans for the Senate and House leaving a fairly split Senate and Republican House which leads to very little getting done for 4 years.

Ah.... a government which does not do much.... and davep has trouble understanding how why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Hillary to Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 02, 2016, 05:28:30 pm
What has the House passed other than a budget?  Shutting down the government for months doesn't sound like an appealing option.

It sounds like the best thing Congress could do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 02, 2016, 06:01:48 pm
I loved the John Oliver take on Trump.  It should be required viewing.

Last night after viewing that clip, I realized I have been vastly underestimating my "brand" and therefor my net worth. Now I can afford to retire whenever I want!!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 02, 2016, 06:10:16 pm
Hillary and Trump are definitely not two equally terrible cancers. Trump is cancer. Hillary is acute IBS. Sucks to have IBS, but at least it's not cancer
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 12, 2016, 09:44:20 am
http://qz.com/634578/a-republican-confession-from-52-years-ago-has-a-lot-to-say-about-this-years-election/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 12, 2016, 06:01:49 pm
http://qz.com/634578/a-republican-confession-from-52-years-ago-has-a-lot-to-say-about-this-years-election/


There is an immense difference between Trump, who has never even voted in a primary election ans is not even really a Republican, and a sitting Republican senator who was very active in the party before the 1964 election and remained active after it, even being called, "Mr. Republican."  Before Kennedy's assassination columnists were already writing about an anticipated general election race between Kennedy and Goldwater in 1964, and the race was expected t be quite competitive, with many even forecasting a fairly easy win for Goldwater.  Not quite the same for Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 15, 2016, 04:28:41 pm
JFK would have destroyed Mr. Extremist.

We all know it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2016, 04:48:32 pm
JFK would have destroyed Mr. Extremist.

We all know it.

JFK certainly didn't "know it."

Of course, I have forgotten how much smarter than he is that you are.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 15, 2016, 05:18:32 pm
The cover of todays USA TODAY says Trump doesnt have a prayer of beating Hilary head to head.

We wont have to hear his mouth long but the alternative OTOH...

I still wish Ric Flair would run with Arn Anderson as his VP.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 15, 2016, 05:37:04 pm
Hillary, Democrats, liberals, and the mainstream media can underestimate Trump in the general election at their own risk.

Regular Republicans and the mainstream media have already done enough underestimating of Trump the last few months as it is. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 15, 2016, 06:01:43 pm
JFK would have destroyed Mr. Extremist.

We all know it.

True.  But he would have been a true Republican.  Kennedy could never win the Democratic nomination today, with the loony left taking over the party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 15, 2016, 06:03:55 pm
Ah.... a government which does not do much.... and davep has trouble understanding how why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Hillary to Trump.

Did I say that?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2016, 06:18:39 pm
Hillary, Democrats, liberals, and the mainstream media can underestimate Trump in the general election at their own risk.

Regular Republicans and the mainstream media have already done enough underestimating of Trump the last few months as it is. 

m the ation
Few people are underestimating Trump.  They fully understand the harm he would do to the Republican party if he gets the nomination, likely causing the Republicans to lose the Senate, and polluting the Republican brand for years, and wrecking even greater harm to the nation if he somehow won in November.

The only ones underestimating Trump are his supporters.  Most of them believe he could not possibly harm the nation as much as he likely would if he were elected.

I do not underestimate him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2016, 06:20:16 pm
Did I say that?

I believe so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 15, 2016, 06:47:06 pm
Can you point to the post?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2016, 06:49:01 pm
Can you point to the post?

Why bother?  If you deny saying it, I doubt that I care enough to look for it, but my memory is you have posted that at least once.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2016, 06:53:24 pm
It was easier than I thought:

I agree.  But I also don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Hillary to Trump.  They would both be equally horrible.  It is rather like choosing which incurable cancer you wish to die from.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 15, 2016, 07:33:20 pm
Thanks.  It certainly was, and is my belief, but I didn't remember posting it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 15, 2016, 07:38:15 pm
I'm no fan of Hillary Clinton.  But the choice between her or Trump is an absolute no-brain-er. (Which, I guess, excludes me from the Intelligent/Thoughtful club.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 15, 2016, 07:43:50 pm
If Rubio had been as eloquent in the debates as he was in his suspension speech, he might have won.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 15, 2016, 07:48:48 pm
True.  But he would have been a true Republican.  Kennedy could never win the Democratic nomination today, with the loony left taking over the party.


Donald Trump is about to be the GOP candidate.... who has gone loony???
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2016, 08:00:19 pm
Thanks.  It certainly was, and is my belief, but I didn't remember posting it.

I actually thought you had posted it twice, but stopped searching after finding that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2016, 08:09:54 pm
On a completely different topic, but still in the political vein, today I gave students in my four study skills classes a very simple reading comprehension exercise.

They are 7th and 8th graders.  They have all either recited or heard recited to them the Pledge of Allegiance every morning in the first period of school for more than 1,300 times since they started school.  The exercise was to explain what the Pledge means.

Not one came close, and that was with all of them allowed to work together and to use dictionaries.

Not one.

I pretty much expected as much, and it is one of the reasons why when I hear people complaining that "kids don't learn the Pledge anymore," I think those complaining are wildly misguided.  The kids generally have no understanding at all as to what it means.  Having them mindlessly recite something they do not understand is pointless.  The other reason most of those complaining are misguided is because I believe most schools still do have the kids recite the pledge.... even if they have no idea what a "pledge" is, let alone understanding the rest of it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 15, 2016, 08:14:07 pm
What did they say that the pledge meant?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2016, 09:40:56 pm
Clueless.  The words are a mishmash to them.  The closest I can recall at the moment is one kid who thought it was a promise of loyalty to dead soldiers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 15, 2016, 09:47:36 pm
Im old enough to remember when my 2nd grade teacher would read us the bible every morning.

She'd get shot if she did that now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2016, 09:53:35 pm
Im old enough to remember when my 2nd grade teacher would read us the bible every morning.

She'd get shot if she did that now.

You are quite wrong.

It still happens.  It shouldn't, but it does,  It shouldn't have been happening when you were in school, unless you were in a private school.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: papa smurf on March 15, 2016, 10:09:43 pm
I know I will get hammered for this but the constitution does not state that you can not have prayer in school...it's meaning is that it can not have a state sponsored religion that everyone is forced to partake in.  Our founding fathers believed in GOD and put his name on our money, in our pledge etc.  Now for the bashing from the liberals because I have a different opinion then they do.   But we live in a free country and they have that right.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: AndyMacFAIL on March 15, 2016, 11:53:53 pm
I know I will get hammered for this but the constitution does not state that you can not have prayer in school...it's meaning is that it can not have a state sponsored religion that everyone is forced to partake in. Our founding fathers believed in GOD and put his name on our money, in our pledge etc.  Now for the bashing from the liberals because I have a different opinion then they do.   But we live in a free country and they have that right.   


100% incorrect. 

The phrase "In God We Trust" was placed on U.S. currency in the 1860s by the Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase during the Civil War after an appeal to him to do so by a Reverend from Pennsylvania: 

https://www.treasury.gov/about/education/Pages/in-god-we-trust.aspx

The "Pledge of Allegiance" was written in 1892 by the socialist minister Francis Bellamy.  It was meant to be a pledge for all nations until the words, "the Flag of the United States of America" were added in 1923.  The phrase "under God" wasn't added to the pledge until 1954 in response to the Communist threat of the times.  The daughter of the writter of the poem even objected to the change in the poem:

http://www.ushistory.org/documents/pledge.htm


Our founding fathers had nothing to do with putting God on our money or in the Pledge.  Those actions happened over 80 and 175 years after our founding fathers formed the U.S.A.

You're more than entitled to your view on school prayer but please do at least a little Google search before you try to pass off stuff as fact.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 16, 2016, 06:43:05 am
I know I will get hammered for this but the constitution does not state that you can not have prayer in school...it's meaning is that it can not have a state sponsored religion that everyone is forced to partake in.  Our founding fathers believed in GOD and put his name on our money, in our pledge etc.  Now for the bashing from the liberals because I have a different opinion then they do.   But we live in a free country and they have that right.   

The Constitution also does not say government can not pay for the construction of churches or burn infidels at the stake.  Seriously.  Those words are nowhere in the document.

What it DOES say is that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."  And thru the 14th Amendment, that language is taken to be applicable to state and local government.

Do you seriously contend that having a school lead children in prayer (and this only addresses schools leading prayer or teaching any religious dogma as fact, not students praying on their own, or the actual study of religion) is not "respecting religion"?

The key Supreme Court decisions addressed the issue more than 35 years ago.  Abbngton was in 1963 https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/374/203 and Engle was in 1962 https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/370/421 

Both of those decisions were well before Dusty was born, let alone before he began school.

One thing I often find amusing is how many conservatives and how many of those who are most strident in their mindless insistence that the Pledge of Allegiance be recited in school (in spite of the fact that the kids are reciting something they do not even begin to understand) is that the reason it was written, and its logical actual function (to the extent that it has any), is the exact opposite of what those conservatives would want.

AndyMcFAIL is right that the author of the Pledge was Bellamy and that he was a socialist.  He wrote it at a time when the American spirit was so strongly individualistic that he and other socialists were quite aware of the fact that the American public as it then existed would never accept socialism, let alone embrace it or vote for it.  So he came up with the Pledge in the hope of indoctrinating kids, getting people to pledge allegiance to the all powerful state, and to gradually come to believe and accept what they were reciting.  The Pledge was intended to help pave the way for socialism in this country, and, to a remarkable degree, it has done exactly that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 16, 2016, 09:32:32 am
I spent part of my childhood living in England. I attended a little village school, no more than 75 kids, five teachers and a headmaster. The first thing the students did in the morning was pray.  The headmaster would loudly announce, "Lord's Prayer please, Yanks excused".  After that we sang, "God Save the Queen please, Yanks excused".  I was the only "Yank" in school.  I prayed, I sang, I lived.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 16, 2016, 09:36:56 am
If Rubio had been as eloquent in the debates as he was in his suspension speech, he might have won.

I don't know, Rubio's had his eloquent moments.

In hindsight, he should have focused on getting re-elected to the Senate instead of jumping the gun on running for President.  The people in Florida obviously didn't like that he probably spent more time the last two years running for President instead of being their senator. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 16, 2016, 09:43:35 am
I don't know, Rubio's had his eloquent moments.

In hindsight, he should have focused on getting re-elected to the Senate instead of jumping the gun on running for President.  The people in Florida obviously didn't like that he probably spent more time the last two years running for President instead of being their senator. 

100% correct. Most feel he forgot about his constituents once he got on the big stage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 16, 2016, 10:36:26 am
I spent part of my childhood living in England. I attended a little village school, no more than 75 kids, five teachers and a headmaster. The first thing the students did in the morning was pray.  The headmaster would loudly announce, "Lord's Prayer please, Yanks excused".  After that we sang, "God Save the Queen please, Yanks excused".  I was the only "Yank" in school.  I prayed, I sang, I lived.

I don't think anyone has suggested a person would not survive (or has not survived) if they are required to recite the pledge, or a prayer, or even to join a particular church and tithe to it.  It is equally true that the nation will survive (and has survived) in the absence of someone doing any of those things.  Survival really is not the question.  The question is whether the First Amendment, which (in conjunction with the 14th) prohibits government from doing anything respecting the establishment of religion, and, whether you or I think it does, the Supreme Court has decided that having a public school lead kids in prayer does qualify as "respecting" the establishment of religion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on March 16, 2016, 11:15:56 am
Quote
In hindsight, he should have focused on getting re-elected to the Senate instead of jumping the gun on running for President.

Yep.  He was Not Ready For Prime Time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 16, 2016, 12:28:50 pm
If Rubio had not joined the "gang of eight" on the immigration issue, he might have had a chance.  A great many conservatives are sick and tired of politicians claim to be conservative during campaigns, but sacrifice what they claimed to be their beliefs once elected.

The line in the sand formed many conservatives on this issue seems to be a path to citizenship for those that came here illegally.  If he had resisted that aspect, he would not have so much of his conservative base.  Having shown himself to be willing to compromise on this issue caused many to fear that he would do so on other issues important to them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 16, 2016, 01:25:51 pm
Count me in among the unintelligent crowd that would vote for Hillary over Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 16, 2016, 03:19:33 pm
Survival really is not the question.

Of course.  I was just sharing a little personal experience.

Interestingly, I can remember my 3rd/4th grade teacher, Mrs. Jones, a great and wonderful person, pointing out to the class one day that, as the only 'Yank", I was the only person in the room who had a choice concerning praying and singing. I liked that. Never had time to get a big head about it...as soon as I got on the playground my school chums would start asking me why my country was napalming little Vietnamese children. And when they found out what town in America I was from they wanted to know why I nuked all those poor little Japanese children.  Hard questions to answer even for an eight year old.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 16, 2016, 04:54:10 pm
as soon as I got on the playground my school chums would start asking me why my country was napalming little Vietnamese children. And when they found out what town in America I was from they wanted to know why I nuked all those poor little Japanese children.  Hard questions to answer even for an eight year old.

You probably benefited from that, if only by learning what the United States was doing at the time, and what it had done.  A lot of kids in the U.S. were remarkably ignorant of both of them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: papa smurf on March 16, 2016, 04:59:14 pm
yes many more lives would have been saved if we would have invaded japan...not
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 16, 2016, 05:02:05 pm
Many more lives would have been lost if the US had invaded Japan.  Especially Japanese lives. But try explaining that to an eight year-old who's already pissed off that you don't have to sing God Save the Queen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on March 16, 2016, 05:58:42 pm
yes many more lives would have been saved if we would have invaded japan...not
The military had ordered 500,000 body bags.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 16, 2016, 06:28:46 pm
You probably benefited from that, if only by learning what the United States was doing at the time, and what it had done.  A lot of kids in the U.S. were remarkably ignorant of both of them.

Wow.  I don't know what kind of childhood you had, but in mine, I don't think that there was a single school kid that didn't know that we had dropped an atomic bomb on Japan.  And everyone I knew also seemed to know that we were at war in Viet Nam.  It is quite possible that many of them didn't now what napalm was, but I'm not sure what difference that makes.  I didn't know what specific weapons we used in Korea, but I was pretty sure that we used some.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 16, 2016, 06:33:44 pm
I have never questioned Hiroshima.  I have misgivings about Nagasaki.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 16, 2016, 07:21:10 pm
The really horrible thing about Hiroshima and Nagasaki is not the bombs themselves. Destroying cities and annihilating civilians was, by the summer 1945, a common event. Literally millions of civilians had died from allied bombing before Hiroshima.  As for pure killing ability, the only novel thing the A-Bomb provided was efficiency.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 16, 2016, 07:56:32 pm
Dresden, Tokyo and Berlin all had bombing raids that killed as many in one raid as either of the Atomic Bombs did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 16, 2016, 08:03:42 pm
It took about 3000 allied aircraft, over several days to bomb Hamburg.  People literally melted from the ensuing firestorm. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 16, 2016, 08:05:11 pm
Wow.  I don't know what kind of childhood you had, but in mine, I don't think that there was a single school kid that didn't know that we had dropped an atomic bomb on Japan.  And everyone I knew also seemed to know that we were at war in Viet Nam.  It is quite possible that many of them didn't now what napalm was, but I'm not sure what difference that makes.  I didn't know what specific weapons we used in Korea, but I was pretty sure that we used some.

In third grade my bet is that most kids did not know the nuclear bombs also vaporized schools and all of the children in them.  I was quite aware we bombed Japan.  I believe it was Jr. High before I learned that at east one of them was dropped on a school full of children, and our use of napalm in bombing village was not even known by many adults until this wonderful photo from 1972http://media3.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2015_44/836396/kim-phuc-inline-3-102715_5f1b58e53f930a6c1ac76fe2e7991806.today-inline-large.jpg

Perhaps FDISK was not in 3rd grade until 1972 or 1973, but I thought he was at least a couple of years older than that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 16, 2016, 08:11:15 pm
Jes, you don't drop a nuclear bomb on a school.  You drop it on a school district.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 17, 2016, 05:49:31 am
If Rubio had been as eloquent in the debates as he was in his suspension speech, he might have won.

If the dog hadn't stopped to ****, he wold have caught the rabbit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 22, 2016, 01:33:56 pm
Donald Trump's detachment with reality knows no ends.

https://mobile.twitter.com/mateagold/status/712041259221782528?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 22, 2016, 01:39:20 pm
I'm not sure Trump should talk about a well run company.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-worse-than-you-think-trumps-business-disaster-2016-03-04

I was going to make an easy Curt is old joke about the Cubs being well run, but I thought I'd let it go this time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 22, 2016, 02:30:29 pm
I'm not sure Trump should talk about a well run company.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-worse-than-you-think-trumps-business-disaster-2016-03-04

I was going to make an easy Curt is old joke about the Cubs being well run, but I thought I'd let it go this time.

It's amazing the Republicans never ran ads on that from the get go.  That has everything you'd want to turn off prospective Republican primary voters, from failure of a public corporation to running a seedy gambling enterprise (which you wouldn't think would turn off evangelicals, but nothing else he's done or said has done that up to this point). 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 22, 2016, 02:36:21 pm
Not to mention that his casinos and hotels are 80% staffed with immigrants.  Wanna bet they're all legal?

Trump looked at the candidates in both parties and decided the Republican party would be the easiest to hijack.  All he had to do is get 24 to 30% of the vote in the early primaries and he'd be the favorite.  The only time he has considered office he was going to run as a third party candidate, and most of his donations have gone to Democrats.  This whole thing is the biggest hoax ever pulled.  Any time now, Ashton Kutcher is going to jump out and says, "USA, you just got punked."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 22, 2016, 02:45:54 pm
It's amazing the Republicans never ran ads on that from the get go.  That has everything you'd want to turn off prospective Republican primary voters, from failure of a public corporation to running a seedy gambling enterprise (which you wouldn't think would turn off evangelicals, but nothing else he's done or said has done that up to this point). 

I don't think they could have done it even if they wanted to.  Trump has a brand and trying to take that brand apart would have been difficult, especially when he gets all the free media that he wants.  In early debates it might have worked, but he would have just played it off as the media is picking on me and his supporters wouldn't have cared. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 22, 2016, 02:47:56 pm
Not to mention that his casinos and hotels are 80% staffed with immigrants.  Wanna bet they're all legal?

Trump looked at the candidates in both parties and decided the Republican party would be the easiest to hijack.  All he had to do is get 24 to 30% of the vote in the early primaries and he'd be the favorite.  The only time he has considered office he was going to run as a third party candidate, and most of his donations have gone to Democrats.  This whole thing is the biggest hoax ever pulled.  Any time now, Ashton Kutcher is going to jump out and says, "USA, you just got punked."

One thing that's been interesting to me lately has been all the willing accomplices in this.  CNN has been in the tank for Trump winning the Republican nomination from the beginning.  In the conservative media where you would think they wouldn't be propping up someone who's not that conservative like Trump, Drudge Report, Breitbart, and Daily Caller have pretty much been Trump PR outlets. 

Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have been propping him up too, although for them, it makes a lot of business sense.  They get Trump inflated ratings for their shows in the near term the more they talk about him and defend him, and in the long term, they get to trash Hillary for four years while still getting to bemoan that the Republicans haven't nominated a "true" conservative since Reagan.

It's bizarre that all of these outlets that ought to be bringing down a complete dangerous fraud like Trump are very much responsible for promoting him and keeping him afloat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 22, 2016, 03:15:37 pm
MSNBC has been calling out Trump pretty much all along.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 22, 2016, 03:56:41 pm
MSNBC has been calling out Trump pretty much all along.

They have.  And they have been doing a reasonably good job of it.  Unfortunately their ratings are so low they reach nearly no one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 22, 2016, 03:59:06 pm
MSNBC has been calling out Trump pretty much all along.
And Fox has been calling out Clinton and Sanders.   Both FOX on the right and MSNBC on the left have lost impartial credibility.  And BTW, Trump does have a couple of butt buddies on MSNBC in the morning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 22, 2016, 04:01:11 pm
And Fox has been calling out Clinton and Sanders.   Both FOX on the right and MSNBC on the left have lost impartial credibility.  And BTW, Trump does have a couple of butt buddies on MSNBC in the morning.

They've all lost impartial credibility.

CNN has just totally sold itself up the river for Trump ratings, just like it did for the Malaysian Airlines flight and Ebola.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 22, 2016, 04:33:47 pm
The only good thing on MSNBC is Lockup.

And no Im not a Trump supporter.

Every Trump supporter Ive spoken to around here are only doing so because they like his racist promises.

If my options are Trump or Hilary then Im most definitely gonna write in Ric Flair.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 22, 2016, 04:34:52 pm
I'd rather write in Charlotte.  Rick's taken too many bumps.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 22, 2016, 04:37:02 pm
https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/zWo_4FBBN25pfyZv_xbweQ--/YXBwaWQ9eWlzZWFyY2g7Zmk9Zml0O2dlPTAwNjYwMDtncz0wMEEzMDA7aD00MDA7dz00MDA-/http://www.tshirtmall.com/images/gallery_large/VWSNC27.jpg.cf.png
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 22, 2016, 04:38:47 pm
I'd definitely be OK with Charlotte too but I bet me and you are the only ones here who know who she is Curt.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 22, 2016, 04:46:39 pm

Wouldn't bet on it.  There are guys in the wrestling closet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 22, 2016, 04:50:46 pm
If my options are Trump or Hilary then Im most definitely gonna write in Ric Flair.

Ha!  I think I might be right there with you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 22, 2016, 05:06:11 pm
I'm not sure that "calling out Trump" would have made much of a difference.  In the three weeks before the primary here in Florida, you couldn't watch TV or listen to the radio for more than 10 minutes without being bombarded with ads "calling out Trump".  But it made no difference.

Part of Trump voters actually think that Trump would make a good president.  But I believe an even larger part of Trump supporters are more interested in "sticking a thumb in the eye of the Republican Establishment".

For years, they have been told that only a "moderate" can win in the general election, only to see the moderates lose.  For years they have voted for candidates in the House and Senate that promised to end Obamacare, reduce spending, reduce the national debt, etc. only to see them refuse to do those things necessary to accomplish this because it might imperil their reelection. 

They are sick and tired of "political correctness", and are pleased to see a candidate who refuses to be "politically correct", even when that particular "incorrectness" is idiotic on the face of it.

Trump would make a horrible President.  But not as horrible as Hillary, Sanders or Biden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on March 22, 2016, 06:28:13 pm
Speaking of less than desirable politicians

Former Toronto mayor, Rob Ford, has died at 46.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 22, 2016, 06:29:11 pm
I'd definitely be OK with Charlotte too but I bet me and you are the only ones here who know who she is Curt.

At age 29, she does not meat the constitutional minimum requirements.... regardless how much you might like her positions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 22, 2016, 07:57:26 pm
I really disappointed in you, Dave.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 22, 2016, 08:05:24 pm
I'm not sure that "calling out Trump" would have made much of a difference.  In the three weeks before the primary here in Florida, you couldn't watch TV or listen to the radio for more than 10 minutes without being bombarded with ads "calling out Trump".  But it made no difference.

Part of Trump voters actually think that Trump would make a good president.  But I believe an even larger part of Trump supporters are more interested in "sticking a thumb in the eye of the Republican Establishment".

For years, they have been told that only a "moderate" can win in the general election, only to see the moderates lose.  For years they have voted for candidates in the House and Senate that promised to end Obamacare, reduce spending, reduce the national debt, etc. only to see them refuse to do those things necessary to accomplish this because it might imperil their reelection. 

They are sick and tired of "political correctness", and are pleased to see a candidate who refuses to be "politically correct", even when that particular "incorrectness" is idiotic on the face of it.

Trump would make a horrible President.  But not as horrible as Hillary, Sanders or Biden.

This is not what GOP voters are sick of. They are sick of being told all about the free market and having their entire party pander to bigpharma and all out protectionism.

They are tired of being told they stick up for the little guys economic interest while all full on voting for every bail out.

Obamacare is better then the alternative, where those who can afford and pay for insurance subsidize all those that do not pay for it. My only problem with obamacare is that they did not go full single payer.

Who is worse off today then they were 8 years ago when we diving into the worst recession in 80 years? show of hands on this board. whose life is actually worse off today then 8 years ago?

Mine is much better. i lost my job in the restaurant industry at the first start of the recession at the start of 2008. My company was bought out by Bain capital in 2007,  and they started laying us off with righteous vengeance at the first start of the faultering.

I am at a loss to find peers who were worse off 8 years ago then they are now. I'll wager that few off you are worse off now then you were at the time as well.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 22, 2016, 08:22:33 pm
I say the same to my mother and wife.

Life is much better today than it was 8 years ago but most anti Obama people are that way because he's black and they'll never acknowledge that.

If Barack was white and his name was John Smith nobody would have an issue with him.

In the South anyway.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 22, 2016, 08:27:25 pm
You choose an odd example of the voter's ire.

The most unpopular law in the land among republican voters is Obamacare.  You may find Democrats that like it, but most Democrats like free stuff.

I agree that many voters of both parties do not like free trade.  Many Democrats seem to be voting for Trump because, unlike those in charge of both parties, they would rather have protectionism.

I agree that voters in both parties are sick and tired of bail outs.  But, of course, although a great many Republicans voted for it, both parties have been in favor of bail outs.  Obama orchestrated the bail out of the Automobile industry and the Automotive Unions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 22, 2016, 08:35:36 pm
You choose an odd example of the voter's ire.

The most unpopular law in the land among republican voters is Obamacare.  You may find Democrats that like it, but most Democrats like free stuff.

I agree that many voters of both parties do not like free trade.  Many Democrats seem to be voting for Trump because, unlike those in charge of both parties, they would rather have protectionism.

I agree that voters in both parties are sick and tired of bail outs.  But, of course, although a great many Republicans voted for it, both parties have been in favor of bail outs.  Obama orchestrated the bail out of the Automobile industry and the Automotive Unions.

What is the alternative to Obamacare where those who pay for insurance do NOT pay for those who dont?

Lets be honest, insruance holders have long paid for those in the system that do not pay for insurance. the real problem with health care is the genuine lack of competition that every member of congress seems to support entirely.

Health care is the only industry in this country where you can obtain a service and have no idea what the real charges are until AFTER you receive the service... its also the only service where the prices are completely disparage depending on how you choose to pay for the service. (beyound normal additional charges for paying with a CC vs cash)

I'll ask again, who here is worse off today then they were 8 years ago? I mean it honestly... is your life worse today? or only your perspective of it? why are so many people so needlessly angry?

Have we as a society really lost that much perspective of the common struggle that we must **** and moan about having it so good?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 22, 2016, 08:42:25 pm
I'll tell you one understated problem with Obamacare.  A lot of the insurance plans on Obamacare is hardly real insurance for low income people.  I was helping my brother with Obamacare, and the lowest price plan he was eligible for and was already stretching his budget carried a $10,000 deductible.

If you're an employee at Wal-Mart and wind up with cancer or in a car wreck and you have a health plan with a $10,000 deductible, you're really not insured at all.

And I think Obamacare is only covering maybe 1/4 of the previously 40,000,000 some odd uninsured before it went into effect.

It's a bad system, even if your goal is universal coverage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 22, 2016, 08:46:12 pm
I'll tell you one understated problem with Obamacare.  A lot of the insurance plans on Obamacare is hardly real insurance for low income people.  I was helping my brother with Obamacare, and the lowest price plan he was eligible before and was already stretching his budget carried a $10,000 deductible.

If you're an employee at Wal-Mart and wind up with cancer or in a car wreck and you have a health plan with a $10,000 deductible, you're really not insured at all.

And I think Obamacare is only covering maybe 1/4 of the previously 40,000,000 some odd uninsured.

Not a good system. 

A 10K deductible loss on your credit is a lot easier to overcome then a 100K charge from a hospital for emergency coverage.

We have to fix the issue of people who willfully choose to not have insurance and then go to the ER for any problem and pass the costs onto the rest of us.  IMO the real problem is a genuine lack of competition in the healthcare space. in terms of both coverage, and opaque billing practices.

Obamacare only attempts to patch the really bad situations... and that in and of it self imo is a failure of the entire program, they half assed it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 22, 2016, 08:48:20 pm
Both parties do a great job of lying with statistics.  Health insurance and employment are two excellent examples.  Yes employment is up.  Why?  Because people looking for work for a long time, gave up and no longer count in the statistics.  Many employers cut hours to avoid paying the health insurance and hired others in low paying, unfulfilling jobs.  What we have is a lot of people working for minimum wage in part time work.  Obamacare is responsible for some of that, not all of that.   And neither Trump nor the Republicans will fix it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on March 22, 2016, 08:50:20 pm
Trump would make a horrible President.  But not as horrible as Hillary, Sanders or Biden.

I'll take a political hack over a demagogue.  I could not imagine a more dangerous world than one with Putin and The Donald being the guys with their fingers on the button. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 22, 2016, 08:52:01 pm
Trump would make a horrible President.  But not as horrible as Hillary, Sanders or Biden.

I'll take a political hack over a demagogue.  I could not imagine a more dangerous world than one with Putin and The Donald being the guys with their fingers on the button. 
Amen

Our hope is that whoever is voted in, the other party controls the House and Senate.  With Trump on the ticket, I fear that won't happen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 22, 2016, 08:54:31 pm
The alternative to healthcare in which those who pay for healthcare insurance pay for those who do not pay for healthcare insurance, it is to have each person pay for his own healthcare, either through insurance or with his own assets.  I have no problem with the Government paying for necessary healthcare for those who have no assets, through general taxation.

I suspect that we would not agree on a definition for necessary healthcare.

I agree that lack of competition is a severe problem.  But the lack of competition comes through federal and local government regulations rather than the industry itself.

I, myself, am no worse off now than I was 8 years ago, but that is because I have been retired for 15 years, and am living off of the money I saved during my working life.  I have a 32 year old daughter who lost her job 3 years ago and is now working at a job that pays less than her last one.  Another daughter who is 42 retired from the Navy 3 years ago, and was unable to find a job for two years.  She is certainly not better off than she was 8 years ago.  I have no idea who your peers are, but you seem to be in a segment of the economy that is doing better than many others.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 22, 2016, 08:57:06 pm
Both parties do a great job of lying with statistics.  Health insurance and employment are two excellent examples.  Yes employment is up.  Why?  Because people looking for work for a long time, gave up and no longer count in the statistics.  Many employers cut hours to avoid paying the health insurance and hired others in low paying, unfulfilling jobs.  What we have is a lot of people working for minimum wage in part time work.  Obamacare is responsible for some of that, not all of that.   And neither Trump nor the Republicans will fix it.

Eliminating ObamaCare would fix much of that overnight.  Revising the tax code to reduce the corporate tax rate ad allow repatriation of overseas dollars would fix much more of it, though not in a matter of days.  And ending other government policies or programs which actually encourage employers here to move production overseas would also do much to help.

All of those are moves Cruz supports.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 22, 2016, 09:51:58 pm
We have to fix the issue of people who willfully choose to not have insurance and then go to the ER for any problem and pass the costs onto the rest of us.  IMO the real problem is a genuine lack of competition in the healthcare space. in terms of both coverage, and opaque billing practices.

Obamacare only attempts to patch the really bad situations... and that in and of it self imo is a failure of the entire program, they half assed it.

That is only a small part of what people with health insurance are paying for.  They also subsidize Medicare/Medicaid patients. The dirty little secret is that hospitals most often lose money on Medicare patients and take a huge loss on Medicaid patients. People with insurance pay for this. This is a much larger chunk of money than people without insurance going to an ED for a common cold.

Obama care for the middle class has been horrible. Insurance premiums have risen, deductibles (even outside of the market place have gone up), HSA's were neutered. When I was in residency 10 years ago most plans had 2 tiers, generic/brand. Then it became 3 tiers.  5 years ago it became 4/5 tiers.  Today a lot of drug plans have 97 tiers. It is uncommon to see a prior authorization for a generic medication that is under $10 in out of pocket costs. One of the other fun parts of Obama care is it let drug companies take generic medications that have been around longer than DaveP has been alive and make the branded. They could do this because these drugs didn't have a study proving their efficacy. So a $2 drug no becomes a $100 drug. Even when it becomes generic again (the branded period isn't as long) the cost for the generic is higher because their are fewer companies that make it a generic. The upside of this a drug that doctors knew works now has a study proving that the drug works, it only costs more. Yeah!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on March 22, 2016, 10:59:43 pm
Quote
Trump would make a horrible President.  But not as horrible as Hillary, Sanders or Biden.

Yep, time to stop reading the politics thread.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 22, 2016, 11:14:26 pm
At this point, Hillary's going to have to do or say something that really turns me off to not vote for her in a Hillary vs. Trump general election and not cast a protest vote for Ric Flair instead.


Even with that, I'd say the chances of me voting like Dusty and casting a vote for Ric Flair are better than I'd like for them to be.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 22, 2016, 11:45:26 pm
LMAO
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 23, 2016, 04:12:55 am
At this point, Hillary's going to have to do or say something that really turns me off to not vote for her in a Hillary vs. Trump general election and not cast a protest vote for Ric Flair instead.


Even with that, I'd say the chances of me voting like Dusty and casting a vote for Ric Flair are better than I'd like for them to be.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMqaItzolOg
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on March 23, 2016, 09:12:48 am
Jimmy Herring 2016
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 23, 2016, 09:33:40 am
I've voted for John Bell in the past three presidential elections.  Looks like he'll get another vote from me this year.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 28, 2016, 02:17:45 am
Trump Threatens to Run TV Ads Slamming Ricketts' 'Rotten Job' of Running Cubs
It appears that Round Two of Donald Trump's battle against the Ricketts family is getting underway as the Republican frontrunner blasted the clan for doing a "rotten job" of running the Chicago Cubs
By James Neveau

Presidential candidate Donald Trump has made it a habit during this campaign to push back against critics and take on all comers, and on Monday he continued his battle with the Ricketts family.

Trump, who has been the target of ads paid for by family matriarch Marlene Ricketts, has called out the family on several occasions, and now he’s floating the idea of running ads about the “rotten job” the family has done in running the Chicago Cubs.

“I’ll start taking ads telling them all what a rotten job they’re doing with the Chicago Cubs," Trump Trump told the Washington Post. "I mean, they are spending on me. I mean, so am I allowed to say that? I’ll start doing ads about their baseball team. That it’s not properly run or that they haven’t done a good job in the brokerage business lately.”

Controversy between each side began in February after a Super-PAC run by Marlene Ricketts bought $3 million worth of ads criticizing Trump.

The candidate responded by saying that the family had “a lot to hide,” and Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts said that it was “surreal” to see Trump threaten his mother. He also said that the family’s spending in the political sphere was “an open book.”
Published at 7:11 AM CDT on Mar 22, 2016

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Trump-Criticizes-Ricketts-Rotten-Job-of-Running-Cubs-373048071.html#ixzz44BByRPuS

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 09, 2016, 03:19:30 pm
I was very surprised that Bernie didn't do better in "progressive" areas like San Francisco.  Santa Cruz was the only major city in the state to prefer Bernie.  That should have sent a pretty clear message to him that Dems are not ready to support change on the scale that he advocates.  Too bad, in my view.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 09, 2016, 03:36:15 pm
I was very surprised that Bernie didn't do better in "progressive" areas like San Francisco.  Santa Cruz was the only major city in the state to prefer Bernie.  That should have sent a pretty clear message to him that Dems are not ready to support change on the scale that he advocates.  Too bad, in my view.
Maybe they see Hillary as more of a sure thing against Trump than Bernie.  I can't say for sure until Jes and JeffH declare one of them "toast."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on June 09, 2016, 03:58:54 pm
Maybe they see Hillary as more of a sure thing against Trump than Bernie.  I can't say for sure until Jes and JeffH declare one of them "toast."

I don't think I would ever declare Hillary toast, particularly if Trump actually runs as the Republican nominee, though I still have hope to possibly one day call her a convicted felon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 09, 2016, 05:37:03 pm
I dont like either one of them but Hilary's gonna win and you all know it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 09, 2016, 06:30:00 pm
I hope so! (Words I never expected to write re: Hillary and her election chances)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 28, 2016, 04:55:42 pm
Some of these pictures of the airport coming out of Istanbul remind me of the movie Bullitt
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: AndyMacFAIL on July 17, 2016, 05:39:19 pm

(http://i666.photobucket.com/albums/vv23/K_M_A_2/BBF/BryantRizzo2016_zpsotv7ppjq.jpg)

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 30, 2016, 10:28:39 pm
WTF?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on July 31, 2016, 08:39:47 am
WTF?

What.... you can't get behind that ticket?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 31, 2016, 12:32:02 pm
It's mind boggling that Trump seems to have 45% of the vote or so.  The level of anger in the electorate is beyond anything that I have seen in my lifetime.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on July 31, 2016, 02:02:16 pm
Both of the options suck.

Ric Flair is defintely getting my vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 31, 2016, 02:14:12 pm
I can't believe either of the main candidates have any support.  One is a crooked egomaniac who has bribed, stolen and cheated their way to the top.  The other is, well, they're both like that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on July 31, 2016, 02:43:25 pm
Both of the options suck.

Ric Flair is defintely getting my vote.

No one would expect anything else.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on July 31, 2016, 04:48:11 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGD8gJt7weU
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 31, 2016, 05:57:46 pm
I have sent that ad to dozens of friends the past two weeks.  If they can get up to 15%, they will be in debates, and that could make things interesting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on July 31, 2016, 06:06:30 pm
I agree...it would be fun to see them in the debates. I'm very familiar with Johnson, familiar enough to know he's twice as smart and about 10 times more honest than either of the major party candidates.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on July 31, 2016, 06:52:47 pm
FDISK, give us a rundown on Johnson.  What are his strengths and weaknesses?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on July 31, 2016, 09:13:33 pm
Wow, an actual organic discussion of the Libertarian candidate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on July 31, 2016, 11:50:53 pm
Easy Big Boy, Johnson isn't a REAL Libertarian. Just happens to be running under that flag.

Johnson was a very popular and successful governor. He's a centrist, slightly right of center fiscally, slightly left of center socially.  A combination that precludes his ever being nominated by either major party. As the ad states he was a very popular Republican Governor in a very Democratic state.

Oh yea...he once scaled Mt Everest with a broken leg. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 31, 2016, 11:55:45 pm
That's okay, Trump isn't a real Republican.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on July 31, 2016, 11:58:49 pm
Nope, Trump is more of a Mussolinist
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 01, 2016, 12:10:14 am
At least the damb trains ran on time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 23, 2016, 04:11:20 pm
It strikes me that Trump's intonation is reminiscent of Ralph Kramden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on August 23, 2016, 04:20:42 pm
Great clip.

http://www.jackiegleason.com/ralph.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on August 23, 2016, 05:16:02 pm
It strikes me that Trump's intonation is reminiscent of Ralph Kramden.

Reason enough to vote for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 23, 2016, 05:20:57 pm
One of these days............pow, right in the kisser.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 23, 2016, 05:24:16 pm
It strikes me that Trump's intonation is reminiscent of Ralph Kramden.

I know what you mean.  Hillary, on the other hand, is reminiscent of Rod Blagojevich
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 31, 2016, 08:18:25 am
So a benchwarmer sits on the bench, something he's good at, during the national anthem and the media makes him a celeb grande.  In my thinking, however, neither he nor the media attention will stop one cop from shooting someone when they fear bodily harm.  JMO
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 31, 2016, 09:11:25 am
The flag/national anthem represent a system that allows people to develop solutions to social problems through self-governance.  The process is very slow but it's the responsibility of those who care to work towards making things better.  I understand Kap's anger and frustration, but not his venting against the principles that will allow positive change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on August 31, 2016, 09:26:58 am
Gotta wonder if he has exhausted other means of effecting change in the system...

Like contacting his representatives would do any good...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 31, 2016, 10:24:26 am
I think he should protest income equality too and give me his check.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 31, 2016, 10:25:57 am
The cynic in me makes me think it is very hard to cut him now and he gets to keep his non-guaranteed money.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on August 31, 2016, 10:50:28 am
My cynical voice says start him every game and see how long that lasts
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 31, 2016, 10:50:47 am
I understand that Kap's skill set (even when he's 100%) do not fit well in Chip Kelly's offensive system.  It would be in Kap's best interests to move to another team if the financial side can be worked out.  I understand the Vikings now need a QB.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 31, 2016, 10:53:20 am
I understand that Kap's skill set (even when he's 100%) do not fit well in Chip Kelly's offensive system.  It would be in Kap's best interests to move to another team if the financial side can be worked out.  I understand the Vikings now need a QB.

I don't follow the NFL as much as I used to because the Bears stink, but isn't Kap supposed to be a running QB that can throw.  That would seem to fit well or is it is lack of accuracy?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on August 31, 2016, 10:58:48 am
Christian Ponder is also on the 49ers roster...

hahaha
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 31, 2016, 10:59:34 am
According to Greg Cosell, Kelly's offense requires precision timing and accuracy, neither of which are strengths of Kap.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 31, 2016, 11:10:25 am
Christian Ponder is also on the 49ers roster...

hahaha
Sure gives you something to think about it, doesn't it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on August 31, 2016, 11:36:40 am
Vikings dilemma similar to POTUS - which one hurts the team less
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 31, 2016, 11:59:46 am
I can't imagine anything less important than whether or not a pro athlete sits during the national anthem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on August 31, 2016, 12:11:26 pm
What if it was CurtOne ?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 31, 2016, 12:30:51 pm
Im a 49ers fan and they're all retarded if they start Gabbert over Kap.

They're gonna be horrible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 31, 2016, 01:06:06 pm
There is a certain irony to this event.   The action he took has alienated a number of those he was trying obtain support from.  In other words,  he may have done more harm than good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 31, 2016, 06:47:45 pm
The flag/national anthem represent a system that allows people to develop solutions to social problems through self-governance.  The process is very slow but it's the responsibility of those who care to work towards making things better.  I understand Kap's anger and frustration, but not his venting against the principles that will allow positive change.

Venting?

Venting?

The guy did not stand.

That's a strange vent.  And so far I have seen not one comment from him which could be described as even arguably being "against the principles that will allow positive change."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 01, 2016, 11:51:23 am
Venting?

Venting?

The guy did not stand.

That's a strange vent.  And so far I have seen not one comment from him which could be described as even arguably being "against the principles that will allow positive change."

vent 1  (vĕnt) n. 1. Forceful expression or release of pent-up thoughts or feelings: give vent to one's anger.

Standing is probably not venting.

Talking to the press in the interview that I heard probably is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 01, 2016, 06:30:18 pm
He has some pretty nifty police pig socks he wears to practice too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 01, 2016, 07:24:02 pm
Gotta wonder if he has exhausted other means of effecting change in the system...

Like contacting his representatives would do any good...

Is there some requirement that a person first exhaust all other means of effecting change in the system before a silent, perfectly respectful protest?

I don't recall ever seeing it?  Is that part of the hidden language of the First Amendment?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 01, 2016, 07:28:26 pm
vent 1  (vĕnt) n. 1. Forceful expression or release of pent-up thoughts or feelings: give vent to one's anger.

Standing is probably not venting.

Talking to the press in the interview that I heard probably is.

Perhaps.  I have not listened to any interview with him and have so far only seen and read printed quotes from him from the comments he made when initially asked questions about why he did not stand.  In reading it, the comments seemed rather reserved, nothing forceful at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 01, 2016, 10:48:25 pm
He certainly has the right to conduct a peaceful protest, just as others have the right to conduct a peaceful protest against his actions.  Do you feel that they do not have that right?  Or has the counter protest been violent?  I haven't followed it since the interview I saw.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 01, 2016, 11:22:36 pm
He certainly has the right to conduct a peaceful protest, just as others have the right to conduct a peaceful protest against his actions.  Do you feel that they do not have that right?  Or has the counter protest been violent?  I haven't followed it since the interview I saw.

Do you have some reason to ask that I believe those complaining about him do not have that right?  Could you point to anything I have written where I might have suggested that?  This is not a challenge, or an effort to argue, but instead an effort to improve my writing so I avoid any such reasonable conclusion in the future.... assuming your question was actually reasonable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 02, 2016, 10:23:13 am
Can you tell me where I stated that you believe that those expressing their complaints do not have the right to do so?  I asked a question.  I did not make a judgement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 02, 2016, 06:24:56 pm
Do you have some reason to ask that I believe those complaining about him do not have that right?  Could you point to anything I have written where I might have suggested that?  This is not a challenge, or an effort to argue, but instead an effort to improve my writing so I avoid any such reasonable conclusion in the future.... assuming your question was actually reasonable.

Can you tell me where I stated that you believe that those expressing their complaints do not have the right to do so?  I asked a question.  I did not make a judgement.

I did not write that you stated that I "believe that those expressing their complaints do not have the right to do so."  I also never suggested you were not asking a question.  Instead I  asked if you had "some reason to ask that I believe those complaining about him do not have that right."  Nowhere is there even a suggestion that you lacked the "right to do so."  Your question only made sense if there was something I had written which would lead a reasonably sane person to think I had at least suggested that a person did not have "the right to conduct a peaceful protest," hence my question to you: Could you point to anything I have written where I might have suggested that?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on September 02, 2016, 07:35:06 pm
Smh...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 02, 2016, 07:51:34 pm
Let me know when Jes tells us Trump or Hillary is toast
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on September 03, 2016, 06:05:24 am
America is toast.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 03, 2016, 09:46:45 am
Hillary is going to win in a landslide.  More Electoral votes than her husband had in either of his two victories.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 03, 2016, 09:48:27 am
I don't know.  The race has tightened significantly over the past 1-2 weeks.  If Trump is perceived as being strong in the debates, he's got a real chance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 03, 2016, 09:54:28 am
Much of the Republican establishment is refusing to support him.  And that is where the money comes from to run a campaign.  He will lose in Ohio, North Carolina and Florida, which pretty much makes the rest of the country meaningless.  Is there a Democratic state that is going to swing to Trump?  I don't see any.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 03, 2016, 10:13:13 am
It's pretty much dead even in Ohio and North Carolina, and Hillary's lead in Florida is razor thin.  It's an uphill battle for Trump, but Nate Silver has his odds of winning at better than 30%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 04, 2016, 09:34:39 am
I just wonder how far this guy would go if some major backers bought him ads and he was allowed to debate.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/04/politics/gary-johnson-richmond-times-dispatch/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on September 08, 2016, 04:34:37 pm
You don't have to wonder anymore.


What is Aleppo?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 08, 2016, 05:18:09 pm
Otto, of course Hillary knows Aleppo.  She gave birth to it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on September 08, 2016, 05:23:51 pm
Don't encourage it...just spray, and maybe it will leave...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 08, 2016, 05:28:41 pm
At least we know he ain't dead, which most here had hoped.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 08, 2016, 05:29:48 pm
Otto, of course Hillary knows Aleppo.  She gave birth to it.

Actually a pretty good line.

Too dambed bad Johnson didn't think of it -- Question: What do you do about Aleppo?  Answer: What I would like to do is force President Obama and Secretary Clinton to take care of their bastard child, but we have already seen they have only made a greater mess of things with their parenting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 26, 2016, 09:33:38 am
Nate Silver has the election at essentially 50:50 as of today.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 26, 2016, 10:37:45 am
People hate both candidates so bad that they're like horses in a barn fire.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 26, 2016, 01:23:13 pm
One of them is much, much worse than the other.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 26, 2016, 01:26:08 pm
Pancreatic cancer is much worse than lung cancer.  It doesn't mean I want to get either one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 26, 2016, 04:05:33 pm
One of them is much, much worse than the other.
I know, but I just can't vote for Trump either.   ;D
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 26, 2016, 04:44:19 pm
Nate Silver has the election at essentially 50:50 as of today.

Either way, Obama is toast.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 26, 2016, 05:12:35 pm
Actually, right now Silver is giving the edge to Trump.  http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/26/silver-trump-would-win-if-election-were-held-today/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 26, 2016, 06:05:19 pm
That's not what the now-cast says.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on September 27, 2016, 02:00:30 am
Trump took Hilary behind the wood shed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 27, 2016, 05:11:56 am
A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 27, 2016, 06:56:14 am
A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.

One of my favorite lines....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on September 27, 2016, 01:30:33 pm
I just said that to get people here fired up.

I honestly don't give a **** and don't like either one of them.

I will vote because that's what a grown man is supposed to do but I'm not in the tax bracket that the results of this election is gonna effect me,I'm too old to get drafted, and I'm not looking for a handout from the government so other than having to hear their mouth for the next 4 years its no sweat off my sack.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 27, 2016, 02:10:41 pm
I'm reminded of the debates between Nixon and Kennedy.  Most agreed that Nixon won the debate, but the public was turned off by Nixon's 5 o'clock shadow.

Last night, Hillary, who's been told she doesn't smile enough, managed a big phony smile too often.  I thought she presented herself better than Trump, didn't repeat herself, and didn't toot her own horn as much as Donald, but every time she flashed that big toothy smile that was so fake, it turned me off.  I haven't heard anybody else comment on it, so maybe it's just me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 27, 2016, 02:17:45 pm
Quote
because that's what a grown man is supposed to do

No, a grown man should become educated enough about the issues to make a sensible choice.  If your attitude is what you claimed, do us all a favor and don't vote.

Dusty, you're not saying anything different from how something like half of America feels, but I'm talking about all of them, too.  We'd be better off if they didn't vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 27, 2016, 02:28:15 pm
I would certainly have the quality of a candidate's smile high on my list of determining factors in casting my vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 27, 2016, 03:05:55 pm
Or sighing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 27, 2016, 03:28:19 pm
I would certainly have the quality of a candidate's smile high on my list of determining factors in casting my vote.
P2, it wasn't the smile.  It was how fake and insincere it looked.  Play-acting.  You seem to dismiss the fact that people dislike Hillary because they feel she isn't honest and trustworthy.  An insincere smile doesn't help her.  BTW, since I posted that I've overheard some people in the grocery story that actually mentioned it.  Please go back to my original post.  Do you think whether a guy shaved before the event should influence your vote?  Me either, but in 1960 it did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 27, 2016, 04:15:28 pm
I would say that phoney smiles are about a important in a political race as 20 year old comments about flat chested women.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 27, 2016, 04:27:32 pm
Question.  Who was the last President to have facial hair?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 27, 2016, 04:49:47 pm
I will vote because that's what a grown man is supposed to do but I'm not in the tax bracket that the results of this election is gonna effect me,I'm too old to get drafted, and I'm not looking for a handout from the government so other than having to hear their mouth for the next 4 years its no sweat off my sack.

Yeah.... but why are YOU voting?

The idea that the outcome of the election will only effect you if you would be in a tax bracket likely to pay higher taxes, or if you are young enough to be drafted if we go to war (we no longer have a draft, but if we have another war comparable to WWII you are not too old to end up drafted), or if you are looking for a handout indicates you really haven't thought much about this.

Did the recession of 2008-2009 effect you?  Would higher prices on nearly everything you buy effect you?  Would an end of our constitutional republic effect you?  Would full-blown, single-payer, nationalized health care and socialized medicine effect you?  Would more or fewer government regulations on business effect you?

And does something have to directly effect you before you care about it?  Would you have been one of those in 1860 who if you were not a slave or a slave owner didn't care whether slavery continued or was ended?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 27, 2016, 04:51:06 pm
Question.  Who was the last President to have facial hair?

Nixon if we count the five o'clock shadow.  Taft otherwise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 27, 2016, 04:51:50 pm
Taft had a mustache.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 27, 2016, 05:21:16 pm
Right.  And I think Teddy had one too, but historians have claimed that Dewey lost to Truman because his mustache reminded people too much of Hitler.  Fact?  Maybe, but no politician since has had any.  My simple point is that not all people vote rationally.  Mustaches, smiles, 5 o'clock shadows, Clinton pursing his lips, Gore wandering over to Bush's podium...none of these things should matter, but they do.  How about the Johnson ad that was anti-Goldwater showing a nuclear explosion...should that have been as effective, considering that Goldwater had never (to my knowledge) advocated that kind of violence?

So, would it be silly to vote for or against someone because of a smirk or a smile, yes...but it will still happen.

I also am tired of being told that since I will vote for neither of these people, I'm wasting my vote.  Using that logic, whenever someone votes for the loser in an election, it must be a wasted vote.  We should all wait and see what the poll says in November and vote for the one who is going to win to avoid wasting our vote.  Irrational.  I think not voting my conscience and for someone I think would be a good President is wasting my vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on September 27, 2016, 06:46:35 pm
Jes...

Call me a name or make fun of me or whatever you want but my mom says all the time that I'm a very simple man.

Feed me good at night, give me a roof over my head, give me a Playstation to play in my down time, and let me play golf on my days off and Ill never complain.

I do the things a man's supposed to do like keep a job and be a good Christian man,husband, and daddy and keep my yard up but other than that I'm very easy to please.

In being an easy to please, laid back, man I've learned to choose my battles wisely and if it does not effect me or my family I truthfully don't give a ****.

The majority of the things this election is based around doesn't even mean as much to me as UT beating Georgia Saturday.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 27, 2016, 07:51:35 pm
Jes...

Call me a name or make fun of me or whatever you want but my mom says all the time that I'm a very simple man.


I have no doubt but that you are.  Now, where was it that I called you names?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on October 07, 2016, 01:09:11 pm
Did the recession of 2008-2009 effect you? 

The republic inspired Great Recession effected everyone. Especially the drumpfster fire picking at the bones of failed businesses.

Would higher prices on nearly everything you buy effect you? 

During the entire Obama Admistration inflation has been very low. Most prices have been uneffected during this time.

Would an end of our constitutional republic effect you? 

The end of our constitutional republic will not shortened by this election or the next or the next or the next...

Would full-blown, single-payer, nationalized health care and socialized medicine effect you? 

Does Medicare or private health insurance have different outcomes? Even with private health care costing more?

Would more or fewer government regulations on business effect you?

Clearly having less regulations and consumer protections would very much negatively effect people. Most people do NOT want to be test tube consumers for the idiotic libertarian bathtub size government that you adovate for.

And does something have to directly effect you before you care about it? 

That depends on whether he considers himself a Democrat (answer is no) or a republic (then answer is yes).

Would you have been one of those in 1860 who if you were not a slave or a slave owner didn't care whether slavery continued or was ended?

The depends on whether he would have considered himself a republican federalist (Party of Abe Lincoln then answer is yes) or a bigoted southern limited federal government states righter (then answer is still yes because that is the way it is) 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 07, 2016, 05:08:34 pm
Did the recession of 2008-2009 effect you? 

The republic inspired Great Recession effected everyone. Especially the drumpfster fire picking at the bones of failed businesses.

Anytime someone like Trump moves in to scavenge on the remains of failed businesses or to purchase distressed properties, the owners, and society both, are made better off.  If NO one bought them, the owners and society would suffer complete losses, and when vultures like Trump move it, it drives up what the sellers get.

Greed is good.

Would higher prices on nearly everything you buy effect you? 

During the entire Obama Admistration inflation has been very low. Most prices have been uneffected during this time.

That is rather unresponsive to the question.  My question did not mention Obama at all

Would an end of our constitutional republic effect you? 

The end of our constitutional republic will not shortened by this election or the next or the next or the next...

The outcome of elections will determine when the constitutional republic ends, regardless when that might be.  Neither you nor I have any crystal ball allowing a meaningful forecast of when, but the outcome of elections will most certainly decide it.

Would full-blown, single-payer, nationalized health care and socialized medicine effect you? 

Does Medicare or private health insurance have different outcomes? Even with private health care costing more?

Yes.  It is surprising that you support ObamaCare, but ask that question.  Your question suggests that whether ObamaCare continues, is expanded, is replaced by single payer or is replaced with market competition, makes no difference.  If that is the case, why does it matter to yo whether ObamaCare is continued?  Let's scrap it.

Would more or fewer government regulations on business effect you?

Clearly having less regulations and consumer protections would very much negatively effect people. Most people do NOT want to be test tube consumers for the idiotic libertarian bathtub size government that you adovate for.

My question did not suggest otherwise.

And does something have to directly effect you before you care about it? 

That depends on whether he considers himself a Democrat (answer is no) or a republic (then answer is yes).

So the Democrats wanting to end free trade want to do so because they care about other people?

Would you have been one of those in 1860 who if you were not a slave or a slave owner didn't care whether slavery continued or was ended?

The depends on whether he would have considered himself a republican federalist (Party of Abe Lincoln then answer is yes) or a bigoted southern limited federal government states righter (then answer is still yes because that is the way it is) 

Your ignorance of history is once again showing.  In 1860, there were many non-slaves who were also non-slave-owners who cared whether slavery continued or was ended.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on October 07, 2016, 05:54:27 pm
Question for the board - what affect have these last two posts had on you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on October 07, 2016, 06:05:52 pm
As much as the last 12,000 posts have had.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 07, 2016, 07:23:12 pm
I don't know what all the commotion is about the latest revelation about Trump.  What reason is there to be surprised?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 07, 2016, 07:34:27 pm
I don't know what all the commotion is about the latest revelation about Trump.  What reason is there to be surprised?

None.

Nor is there any reason to be surprised by seeing that in Hillary's private speeches to Wall Street groups that she said politicians should always have a public position and a private position on every issue, or that she claimed she was a firm supporter of completely free trade and truly open borders -- a worldwide common market.

Nor is there often any reason for a wife or husband to be surprised in most cases when they finally catch their spouse in the act, but that doesn't lessen the resulting anger.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on October 07, 2016, 08:23:39 pm
I don't know what all the commotion is about the latest revelation about Trump.  What reason is there to be surprised?

Which revelation is that?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 07, 2016, 08:29:05 pm
Which revelation is that?

That he is crude, says crude things about women, and used his celebrity status and position to bed or fondle women.

And that there is audio of him boasting of it.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-having-extremely-lewd-conversation-about-women-in-2005/2016/10/07/3b9ce776-8cb4-11e6-bf8a-3d26847eeed4_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on October 07, 2016, 08:31:28 pm
Too bad he isn't a Democrat.  That would be considered a resume enhancement.

On the other hand, if you liked Bill Clinton, you gotta love Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 20, 2016, 01:16:35 am
For those who watched the game, but still feel some civic  duty (or curiousity) about the final debate, here is the full thing -- http://heavy.com/news/2016/10/presidential-debate-full-video-replay-watch-wednesday-night-youtube-tonight-yesterday-free-streaming-third-final
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on October 20, 2016, 01:55:16 am
I watched the replay.

I don't like either one enough to take the time out of my day to vote.

I do feel one would probably be a safer bet though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on October 20, 2016, 09:48:35 am
Honestly I'd rather watch Games 2 and 3 of this series on a continuous loop with Bartman interspliced for good measure than be subjected to one more Donald/Hillary debate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 20, 2016, 09:57:55 am
I didn't watch.  Not much to learn and minimal entertainment value.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 20, 2016, 10:07:54 am
I didn't watch.  Not much to learn and minimal entertainment value.
That does it.  I was debating on whether to write you in or Jes.  Congrats.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 20, 2016, 10:15:32 am
Hillary will win in a landslide.  Trump will be lucky to lose by 15 million votes.  Why watch?  This thing was over weeks ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on October 20, 2016, 10:26:34 am
Hillary will win in a landslide.  Trump will be lucky to lose by 15 million votes.  Why watch?  This thing was over weeks ago.

Just wondering Robb, does it look like Evan McMullin is going to win Utah?  That's starting to become a pretty amazing story.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 20, 2016, 02:26:18 pm
I would say he is the favorite at this point.  Mormons, who are very conservative in general still aren't going to hold their nose and vote for someone of Trump's ilk.  And they aren't voting for McMullen because of his faith, they like him for his conservative approach.  I still haven't decided on him myself, but I am taking a close look.  I think if the election tightens and it looks like Trump has any chance of winning,  Utah will vote for him to try to keep Hillary out.  But if it stays like this with Hillary running away with it they'll vote for McMullen.  Just my opinion, could be dead wrong though. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 23, 2016, 02:03:06 pm
Life-long Cubs fan Hillary Clinton changed her allegiance to the Mets when she moved to New York and ran for the Senate.  I wonder if she is changing back.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 23, 2016, 02:04:18 pm
She'll root for the Indians.  She needs Ohio.  Illinois and New York are in the bag.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 23, 2016, 03:31:53 pm
                     (https://scontent.fsnc1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/14708358_1120096171409830_7407802617465797728_n.jpg?oh=e38e68f04ba1bd8e074ca63945f86223&oe=58A76492)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on October 26, 2016, 08:28:39 pm
Uh, then how is it foolish for someone t vote for a 3rd party candidate?

And, if you answer, it would probably be best to move this to the Politics thread.

Odds are an estimate, and even a one in a hundred shot occasionally wins.  Voting for someone who had virtually zero chance makes no sense if there is another candidate that has a better chance of defeating someone that would be a disaster.

One large reason why the odds are 100 to 1 against is because of idiots who are allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on October 26, 2016, 08:33:14 pm
They both suck and you all know it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on October 26, 2016, 09:33:08 pm
Absolutly.  But Hillary is so much worse than Trump that anyone that considers himself conservative on many issues is foolish to withhold his vote for Trump merely because he wants to make some statement that no one will ever hear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on October 26, 2016, 09:34:08 pm
Perfect is fighting a far less formidable enemy than good when it comes to this election. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on October 26, 2016, 09:47:38 pm
Compared to Hillary, Trump is good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 26, 2016, 09:49:27 pm
Idiot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 26, 2016, 09:51:38 pm
You're evidently not too bright either.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 26, 2016, 10:23:01 pm
Odds are an estimate, and even a one in a hundred shot occasionally wins.  Voting for someone who had virtually zero chance makes no sense if there is another candidate that has a better chance of defeating someone that would be a disaster.

One large reason why the odds are 100 to 1 against is because of idiots who are allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good.

Perfect being the enemy of the good....

So between Hillary and Trump, which one is "the good?"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 26, 2016, 10:28:40 pm
Absolutly.  But Hillary is so much worse than Trump that anyone that considers himself conservative on many issues is foolish to withhold his vote for Trump merely because he wants to make some statement that no one will ever hear.

A write-in vote is a statement that no one will ever hear.

That is not remotely the case with a vote for the Libertarian Party.

In the entire history of the United States, never would the change of one vote alter the outcome of the election.  So with hundreds of millions of votes cast, never once has it happened.  Part of this is because of the nature of the electoral college system.  For your individual vote to determine the outcome of the election, not only would the outcome of the election have to depend on the Electoral College votes of your particular state, but the vote in your state would have to have been so close that changing your vote would change which candidate had the most votes in your state.

What DOES happen when you vote for a candidate is NOT that you determine the outcome of an election, but your vote gets added to a candidates vote total to help provide what the candidate and supporters will declare is a "mandate" if they win, or which will do little to nothing if they lose.  But a "mandate" for what if you vote for Hillary?  A mandate for more undeclared war in the Middle East with unreviewable kill-list drone strikes killing thousands of innocents who just happened to be nearby?  A "mandate" for or against trade agreements?  A "mandate" for or against increasing immigration from Syria and other war torn nations?  A "mandate" to be female?  Voting for Trump would produce even less of a "mandate" since the guy has taken multiple sides on virtually every issue.

Voting for a third party candidate, however, generally amounts to increasing the vote total for a very clear set of principles, which those holding office know they have to attend to if they hope to get those voters in the future and which those seeking office in the future know they have to promise to attend to in order to attract that large block of voters with clearly defined desires.

In fact if you vote for either Hillary or Trump the reasons for that vote will be so blurred by personality, character issues, and absolutely ambiguous, contradictory or clearly misrepresented positions each have taken, that no one, not even the winner, will be able to sort out what positions those voting for either of the two major candidates want pursued.

That is not the case with a vote cast for a Libertarian candidate.  It is quite clear what positions those in office, or in the future SEEKING office, will have to advance and pursue in order to win support of those voters.

If you truly want your vote to count and to make a difference, you actually need to vote for the third party candidate most closely reflecting your views.  Votes cast for either winner or the loser in the presidential race end up being lost in the noise and do nothing whatsoever.

Before you write this off as a foolish approach which would never make a difference in American politics, particularly when the 3rd party candidates never attract more than a couple of percentage points of the electorate, look again to our nation's history. 

In the 1920's the Socialists began drawing 2-3% of the vote, largely behind Eugene Debs.  The never reached 5%, only got to 4% once, and yet withing 15 years, 9 of the ten positions in their platform had been enacted into law as members of Congress and presidents sought to win over that identifiable block of voters which might well have been enough to turn the outcome of an election.

The problem with Nadar was not that he drew votes from Gore (and if Gore had been elected, 9/11 still would have happened, we still would have invaded Aghanistan and still would have invaded Iraq -- in other words, there would have been little difference), it is that he did not CONTINUE running and drawing 2-3% of the vote in support of clearly identifiable positions which one or both of the major parties would have had to embrace in order to attract those voters.

I'm a libertarian.  I believe in reducing the size, scope and power of government, particularly the central government; I believe government tries to regulate our lives far too much and does it very poorly; I believe government should stop picking winners and losers in the marketplace and allow consumers to decide outcomes; I believe conduct which does not directly hurt another person should be legal; and I believe that voting for Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party candidate, is the best way to register that set of concerns in such a manner as to assure that politicians pay attention to them.  It in fact is the ONLY way they will pay attention to them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on October 26, 2016, 10:31:52 pm
Compared to Hillary, Trump is good.

Trump is good compared to the ebola virus at least . . .
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 26, 2016, 10:32:41 pm
Hillary is a snake, no doubt.

But Trump is a flaming sack of **** left on your doorstep by drunken high schoolers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 26, 2016, 10:38:34 pm
Trump is good compared to the ebola virus at least . . .

I sincerely challenge that.  I believe the ebol virus killed only one person in the U.S.  I believe both Hillary and Trump would kill many more than that.  Actually, it would appear that Hillary already has.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 26, 2016, 10:53:34 pm
(https://scontent.fsnc1-5.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14670731_10210635149656600_4647877798776374673_n.jpg?oh=7cf3ea48cbbffc71da1515e7b28e7b6d&oe=589F8C9E)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 26, 2016, 11:23:43 pm
Absolutly.  But Hillary is so much worse than Trump that anyone that considers himself conservative on many issues is foolish to withhold his vote for Trump merely because he wants to make some statement that no one will ever hear.
Just curious, Dave, was the vote for Lincoln in 1860  a wasted vote?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 27, 2016, 09:58:10 am
If I thought both major party candidates were bad (but neither catastrophic), I would vote for a preferable third party or write-in candidate.  If I thought that both major party candidates were bad and one was catastrophic, I would vote for the merely bad candidate rather than a better third party or write-in candidate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 27, 2016, 12:13:24 pm
Donald Trump is the worst thing to happen to American politics in my lifetime.  Maybe ever.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 27, 2016, 12:22:31 pm
Neither alternative is acceptable.  Neither will get my vote.  I weep for my country much like I did when Obama was elected and he has been everything I feared he would be.  The only thing stopping him from being worse is losing both houses of congress, although they didn't stop him nearly enough.  Hilary will have a lasting impact on the constitution with her pick of liberal supreme court justices.  Trump is unstable and would most likely ruin our standing in the world even worse than Obama has and could easily plunge us into world war 3 just through ego alone.  This is like receiving a death sentence and being asked which method you would prefer.  There is no choice, both end up with you dead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on October 27, 2016, 12:28:13 pm
Donald Trump is the worst thing to happen to American politics in my lifetime.  Maybe ever.

I fear we are headed down a path which a lot of other governments have taken where fist fights are commonplace in the houses of legislature.  I just don't like the direction politics has take the last 20 years and in particular the last 2 years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on October 27, 2016, 12:59:56 pm
Have to bottom out before we can start over
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: dev on November 05, 2016, 02:00:39 pm
Neither alternative is acceptable.  Neither will get my vote.  I weep for my country much like I did when Obama was elected and he has been everything I feared he would be.  The only thing stopping him from being worse is losing both houses of congress, although they didn't stop him nearly enough.  Hilary will have a lasting impact on the constitution with her pick of liberal supreme court justices.  Trump is unstable and would most likely ruin our standing in the world even worse than Obama has and could easily plunge us into world war 3 just through ego alone.  This is like receiving a death sentence and being asked which method you would prefer.  There is no choice, both end up with you dead.
LOL I would ask what irrational fears you had...but I don't need to waste my time reading them...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: dev on November 05, 2016, 02:04:45 pm
Too bad he isn't a Democrat.  That would be considered a resume enhancement.

On the other hand, if you liked Bill Clinton, you gotta love Trump.
Is that because both were accused of harassment?...With YOUR logic, if you like the Iraq invasion you should love Hillary...but if you are voting for Trump, which it sounds like you are, then you think the Iraq invasion was wrong...I am glad you finally saw the light.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2016, 04:01:18 pm
When I was growing up, there were some claims that the news organizations were biased, but all the networks tried to give balanced reporting.  Newspapers had the rep of being either Democrat or Republican, but not the tv news.  That was in the 50's.  In the 60's, especially as Vietnam grew as an issue, television news became more and more accused of having a left bias, particularly since "experts" said journalism people tended to be idealistic and crusaders.  This increased until the late 80's and 90's until FOX was born in 1996.  "Fair and balanced."  Actually far to the right to balance the perceived left of all the others.  MSNBC came into being as the ultra-left news.  ABC, CBS, and NBC continue to try to pretend they're impartial, but still lean more left than right.  CNN, I think, has actually made the most strides at staying down the middle and exposing issues on both sides, but they're not perfect.

The reason I'm typing this is that journalists used to be our ombudsmen.  They would ferret out the truth when claims were made in our elections and our politics.  Politicians could rarely get away with outright lies or taking things out of context to make the opponent look bad.  They could do it, but they took the chance of being exposed to the general public.

Take the current situation in Missouri.  I don't live there, but I get all the political ads out of St. Louis.  For governor they have a Democrat, who up to a few years ago was a registered Republican and a Republican who was a delegate to the last Democratic convention that nominated Obama.  Yeah, screwed up.  The Democrat is accused of spending nearly 3 million dollars on decorating his Secretary of State office.  True, but deceptive.  The state told him to remodel the entire Sec of State building, and gave him a $3M budget to do it.  Not just his office.  ALL of the Sec of State offices.

 The Republican is accused of stealing $700K from a charity.  He came back from Iraq and started a veteran's organization to help vets find jobs.  His family put over $600,000 into the project.  In the third or fourth year of operation, he took a salary of $700,000 to pay himself for not having taken a salary of any kind the first few years and to repay the loan from his family.

These two issues highlight the mudslinging, and neither is really true, but nobody gives people the real truth.  (I had to dig for it.)  Where is the press to expose this nonsense?  It's why in all our politics today we have outright lies and distortions.  It's sexier to promote the crap instead of the truth.  It gets better ratings, and cheats all of us of what ideas and policies do the candidates really have.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 05, 2016, 08:20:31 pm
Is that because both were accused of harassment?...With YOUR logic, if you like the Iraq invasion you should love Hillary...but if you are voting for Trump, which it sounds like you are, then you think the Iraq invasion was wrong...I am glad you finally saw the light.

Obviously, irony doesn't come across well on a board like this.

I did not care about the fact that Clinton was a womanizer and sexual predator, because it had no effect on the policies he tried to implement.  I do not care about the fact that Trump is a womanizer and sexual predator, because it has no effect on the policies that he will try to implement.  But I DO have a problem with those who did not care about the fact that Clinton was a womanizer and sexual predator, but find it unacceptable in Trump.  In a word, they are hypocrites, and that was the point I was trying to make with the irony.

Both Hillary and Trump are disgusting human beings in my opinion.  That is unfortunate, but the system we have has forced us into a position that one of them, disgusting as he or she is. will be the next president.  Given that choice, I would much, much rather have Trump trying to implement the policies I expect from him than Hillary trying to implement the policies I expect from her.

I was not a supporter of Trump in any of the primaries.  I would much have preferred Rubio or Cruz.  I would even have preferred the horrible candidates of earlier years such as Romney or McCain.  But you have to play the hand you are dealt, or just go home.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 07, 2016, 12:31:46 pm
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/07/opinions/navarro-republican-voting-for-clinton/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 07, 2016, 12:44:55 pm
I agree with DaveP - I was a womanizer back in my day also
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 07, 2016, 01:12:53 pm
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/07/opinions/navarro-republican-voting-for-clinton/index.html


Navarro made clear back in March that she was never going to support Trump.  Really nothing new there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 07, 2016, 01:46:31 pm
Quote
CNN, I think, has actually made the most strides at staying down the middle and exposing issues on both sides, but they're not perfect.

I'd disagree on CNN.  They're big time responsible for building Trump up early on during the primaries, with their wall to wall coverage of his campaign rallies to post-debate softball interviews with him immediately after debates CNN was sponsoring.    If Trump somehow does become President, CNN is going to bear a lot of the responsibility for more or less promoting his candidacy during the Republican primaries.

That was a classic case of building someone up early just so they could tear him down later once the general election started.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2016, 01:52:18 pm
I'd disagree on CNN.  They're big time responsible for building Trump up early on during the primaries, with their wall to wall coverage of his campaign rallies to post-debate softball interviews with him immediately after debates CNN was sponsoring.    If Trump somehow does become President, CNN is going to bear a lot of the responsibility for that for propping up his candidacy during the Republican primaries.

That was a classic case of building someone up early just so they could tear him down later once the general election started.
I've thought all along that CNN has seen covering Donald Trump as a huge ratings bonanza.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 07, 2016, 02:05:25 pm
Agree with Ben.  I think the media were as caught off guard as everyone else in the beginning--Trump was a spectacle, and people wanted to see what was going on (=ratings).  They didn't treat him like a real candidate, and thus he thrived.  By the time they figured out what he was, it was too late to make much of a difference.  Doesn't feel like anything nefarious (built up to tear down).  Maybe incompetence, but if so then a lot of us were incompetent.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2016, 02:09:23 pm
As much as I dislike the Super Delegate format that the Democrats have, it saved them from having a farther left candidate.  If the Republicans had a similar format, they could have stymied a BS run like Trump's.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2016, 02:15:43 pm
Quote
CNN had a great October, topping all of cable news in the genre’s key demographic group of 25-54 for the first time in 15 years. For the first time since 2001, CNN beat Fox News Channel for the month, in both total day and primetime, in the age bracket that is the currency of news ad sales. CNN also enjoyed its most watched month in 11 years thanks in some measure to October’s race-changing 2005 Access Hollywood tape leak, in which GOP White House hopeful Donald Trump was heard on a hot mic boasting to Billy Bush about his Famous Men Get To Grope Women With Impunity Pass.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 07, 2016, 04:20:10 pm
Coming from someone who really don't give a **** and don't like either candidate tomorrow will be fun to just sit back and watch people go ape ****.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 07, 2016, 04:20:57 pm
But Hillary will win and my guess is she's the safest bet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 07, 2016, 05:11:47 pm
I wonder if this will affect the vote in New Hampshire:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-gop-senator-trump-could-get-us-into-a-nuclear-war-121502731.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2016, 05:33:15 pm
With both major candidates at over 60% dislike rates, we are going to have 4 years of gridlock and rancor regardless who is elected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 07, 2016, 06:21:31 pm
The primary process is responsible for both Trump and Hillary.  If the candidates were selected by the parties themselves, neither would have been considered.

It takes a certain kind of lunacy to have a party's candidate selected by people who are not members of the party.  Democrats voted in the Republican primaries for Trump on the assumption that he could never be elected in a National election.  Republicans probably did the same thing for Hillary, or would have if they didn't think that Sanders had less of a chance than Hillary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 07, 2016, 06:32:17 pm
Agree with Ben.  I think the media were as caught off guard as everyone else in the beginning--Trump was a spectacle, and people wanted to see what was going on (=ratings).  They didn't treat him like a real candidate, and thus he thrived.  By the time they figured out what he was, it was too late to make much of a difference.  Doesn't feel like anything nefarious (built up to tear down).  Maybe incompetence, but if so then a lot of us were incompetent.

Definitely the ratings Trump brought in had a big part of how the 24 hour news networks covered him in the primaries. 

In CNN's case, though, they gave him fluff post-debate interviews straight from the podium to give him a chance to correct mistakes he made during CNN sponsored debates and even more puff sit down interviews afterwards.  They had Jeffrey Lord on as a paid CNN cheerleader for Trump during the primaries, which I don't seem to recall networks hiring on a conservative commentator before for the specific purpose of propping up one candidate during the primaries.

They may have wanted Trump to win the primaries to keep the ratings bonanza going during the general election (and also likely in part because he was the easiest candidate for Hillary to face), but they've definitely had a bias in their coverage in this election from the getgo. 

Really all three of the 24 hour cable news channels have become an embarrassment to journalism.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 08, 2016, 07:43:26 am
Not sure who will win today but I do know who will lose; America.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on November 08, 2016, 07:58:51 am
The United States of America has jumped the shark.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 12:44:00 pm
Well for everyone who's worried about a Trump presidency, you should be able to rest easy.  Trump's chances are so bad, they're close to the chances the Cubs had of winning the World Series after they lost Game 4. 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-cubs-have-a-smaller-chance-of-winning-than-trump-does/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 08, 2016, 12:44:22 pm
The United States of America has screwed the pooch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 08, 2016, 01:08:28 pm
But you all watch and see.

Our lives will change very little no matter who wins.

This is just another day to watch the world argue, stress, and riot.

If it wasn't election day it would be because a cop shot some deserving thug.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 08, 2016, 01:08:51 pm
I'm pulling for neither to get to 270.  My odds are very very bad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 08, 2016, 01:10:04 pm
"If it wasn't election day it would be because a cop shot some deserving thug."

Dusty has a lot in common with Forrest Gump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 08, 2016, 01:14:53 pm
Why you say that Curt?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 08, 2016, 01:30:02 pm
You state blunt truths as you see the world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 08, 2016, 03:52:02 pm
But you all watch and see.

Our lives will change very little no matter who wins.

This is just another day to watch the world argue, stress, and riot.

If it wasn't election day it would be because a cop shot some deserving thug.
In some ways I agree Dusty, but in others I don't.  I am a health insurance broker and watching people filing into my office day after day having to make the choice between paying for health insurance or eat, isn't fun.  Oh and if they can't afford it they get to pay a penalty for a couple of 5% of their income.  This year the premiums are going up on average 30% over last year.  People today are paying nearly double what they were just a few short years ago.  That is a direct result of the election of 2008.  Millions are affected by this disaster of a law.  Even the poor who make too much for Medicaid but not enough for a subsidy, (yes, there is a gap) are being punished for not having insurance by taking away a minimum of $695 this year.  It's a train wreck, and there is no end in sight because Hilary won't repeal it once she gets in.  And if any of you think Trump can win I've got some desert property to sell you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 08, 2016, 04:21:15 pm
The costs of health care were going up rapidly well before the ACA.

Is the ACA the best way to manage the costs of health care?  Probably not, but to point at Obama and say it's all his fault is naive and/or specious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 08, 2016, 04:24:20 pm
The health care companies spending more than a million dollars a day lobbying Congress have nothing to do with why it is not working as well as it should.  Yeah, right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2016, 04:48:52 pm
It was set up to fail from the beginning. The penalty/tax is too low to force people to buy insurance causing the healthy to avoid it. The things people have to buy to meet Obamacare minimums are too great and drive up the price. More and more people are being driven to high deductible plans, but HSA were gutted. It was a crappy law. It had nothing to do insurance companies or Republicans, it was all on the Democrats.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 08, 2016, 04:49:03 pm
Well for everyone who's worried about a Trump presidency, you should be able to rest easy.  Trump's chances are so bad, they're close to the chances the Cubs had of winning the World Series after they lost Game 4. 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-cubs-have-a-smaller-chance-of-winning-than-trump-does/

Silver revised that this weekend to give Trump about a 40% chance of winning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 08, 2016, 04:51:25 pm
About 30% as of now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 08, 2016, 04:55:37 pm
But you all watch and see.

Our lives will change very little no matter who wins.

Health care (in other words expanding or ending ObamaCare), trade wars, real wars, restricting abortion versus expanding abortion and having the government pay for it, a recession as opposed to a strong economy, or even just a continued slow economy as opposed to strong growth, an expansion of gun control to the point you can no longer buy ammo or new guns for a reasonable price, citizenship to 11M illegals who would almost all vote for liberal Democrats or mass deportations.... all of those are very real things, some of which are likely to happen under one, but not the other.

Of course, if you think none of those things make any difference in your life, or you think they qualify as "very little.... change," you might be right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 08, 2016, 04:56:19 pm
About 30% as of now.

Still much better than the Cubs' chances down 3-1.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 08, 2016, 05:01:33 pm
The costs of health care were going up rapidly well before the ACA.

Is the ACA the best way to manage the costs of health care?  Probably not, but to point at Obama and say it's all his fault is naive and/or specious.

First, the cost of health care is going up more now than before ObamaCare, and it had actually slowed quite a bit before passage of the law.

Next, and more important, the question is not at the moment the cost of health care, but the cost of health insurance.  And the cost of health insurance is soaring.  Pointing to Obama and saying it is all his fault (or a fault he shares with the members of Congress which passed ObamaCare) is perfectly appropriate.  It makes no sense to point to anyone else.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 08, 2016, 05:27:40 pm
Exit polls are showing that 60% of the voters HATED the choice they had.  60% didn't want either candidate.  I'm trying to remember any time in my lifetime that the Presidential choice was that BAD.

The winner is going to have to do more work AFTER the election to prove himself/herself to people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 08, 2016, 05:29:00 pm
Robb, Lindsay Graham says he wrote in Evan McMullin.  So did I.  Think two votes will do it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 08:19:37 pm
NY Times now has Trump at 88% chance to win Florida.

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/forecast/president/florida
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 08:22:59 pm
Looks like this is going to be a long night.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 08:42:06 pm
NY Times projection tool now has Trump at 54% odds to win the election.  Wow.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 08, 2016, 08:52:37 pm
Damn.

Trump's gonna win ain't he?

I ain't got a dog in it though truthfully.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 08, 2016, 08:54:23 pm
Fivethirtyeight still has Clinton at 73%.  I hope they're right. 

Nate Silver took a lot of criticism for not taking as strong a position on a Clinton win as other prognosticators.  But so far, his live odds haven't really changed from what he had based on polls, and the race is much more competitive than anyone else thought it would be.  Fivethirtyeight's status might improve even more after tonight.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 08, 2016, 09:00:22 pm
538 won't change much as the forecast now is based on called races and pre-election polls. So, it seems as if there are a lot of states that have actual votes that do not match the polls and, until they are called, they are not included in the 538 model. So, their 70%+ forecast now is probably too optimistic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 09:00:23 pm
It looks like Hillary is going to narrowly pull out Virginia.

Trump is going to need to win a state like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin or Minnesota to win.

It looks like Trump is having a great early return in Wayne County, Michigan where Detroit is, though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 08, 2016, 09:01:42 pm
Florida, Michigan, and NC and he wins.  It's going to be really close. What a disaster.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 08, 2016, 09:04:36 pm
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/796186194707120128
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 09:07:03 pm
Trump up to 64% odds on the NY Times website.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 08, 2016, 09:07:27 pm
538 won't change much as the forecast now is based on called races and pre-election polls. So, it seems as if there are a lot of states that have actual votes that do not match the polls and, until they are called, they are not included in the 538 model. So, their 70%+ forecast now is probably too optimistic.

Yeah, I saw Nate Silver's live blog post about that pop up about 30 seconds after I posted.  Still, fivethirtyeight looks good by showing a lot of uncertainty when other sites were at 85%-99% for Clinton.  That gives me a little hope that their overall forecast (~300 electoral votes for Clinton) will work out.

I really can't believe Trump actually has a chance to win. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 08, 2016, 09:09:32 pm
The fact that it's even close is horrifying.  This is the guy endorsed by the KKK and Nazi's and he's a **** hair away from the White House.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 08, 2016, 09:09:44 pm
Florida, Michigan, and NC and he wins.  It's going to be really close. What a disaster.

This election is going to be a disaster regardless which of the two major candidates wins.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 08, 2016, 09:17:35 pm
The fact that it's even close is horrifying.  This is the guy endorsed by the KKK and Nazi's and he's a **** hair away from the White House.

"Horrifying" is too weak a word to express how disgusted I feel about the results so far.

Fivethirtyeight is down to 55% Clinton now that they've given Florida to Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 09:19:46 pm
NY Times is now at 79% Trump . . .
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 08, 2016, 09:21:19 pm
(https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-b0d58252626ccb25decb99e1138a437f?convert_to_webp=true)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 09:31:58 pm
Trump just won Ohio.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 08, 2016, 09:40:01 pm
What I find funny is I work for Marriott and 99% of the people I speak to aren't even from the South let alone Tennessee and every single one of them I've spoken to but 3 (which were Mexicans or married to one) have all been for Trump and the polls are saying the same but this group here all seem to hate him.

Looks to me like you all better get over it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 09:42:05 pm
A Trump win would be a disaster.  But at least a Trump win would be less of a disaster than a Hillary win.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 09:59:25 pm
Rubio holding on to his Senate seat was a pleasant surprise.  But Johnson holding on in Wisconsin is an absolute shocker.  Is it possible that Hillary could actually lose this thing?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 08, 2016, 10:01:52 pm
I just don't understand how anyone could think Clinton is more of a disaster than Trump.  Literally every bad thing you could say about Clinton you could also say about Trump.  He's a liar.  He's been on trial a lot, so I don't know how you could call her a criminal and let him get a free pass.  He's bragged about his ability to sexually assault women...even Clinton's husband hasn't bragged about that.

But Clinton has qualifications--she has been First Lady, New York Senator, and Secretary of State.  Trump...well, he had a successful reality show.  He got Vince McMahon's head shaved at Wrestlemania 23.  He made at least one appearance on Access Hollywood.  Not sure how that makes him a better candidate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 08, 2016, 10:02:32 pm
A Trump win would be a disaster.  But at least a Trump win would be less of a disaster than a Hillary win.

Depending entirely on what Trump we get.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 08, 2016, 10:03:46 pm
I understand that Vancouver is a great place to live.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 10:06:29 pm
I just don't understand how anyone could think Clinton is more of a disaster than Trump.  Literally every bad thing you could say about Clinton you could also say about Trump.  He's a liar.  He's been on trial a lot, so I don't know how you could call her a criminal and let him get a free pass.  He's bragged about his ability to sexually assault women...even Clinton's husband hasn't bragged about that.

But Clinton has qualifications--she has been First Lady, New York Senator, and Secretary of State.  Trump...well, he had a successful reality show.  He got Vince McMahon's head shaved at Wrestlemania 23.  He made at least one appearance on Access Hollywood.  Not sure how that makes him a better candidate.

Both Clinton and Trump are despicable people.  The only difference between them is that Trump is less likely to continue the destructive policies of Obama.  And is much more likely to appoint decent Supreme Court Justices than Hillary.

In addition, I would much rather have Trump in charge of foreign policy than Hillary.

Unfortunately, Trump is going to hurt our economy, at least at first.  After hours futures trading have already lost me about a year's income, and he isn't even likely to win, yet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 08, 2016, 10:07:47 pm
Trump is a racist, a demagogue, and a misogynist.  You own that when you vote for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 10:09:16 pm
The biggest problem I see from all this is that the country is strongly moving in the direction of a populist electorate.  Trump is a pure populist, and Sanders came close to defeating Hillary with his populist views.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 08, 2016, 10:12:19 pm
They have a good PCL team
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 10:12:42 pm
Ron Johnson had been catching up in Wisconsin.  That pretty much clinches the Senate for the Republicans.

538 now has Trump as a 61% favorite.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dihard on November 08, 2016, 10:16:01 pm
I feel sick. President Donald Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 08, 2016, 10:17:12 pm
Hilary is a criminal, a liar, and oversaw some of the worst foreign policy decisions in this nation's history.   Anyone voting for her must own that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 10:18:04 pm
Trump is a racist and a demagogue.  You own that when you vote for him.

I agree.  Of course, he was running against a criminal and a demagogue, and a lot of people had to own that when they voted for her.  The above post was modified to include misogynist.  Look at how many people owned that when the voted for Bill Clinton, and again when they voted for his wife, who not only was his enabler, but actively attacked the women her husband preyed upon.

But this was the wrong year to run an elitist.  Sanders probably would have won for the Democrats.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 10:21:38 pm
The thing that's shocking for me is that Trump pushed normally Republican voters like br and me to Hillary.  I'm guessing people like Tico, Robb, and Curt vote for most other Republicans besides Trump. 

Of course, he's kept Republicans like DaveP in the Republican camp who detest Hillary even more than Trump, but to make up the loss of Republican voters like some of us ... I'm not even sure I want to go there. 

Sad sign for our country that it looks like we're heading down that road.  If Trump holds up in Michigan and Wisconsin, it might be a good two years for the Republicans, but I really hate what the future looks like if the GOP becomes the party of Trump and the alt-right people that have been building him up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 08, 2016, 10:22:06 pm
Hilary is a criminal, a liar, and oversaw some of the worst foreign policy decisions in this nation's history.   Anyone voting for her must own that.

I would genuinely be happy to see her in a prison cell.... unfortunately, about the only chance that has of happening is for Trump to be elected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 10:23:19 pm
Let us not lose sight of the fact that the odds are still in favor of Hillary winning tonight.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 08, 2016, 10:24:14 pm
Let us not lose sight of the fact that the odds are still in favor of Hillary winning tonight.

I actually don't think the are at this point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 10:26:29 pm
He still had to win either Wisconsin, Pennsylvania or Michigan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 10:26:33 pm
Yeah I agree with jes.  It looks like Trump is probably favored to win at least one of MI, WI, or PA, and if he does that, he should win the election. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 08, 2016, 10:31:45 pm
People didn't vote for Trump as much as they voted against Hillary.  I thought it would be the other way around.  Some didn't want a woman.  Some didn't want a Clinton, any more than they wanted another Bush.  Some seriously feel she is not trustworthy.  But the common people identified with Trump over Clinton who they see as an elitist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 08, 2016, 10:32:09 pm
Fox just gave Wisconsin to Trump. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 08, 2016, 10:36:59 pm
Looks like it's over.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 08, 2016, 10:38:50 pm
Appalling.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2016, 10:42:18 pm
Man, I never thought I would be sad that Hillary lost. 2016 is a really weird year for me.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 10:45:21 pm
She still hasn't lost yet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 08, 2016, 10:45:34 pm
The thing that's shocking for me is that Trump pushed normally Republican voters like br and me to Hillary..

Just to be clear, I'm open to voting for anyone...but I haven't voted Republican (for President, at least) since 2000.  Libertarian the last three elections, Democrat today.  I'm embarrassed that I could be remotely connected to the current version of the Republican party in any way. 

Hopefully there is still some path for Clinton to win.  If not, I guess it makes sense that the high of a Cubs World Series win would be followed by something like this a week later.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 08, 2016, 10:47:36 pm
She has to win arizona or that's it.   And she isn't going to win arizona.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 08, 2016, 11:00:40 pm
Clinton's odds down to 14% on 538.  Cubs were down to 12% after game 4...so maybe there's still a chance?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 08, 2016, 11:06:27 pm
Jake Tapley on CNN said the market may be down on Wednesday by more than after 9/11.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 11:12:42 pm
Futures are down over 900 points right now.  If you have any money, buy heavily about an hour after the market opens tomorrow, assuming Trump wins.  This will be much like the Brexit vote.  Everything will drop immediately, and then gradually return to normal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 08, 2016, 11:16:45 pm
If this was the cosmic price of the Cubs winning the World Series, I think I would prefer that they hadn't.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on November 08, 2016, 11:17:31 pm
Be greedy when others are fearful, and be fearful when others are greedy
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 08, 2016, 11:31:14 pm
Be interesting to see what the market does if Hillary pulls it out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 08, 2016, 11:46:38 pm
People didn't vote for Trump as much as they voted against Hillary.  I thought it would be the other way around.  Some didn't want a woman.  Some didn't want a Clinton, any more than they wanted another Bush.  Some seriously feel she is not trustworthy.  But the common people identified with Trump over Clinton who they see as an elitist.

Yeah, it's easy to identify with a guy who lives in a gold penthouse on top of a Manhattan skyscraper that has his name on it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 09, 2016, 12:10:26 am
Probably more so than identifying an elitist corrupt politician that considers herself above the law and uses a charity to sell her influence around the world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 09, 2016, 01:18:48 am
This is the Politics And Religion thread so I'm just gonna throw this out there...

1Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

If you claim to be a Christian man yet don't agree with this then that's called blasphemy.

Today is s good day.

Cue Ice Cube...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 09, 2016, 01:39:55 am
AP just called the election for Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 09, 2016, 01:49:33 am
Lol...

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 05:35:38 am
This is the Politics And Religion thread so I'm just gonna throw this out there...
1Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
If you claim to be a Christian man yet don't agree with this then that's called blasphemy.

To the list of things DUSTY does not understand, we can now comfortably add the meaning of the word "blasphemy."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 09, 2016, 07:11:21 am
RISE UP YE DEPLORABLES!!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 09, 2016, 07:36:40 am
MAKE AMERICA HATE AGAIN!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 09, 2016, 07:43:06 am
And honestly what has Hillary done that Trump hasn't done more of?  What in all honesty has she done that is criminal?  There is no proof that any of the money the foundation took in lead to any favors for other countries.  Yet Trump used his foundation money illegally!  There literally should be an investigation into his foundation practices.  And if you think that Hillary is a liar then you haven't been paying attention to fact checking this election.  Trump LITERALLY lies half the time he opens his mouth. http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

I'm truly frightened for what the next 4 years will do to set our country back.  While I have always voted Democrat - I always respected the other candidate.  But not this time.  We shouldn't have to make excuses for our presidents behavior to our children.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2016, 07:49:58 am
Since having to be politically correct is now a thing of the past, we’ll probably start to hear “Merry Christmas” again instead of “Happy Holidays”.  That doesn’t bother me as much as what it will lead to.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2016, 07:51:57 am
Futures are down over 900 points right now.  If you have any money, buy heavily about an hour after the market opens tomorrow, assuming Trump wins.  This will be much like the Brexit vote.  Everything will drop immediately, and then gradually return to normal.
Brexit was mentioned several times during the election night coverage.   It didn’t take long at all before the Brits realized they had made a huge mistake.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2016, 07:52:49 am
America’s toughest sheriff, 84-year old Joe Arpaio failed in his reelection bid in Maricopa County (Phoenix).  Voters decided that $130 million spent on defending him in lawsuits was enough.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 09, 2016, 08:00:52 am
Right now, Hillary is up in the popular vote, and Nate Silver tweeted early this morning that she was still likely to win that by 1-2%.

That's going to cause a really interesting dynamic if she really does stay ahead in the popular vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 09, 2016, 08:06:21 am
Just to be clear, I'm open to voting for anyone...but I haven't voted Republican (for President, at least) since 2000.  Libertarian the last three elections, Democrat today.  I'm embarrassed that I could be remotely connected to the current version of the Republican party in any way. 

Hopefully there is still some path for Clinton to win.  If not, I guess it makes sense that the high of a Cubs World Series win would be followed by something like this a week later.

Ha! My apologies to you br.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 09, 2016, 08:11:28 am
Fivethirtyeight still has Clinton at 73%.  I hope they're right. 

Nate Silver took a lot of criticism for not taking as strong a position on a Clinton win as other prognosticators.  But so far, his live odds haven't really changed from what he had based on polls, and the race is much more competitive than anyone else thought it would be.  Fivethirtyeight's status might improve even more after tonight.

I'm not sure any of the prognosticators are looking very good at all this morning, but at least Silver had Trump at 25% odds or so of winning.  That's a lot better than places that were giving him hell like the Huffington Post that embarrassingly only had Trump's odds at like 1%.

Actually Silver had been talking up a lot lately the possibility that Trump would win the electoral college but lose the popular vote, which looks like has a very good chance of happening at the moment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 09, 2016, 08:26:51 am
To the list of things DUSTY does not understand, we can now comfortably add the meaning of the word "blasphemy."

He won't learn unless you define it for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 09, 2016, 10:43:00 am
Yeah, I follow Fivethirtyeight pretty closely, and it's clear that Silver and company were anxious about the models and were giving Trump a very real shot.  A polling error away from a Trump presidency.

I can't wait for the factory jobs to come rolling back in.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 09, 2016, 10:56:24 am
I can't wait for the reactions when he's not able to deliver on his top campaign promises like building a wall, deporting 12 million people, and blocking Muslims from entering the country. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 09, 2016, 11:01:20 am
My guess is that the supporters were mostly venting anger and fear, and needed to have someone channel those feelings.  Trump did so with amazing skill.  I doubt there will be a lot of push back when most of his plans get nowhere (except erases of anything that constitutes Obama's legacy including ObamaCare and the nuclear deal with Iran).  Plus, Trump will always be able to blame opposition from Congress for failing to implement/fund his crazy ideas like the wall and deportation of Muslims.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2016, 11:13:16 am
Another prediction gone wrong as the Dow is up 140 points.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 09, 2016, 11:16:53 am
He will be held to the same standard that Obama was held to with his promise that if you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan.

Trump will not build a wall, at least a physical wall that extends along the entire Mexican border.  Nor will he deport 12 million people.  I doubt that too many that voted for him actually will expect it.  But I would expect him to be more vigorous about deporting those caught breaking the law, and will be less willing to release newly caught illegal aliens on their own recognizance.

Of much more importance will be the first Supreme Court nominee to replace Scalia, which he will do almost immediately.  His choice will probably set the stage for the rest of his term.  The next thing will be how complete will be his cancelling of many of Obama's executive orders that have been so vexing in the areas of immigration and healthcare.  This is something he can do immediately, and how quickly he does it and how thorough he is about it will be closely watched by many of his supporters.

I expect the first big battle will be over the repatriation of profits held overseas.  This is not something he can do without Congress, and there will be great resistance among Democrats in the Senate.  It should be a good test of whether or not he can be a leader, as well as a demagogue.  One promising thing today is the statements by many Republicans that they intend to do things piecemeal rather than with one large omnibus bill.  The larger the bill, the more tradeoffs and bribes that water down the bill to uselessness.

The greatest danger, of course, is how he will deal with things like tariffs and imports.  Hopefully, he will not do too much damage to the economy, or that the repatriation of foreign profits more than off set or mitigate the damage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: craig on November 09, 2016, 01:33:34 pm
Will this be the first Republican president with Republican majorities in both Senate and House since Hoover?  Democrats have periodically had all three, but I can't recall any Republican control in our lifetimes. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on November 09, 2016, 01:49:03 pm
No, I believe George W. Bush had that a couple times.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 09, 2016, 01:49:41 pm
This is the first Democrat President who calls himself a Republican to have both Houses.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 09, 2016, 02:09:37 pm
Say goodbye to Roe v Wade decision.. If you voted for Kim Jung Un.. I've got the best bridge for you to buy. It's the greatest quality bridge. Top notch. @#&%.

I have a singular rule: never underestimate the colossal stupidity of people. And i fu@#ing had a modicum of faith.. Well.. That's gone.

PT Barnum is our new overlord

I had new found optimism with the Cubs winning.. Now.. FU@#!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on November 09, 2016, 02:30:21 pm
DJIA up 300+ right now...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 09, 2016, 02:34:27 pm
Say goodbye to Roe v Wade decision.. If you voted for Kim Jung Un.. I've got the best bridge for you to buy. It's the greatest quality bridge. Top notch. @#&%.

I have a singular rule: never underestimate the colossal stupidity of people. And i fu@#ing had a modicum of faith.. Well.. That's gone.

PT Barnum is our new overlord

I had new found optimism with the Cubs winning.. Now.. FU@#!

Is the killing of unborn babies that important to you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 09, 2016, 03:11:04 pm
The impression I get today is that good triumphed over evil and that the working class took back control over their country today.

I noticed the neighbor has an American flag flying too.

Its completely different than the tone here today and over the last several months.

I guess some here really took Trump's comments about the Ricketts clan to heart.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 09, 2016, 03:21:13 pm
That's how they felt in Zimbabwe when Mugabe took over.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2016, 03:34:26 pm
I finally came up with the name I've been trying to remember for several weeks

Full Definition of Hobson's choice
1   an apparently free choice when there is no real alternative
2:  the necessity of accepting one of two or more equally objectionable alternatives
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 09, 2016, 03:37:46 pm
My son, not a Trump supporter, claims that we need to relax because he perceives that Trump was putting on a show to garner publicity.  Free publicity.  The more outrageous things he said, the more coverage he got.  Obviously, he didn't plan the "****" tape, but I doubt he meant everything he said.   As a "change" candidate, he now will have to answer all those angry people who elected him why the wall's not being built, why Hillary is not being investigated by a special prosecutor and going to jail, why the immigration problem isn't fixed, why the Iran deal is not undone, why businesses are still going to China and Mexico, and why he still won't reveal his tax returns.

I'm sure he got some votes from anti-feminists and from racial bigots, but that doesn't explain the huge swing to him.  The irony is that what some comedians said turned out to be true: a lot of people who were voting Trump lied to polsters our of embarrassment. 

I was mentally set for a Hillary presidency and figured, oh, well, the worst she can do is continue to rob us blind and continue lying.  We can survive that for 4 years.  I'm going to need time to soak in the new reality.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 09, 2016, 03:43:52 pm
The thing I found interesting during his speech was when he said for the next 2, 3, 4 years we're going to blah blah blah.  Is it possible he might govern for a few years and then step down to go back to his businesses?  I would love it as Pence would be a much better option.  Trump can then say he didn't need 4 years to do what he wanted.  I'm not sure this guy even wants to be President all that much. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 09, 2016, 03:50:11 pm
Pence is a much worse option.  Unless, of course, you want fetus funerals, gay conversion therapy, and creation museums in every state. Then he's awesome.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 09, 2016, 03:53:20 pm
The thing I found interesting during his speech was when he said for the next 2, 3, 4 years we're going to blah blah blah.  Is it possible he might govern for a few years and then step down to go back to his businesses?  I would love it as Pence would be a much better option.  Trump can then say he didn't need 4 years to do what he wanted.  I'm not sure this guy even wants to be President all that much. 
Maybe he realizes that when he's done nothing he can't be reelected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 09, 2016, 04:08:49 pm
you want fetus funerals

That really isn't fair to what the law Pence signed does.  The law requires hospitals/abortion clinics to not dump fetal tissue in landfills.  They need to either incinerate or interred.  It makes it illegal to dump fetal tissue into landfills.   The only time their would be a "fetus funeral" is if the parents wanted to have one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 09, 2016, 04:10:22 pm
I still don't buy that Trump supporters were too embarrassed to tell pollsters who they were voting for.  I haven't met a shy Trump supporter yet.  In all the clips I saw of televised Trump rallies (with thousands and thousands of people in attendance), I never saw anyone trying to hide his or her face from the camera.  So I just don't think there's any chance they would have any problem telling an anonymous pollster who they have never met (and never will meet) that they were planning to vote for Trump.

So far, Trump's popular vote total is still behind Romney and McCain.  I don't think Trump really outperformed the polls.  It was just that Clinton wasn't inspiring enough to get Millennials off the couch yesterday, so she significantly underperformed the polls.

I agree with Cletus that Pence is a terrible far, far right social conservative...Clinton probably should have focused a little more on him because Millennials will turn out to vote on social issues.  I worry a lot about the input he will likely have on choosing Supreme Court justices. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: craig on November 09, 2016, 04:32:36 pm
No, I believe George W. Bush had that a couple times.
 
Correct, thanks. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 05:17:49 pm
He won't learn unless you define it for him.

I don't think that would help.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 09, 2016, 05:17:52 pm
Pence is a much worse option.  Unless, of course, you want fetus funerals, gay conversion therapy, and creation museums in every state. Then he's awesome.

Has Pence advocated those things?  I must have missed it.  Can you provide a link?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 05:20:12 pm
Trump will always be able to blame opposition from Congress for failing to implement/fund his crazy ideas like the wall and deportation of Muslims.

I would agree that deportation of people simply because they are Muslim would be a crazy idea, as well as being unconstitutional, but perhaps even crazier is thinking he said he would do that.  Is there any chance you could refer to a credible source for the claim?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 05:20:59 pm
Say goodbye to Roe v Wade decision.

Let's hope so.

If I would have been confident of that one, I would have voted for Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 05:22:44 pm
That really isn't fair to what the law Pence signed does.  The law requires hospitals/abortion clinics to not dump fetal tissue in landfills.  They need to either incinerate or interred.  It makes it illegal to dump fetal tissue into landfills.   The only time their would be a "fetus funeral" is if the parents wanted to have one.

It is not just unfair to what the law Pence signed does, it demonstrates a rather serious misunderstanding of the role of a governor and the way government works in this country... but not a misunderstanding which is surprising.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 05:25:03 pm
I still don't buy that Trump supporters were too embarrassed to tell pollsters who they were voting for.

They may not have.  There are always some people who simply will refuse to talk to pollsters.  If that group of people is disproportionately made up of Trump voters, you have a serious source of polling error.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 05:25:57 pm
Since having to be politically correct is now a thing of the past, we’ll probably start to hear “Merry Christmas” again instead of “Happy Holidays”.  That doesn’t bother me as much as what it will lead to.

When did we STOP hearing "Merry Christmas"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 05:27:01 pm
MAKE AMERICA HATE AGAIN!

The Black Lives Matter movement, and Hillary's entire campaign, or liberalism in general, does not embody a healthy does of hatred?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 09, 2016, 05:31:26 pm
Quote
It was just that Clinton wasn't inspiring enough to get Millennials off the couch yesterday, so she significantly underperformed the polls.

Yeah I think that was a big factor.  Hillary didn't get millennials going like Obama did, and I always thought that would be a big problem for her.  It probably didn't help their complacency that places like Huffington Post were giving her a 99% chance of winning the election either.  Really the Huffington Post guy and other liberals who were giving Nate Silver a hard time for giving Trump a 1 in 3 chance probably learned a lesson the hard way there.  A lot of millennials living in Huffington Post type bubbles probably thought the election was already in the bag for her and may not have voted.

It sounds like African American turnout wasn't what it was for Obama either.  Places like Philadelphia, Detroit, areas in North Carolina, etc. apparently didn't turn out African American voters for Hillary like they did for Obama, and even with the reduced turnout, she didn't get the share of African American voters that Obama got either.

Modern elections aren't about convincing undecided voters anymore because there are simply fewer of them.  They're all about turning out your block of voters.  Donald Trump had his energized and motivated to vote for him.  Hillary didn't.  That's the difference there, just like it's been in every election since 2000.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 09, 2016, 06:02:35 pm
This is the first Democrat President who calls himself a Republican to have both Houses.

I'm coming to the conclusion that Trump can consider himself a Republican.  Unfortunately he's coming from the alt-right wing of the party, and that scares the crap out of me.

Part of the many reasons why I voted against Trump was for the alt-right people who might be pushing a lot of the agenda in his administration.  Stephen Bannon has turned Breitbart into a whack job website, and he's the one who ran Trump's campaign.  I'm sure he's going to have a big role to play in President Trump's administration, and he'll have people who think and act like him littered throughout.  Politico ran an article about Stephen Miller who was the warm up act at a lot of Trump's rallies, and he's a certified nutjob.  Trump was a regular on Alex Jones's shows and retweeted Infowars.com stuff throughout the campaign, and that site is nothing but a cesspool of whacky conspiracy theories.  The thought that people like George Will are leaving the Republican party and being replaced by guys like Stephen Miller and Stephen Bannon is a scary thought to me.  That's probably only going to get worse now that Trump is in the driver seat of the party.

I still think of myself as a Mitt Romney type Republican, but it looks like people who think like Romney aren't going to be welcome in the party for much longer.  Sean Hannity wants Paul Ryan out as House speaker yesterday, and I don't know how you could consider Ryan as anything but a solid conservative Republican (I even think Ryan is too far to the right on social issues for my tastes, but he's probably the most admirable national Republican in office that I can think of at the moment).  The alt-right and social right people in the Ted Cruz mold are taking over and even people who ordinarily would be considered very right wing Republicans like Ryan are getting pushed out of leadership or are at least going to have very tenuous holds on leadership.

Part of why I voted for Hillary because I wanted the future of the Republican party to be guys like Paul Ryan, Ben Sasse, and Marco Rubio.  Unfortunately it looks like the future is now going to be Donald Trump, Stephen Bannon, Stephen Miller, Ben Carson, Sarah Palin, Alex Jones and other con artists and alt-right whackos.  I'm sure the Republicans will get a lot of their policy goals done in the next couple of years (some of which I'll be happy to see), but long term, there's going to be a heavy price to pay in the country and in the party for that.  Hope I'm wrong.

 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2016, 06:16:12 pm
There weren't enough hours in a day for voters to decide what was a fact, a half-truth, or an outright lie.

Both candidates had a high unpopularity rating so it came down to who would have the best chance of breaking the Washington gridlock.  Trump, being the outsider was the choice.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 09, 2016, 06:42:47 pm
As I hear the breakdown of the results, it appears that Trump generally received about the same percentage of votes compared to population as Romney.  Hillary lost because a large number of Democratic voters, especially in the black areas, just did not turn out in the same numbers as they did for Obama, which is not surprising, but fewer than Gore, which is surprising.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on November 09, 2016, 06:47:11 pm
Jim Comey
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 09, 2016, 06:47:42 pm
The Black Lives Matter movement, and Hillary's entire campaign, or liberalism in general, does not embody a healthy does of hatred?

I assume you meant dose and not does.  And no it does not embody a healthy dose of hatred.  Not even close to what Drumpf was doling out.

And how do you think that Hillary and liberalism in general embody hatred?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 09, 2016, 07:16:31 pm
I think the Obamacare huge price jumps announced a week before the election hurt Hillary far more than the emails,   it's the economy, stupid.  People don't care about womanizing, lying, lousy language, or bad judgement,  but you start taking money out of their pockets...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 09, 2016, 07:54:45 pm
You know how to stop these protests?

Tear gas, fire hoses, and shotguns.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 09, 2016, 08:01:21 pm
As long as people don't use them as an excuse to riot or damage property, no reason to do any of that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 08:08:53 pm
I assume you meant dose and not does.  And no it does not embody a healthy dose of hatred.  Not even close to what Drumpf was doling out.

"Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em up like bacon" does not embody hatred?

And how do you think that Hillary and liberalism in general embody hatred?

The claims that conservative or Republicans want to poison people or push granny off a cliff embody no hatred?  The "white privilege" nonsense and class warfare blaming "the greedy one-percenters" embody no hatred?  The "basket of deplorables" embodies no hatred?  Your use of "Drumpf" embodies no hatred?

Are you for real?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 09, 2016, 08:15:02 pm
You know how to stop these protests?

Tear gas, fire hoses, and shotguns.

"These protests"?

What protests?

Does Dusty want to use tear gas and shotguns on Colin Kaepernick?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 09, 2016, 08:19:28 pm
This could last all night.

These are the people who don't have jobs to go to in the morning.

You know they're wired up on all the free medication they get too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on November 09, 2016, 08:30:28 pm
it's the First Amendment Dusty
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 09, 2016, 08:43:19 pm
You know how to stop these protests?

Tear gas, fire hoses, and shotguns.

You were born in the wrong era.  Though, Trump and his supporters are going to try their hardest to get us back to those days.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 09, 2016, 08:46:26 pm
I'm honestly just trying to get you all fired up.

I care less about this and know less about this than anyone here and I'm man enough to admit it.

Im truthfully not a republican or a democrat and didn't like either candidate.

I voted for Rubio in the primaries.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 10, 2016, 02:15:30 pm
Heh.  California threatening to secede.  Didn't Texas do the same thing after Obama was elected?  Won't happen.  All those folks in California would have to get passports to go to Vegas and Reno.

The Democratic party would have the most to lose.  Big Blue State.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 10, 2016, 02:59:05 pm
Heh.  California threatening to secede.  Didn't Texas do the same thing after Obama was elected?  Won't happen.  All those folks in California would have to get passports to go to Vegas and Reno.

The Democratic party would have the most to lose.  Big Blue State.

I've read about that too.  Just assuming a state like that or say Vermont really truly wanted to secede, I wonder how the federal government or a President Trump would react to that.  One of the crazy #calexit articles I read mentioned that secession would be a legal thing for them to do, and that's not how the federal government has viewed it historically.  I'm reading Jon Meacham's biography of Andrew Jackson right now (By the way, I get the feeling Trump would have a lot in common with Andrew Jackson.), and he considered secession and nullification of federal laws to be illegal.  Abraham Lincoln considered secession to be illegal. 

You'd think in the 21st century that you wouldn't resort to force to bring them back, but the federal government can't just let them walk. 

It's never likely to happen anyway, but that's a thought that's always crossed my mind a time or two whenever secession talk like that gets brought up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 10, 2016, 03:13:24 pm
I've read about that too.  Just assuming a state like that or say Vermont really truly wanted to secede, I wonder how the federal government or a President Trump would react to that.  One of the crazy #calexit articles I read mentioned that secession would be a legal thing for them to do, and that's not how the federal government has viewed it historically.  I'm reading Jon Meacham's biography of Andrew Jackson right now (By the way, I get the feeling Trump would have a lot in common with Andrew Jackson.), and he considered secession and nullification of federal laws to be illegal.  Abraham Lincoln considered secession to be illegal. 

You'd think in the 21st century that you wouldn't resort to force to bring them back, but the federal government can't just let them walk. 

It's never likely to happen anyway, but that's a thought that's always crossed my mind a time or two whenever secession talk like that gets brought up.

Well if California is going to break away I would imagine that Northern California and other red parts of the state aren't going to want to follow would be 1 part of the problem.  The bigger problem is how is California going to get water.  I really doubt President Trump is going to continue allow California to have access to most of their water supplies.  If Northern California stays in the US, then the problems would be worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 10, 2016, 03:15:12 pm
Would California pay for the wall between them and the U.S.?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 03:25:49 pm
Actually seceding is a nonstarter, of course, but I completely understand the desire to decouple ourselves from the misogynist racists and/or rubes who think Trump as president is a good idea.  Right now I'm ashamed of being from the Midwest.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 10, 2016, 03:59:26 pm
I think you need to be a little more charitable.  Where there misogynist and racists that voted for Trump?  Yes.  They weren't the majority.  There are multiple reasons for voting for him that don't include either of those.  Calling people rubes is also pretty offensive. 

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 10, 2016, 04:26:40 pm
People who voted for Trump are rubes.  It may be hurtful to hear that but the truth can hurt.  Those same people may not think they are racists and misogynists but they are endorsing a man who most definitely is and they are aligning with folks like the KKK and Nazi's. So, they may not think they are racists and misogynists but their actions in this case say otherwise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 04:33:07 pm
A HUGE percentage of the people who voted for Trump were completely deceived.  They bought into his rhetoric--which was about 75% lies--as the gospel truth.  He's probably 5x the criminal/liar that Hillary is, but they think that She should be locked up.  They think he's going to help them.

He's not.

Ironically, the party that will help those people (the ones who are really angry and lost their jobs and are at the lower end of the economic spectrum?) would be the other one.

I get that some people who voted for Trump have their reasons, not all of which are deplorable.  However, I'll stand by my assertion that lots and lots and lots of people who voted for Trump are rubes.  Someday, maybe, I'll feel sorry for them when they get taught again that trickle-down economics don't work and maybe they don't have *any* health care options and *still* don't have the manufacturing job he promised to bring back, but right now I think I'm a bit too pissed off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ray on November 10, 2016, 04:35:43 pm
I think the mistake in that line of thinking is there wasn't a reasonable alternative.  Many of us think Hilary is an even worse person than trump. If there was reasonable alternative, fine think that, but your calling an awful lot of voters something they're not.

Don't all those bad guys you mention normally support the Republican party?  Doesn't that mean that Republicans are always always lining themselves with them...in walks in the reincarnation other Ronald Reagan, he runs and wins, and a lot of what you say still holds true. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 10, 2016, 04:48:03 pm
I don't know how you could think Clinton was worse than the racist and misogynist guy who had the support of the KKK and Nazis. But, if you did, you can always choose to abstain.  Presumably you didn't and voted for Trump which says a lot about you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 10, 2016, 04:49:08 pm
I just don't understand the "Hillary is worse than Trump" line of thinking.  Literally every bad thing that has been said about Clinton during this campaign--she's a liar, she's corrupt, she may be a criminal, she may have misused her charity, and so on--you can say about Donald Trump.  And I'd argue that there is far more evidence that those descriptions of Trump are accurate.

Then on top of that, you have the constant misogynistic and racist rhetoric that was Trump's campaign.  You have a guy who mocked a disabled reporter and encouraged violence against protesters at some of his rallies.  And he openly bragged about committing sexual assault because he wanted to impress Billy Bush.  I just don't get it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 10, 2016, 04:49:43 pm
Labels like "racist" and "misogynist" are too extreme for most people I have ever met...
I don't associate skin color or gender as automatic identifiers like some extremists do when seeing a person they don't know.
I do know that some stereotypes are accurate - but that is not extreme enough to judge a person on appearance alone.
Most of us "rubes" have to whisper - or use similes or metaphors to have daily discussions about what is degrading our society into 3rd world status...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 10, 2016, 04:55:52 pm
I just don't understand the "Hillary is worse than Trump" line of thinking.  Literally every bad thing that has been said about Clinton during this campaign--she's a liar, she's corrupt, she may be a criminal, she may have misused her charity, and so on--you can say about Donald Trump.  And I'd argue that there is far more evidence that those descriptions of Trump are accurate.

Then on top of that, you have the constant misogynistic and racist rhetoric that was Trump's campaign.  You have a guy who mocked a disabled reporter and encouraged violence against protesters at some of his rallies.  And he openly bragged about committing sexual assault because he wanted to impress Billy Bush.  I just don't get it.
Pay-for-play has been around for a long time.  Both parties have used it extensively.  Nobody was better at it than George W. Bush.  When big-business and big-oil said "jump", he said "how high?".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 04:57:53 pm
Quote
Many of us think Hilary is an even worse person than trump.

You're wrong.  You've bought into what the alt-right Breitbart people have been selling about Hillary for 20 years.

Is she perfect?  No.  Would she be my first choice?  No.  Is she a better person than Donald Trump?  Unquestionably.

She's spent her whole career championing the rights of children.  Donald Trump champions himself.  The Clinton Foundation (which she actually took flack for) does great charity work around the world.  The Donald Trump Foundation (to which he doesn't even contribute) appears to benefit primarily Donald Trump.  The list goes on.  It is well documented.

That people didn't educate themselves enough to find out what kind of people they were voting for makes them rubes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 10, 2016, 05:00:24 pm
Education is key - voters should be required to pass a TEST before being allowed to vote
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 05:04:56 pm
Education is key - voters should be required to pass a TEST before being allowed to vote

Amen to that, brother. 

That's the biggest thing I'm taking away from this election.  I've had my doubts about straight-up democracy for a while now, but this election is the poster child for its faults.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 10, 2016, 05:05:56 pm
I think they should place truth collars on all politicians (and pundits).  Every time they lie, they get shocked. Would have put a stop to Trump...and it would have been highly entertaining.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 10, 2016, 05:07:44 pm
Good candidates won't run - when the media will expose their privacy
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 10, 2016, 05:09:09 pm
Sarah Palin getting shocked every 2 minutes is something for late-night TV
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on November 10, 2016, 05:10:10 pm
Consider this hypothetical.

The Democratic Party nominates a candidate who is an all around despicable human being.  This person puts forth a progressive agenda.

The Republican Party nominates a candidate who is an all around decent human being.  This person puts forth a conservative agenda.

There are millions upon millions of Democratic/progressive voters who would vote for the Democratic candidate simply because of his or her agenda.

Is that OK?

I say yes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 05:16:33 pm
Quote
Consider this hypothetical.

Good one.  As I consider it, let me first throw out that it's a flawed analogy for this election (you probably know that) because no one has any idea what Trump is really going to do once he takes office.  All we know for sure--through the mounds of available evidence--is that he's a despicable human being.  He contradicted himself so many times that believing any particular promise tends dangerously toward rubishness, if you ask me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 05:16:51 pm
Heh.  California threatening to secede.  Didn't Texas do the same thing after Obama was elected?  Won't happen.  All those folks in California would have to get passports to go to Vegas and Reno.

The Democratic party would have the most to lose.  Big Blue State.

Texas, as a state, never "threatened" to secede after Obama was elected, though there have been discussions about the possibility.  The same is true presently in California.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 05:19:15 pm
Actually seceding is a nonstarter, of course, but I completely understand the desire to decouple ourselves from the misogynist racists and/or rubes who think Trump as president is a good idea.  Right now I'm ashamed of being from the Midwest.

After what you put in your first sentence, some of the rest of us from the Midwest may also be ashamed you are from the same part of the country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 05:25:50 pm
I've read about that too.  Just assuming a state like that or say Vermont really truly wanted to secede, I wonder how the federal government or a President Trump would react to that.  One of the crazy #calexit articles I read mentioned that secession would be a legal thing for them to do, and that's not how the federal government has viewed it historically.  I'm reading Jon Meacham's biography of Andrew Jackson right now (By the way, I get the feeling Trump would have a lot in common with Andrew Jackson.), and he considered secession and nullification of federal laws to be illegal.  Abraham Lincoln considered secession to be illegal. 

You'd think in the 21st century that you wouldn't resort to force to bring them back, but the federal government can't just let them walk.

Why?

And if they attempt to do so, do you send in federal troops, a la Lincoln, which started a civil war resulting in the death of one of every twenty people in the country?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 05:27:33 pm
I think you need to be a little more charitable.  Where there misogynist and racists that voted for Trump?  Yes.  They weren't the majority.  There are multiple reasons for voting for him that don't include either of those.  Calling people rubes is also pretty offensive.

Now, now, such things are only offensive when conservatives say them.  When good liberals do, there is no offense, and, besides, when liberals say something like that, well, you just know it's true.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 05:29:47 pm
Quote
There are millions upon millions of Democratic/progressive voters who would vote for the Democratic candidate simply because of his or her agenda.

Is that OK?

It's tough.  I completely see your point, and I could argue it either way, but in the end it would come down to a personal decision even if we didn't want it to.  It's a spectrum. 

For me personally, the moral part of it matters.  I think it's important that the president is someone that kids can look up to.  It's not everything, but it matters to me.  John Edwards would never get my vote.  In retrospect, I was pretty happy with The thought of Donald Trump living in the White House forever cheapens the office of the president, and that makes me sad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 05:30:42 pm
Pay-for-play has been around for a long time.  Both parties have used it extensively.  Nobody was better at it than George W. Bush.  When big-business and big-oil said "jump", he said "how high?".

Bull.  Utter bull.  The Clintons rented out the damb Lincoln bedroom, and you want to point fingers at George W.

You lose anything resembling credibility with such nonsense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 05:32:52 pm
All we know for sure--through the mounds of available evidence--is that he's a despicable human being.

And that description somehow does not fit both of the Clintons?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 05:34:34 pm
Jes, anyone who takes you off ignore long enough to argue with you is also a rube.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 10, 2016, 05:35:15 pm
Cable news, ain't. Spin is accepted as analysis. Lies are accepted as business as usual. The entire process is a circus. In such an environment it doesn't surprise me that the head huckster wins.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 05:37:54 pm
Cable news, ain't. Spin is accepted as analysis. Lies are accepted as business as usual. The entire process is a circus. In such an environment it doesn't surprise me that the head huckster wins.

The guy who lied the most and best won.  I find that sad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 05:40:27 pm
Okay.  Clearly I had some **** to say.  I think it's out.  I'll resume mostly lurking now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 05:42:50 pm
I just don't understand the "Hillary is worse than Trump" line of thinking.

Then you have rather limited understanding.  I completely understand it, even though I do not share it.

Then on top of that, you have the constant misogynistic and racist rhetoric that was Trump's campaign.

The words "constant," "continual," and "repeated" are different for a reason.  They mean different things.  You might want to check the meaning of each.

You have a guy who mocked a disabled reporter and encouraged violence against protesters at some of his rallies.

Except that he didn't.  He used gestures which he also used to describe other people, including Ted Cruz and a perfectly healthy general, who he was trying to make fun of for being confused or taking positions which he thought made no sense or were inconsistent with what he thought was obvious or what he thought they had said before.... the one you are referencing simply happened to be disabled.... a reporter Trump had passing contact with, never with an in depth or one-on-one interview, with all of that contact more than 20 years earlier.  There is no reason to believe Trump actually knew the guy was disabled.

And he openly bragged about committing sexual assault because he wanted to impress Billy Bush.  I just don't get it.

This is utter bull.  Read the transcript.  Listen to the recording.  He did not say that he ever DID grab a woman by the genitals, but only boast that he COULD.  Earlier this year he also boasted that he COULD should someone on 5th Avenue and get away with it because he was so popular.  Are you similarly going to contend that was Trump admitting that he HAD shot someone on 5th Avenue?

Look, I do NOT like Trump.  I consider him a despicable human being, and I actually would have preferred Clinton over Trump.... but only by the narrowest of margins, since I also consider her a despicable human being and I hope she soon gets a chance to wear an orange jumpsuit on a regular basis.... but your claims about him are nonsense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 05:46:25 pm
A HUGE percentage of the people who voted for Trump were completely deceived.  They bought into his rhetoric--which was about 75% lies--as the gospel truth.  He's probably 5x the criminal/liar that Hillary is, but they think that She should be locked up.  They think he's going to help them.

He's not.

Ironically, the party that will help those people (the ones who are really angry and lost their jobs and are at the lower end of the economic spectrum?) would be the other one.

I get that some people who voted for Trump have their reasons, not all of which are deplorable.  However, I'll stand by my assertion that lots and lots and lots of people who voted for Trump are rubes.  Someday, maybe, I'll feel sorry for them when they get taught again that trickle-down economics don't work and maybe they don't have *any* health care options and *still* don't have the manufacturing job he promised to bring back, but right now I think I'm a bit too pissed off.

I respectfully submit that you have no clue what you are talking about, and suggesting that any higher percentage of  Trump voters are "rubes" than Hillary voters, or than were Obama voters, is an assertion making no sense.

It would also be interesting to hear you explain what "trickle down economics" is, and to point to any example of Trump saying he supports it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 05:49:19 pm
Amen to that, brother. 

That's the biggest thing I'm taking away from this election.  I've had my doubts about straight-up democracy for a while now, but this election is the poster child for its faults.

Considering some of your comments here it is amusing to see you calling for your own disenfranchisement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 10, 2016, 05:52:50 pm
Well...there is plenty of blame to go around.

1. Hillary is a very uninspiring idea.  Back in the old days, when I had a job, I used to handle classified data all day, every day. If I had done what Hillary did I'd be typing this from a Federal lockup. If she had been merely the 'usually unlikable politician' she would have won hands down. 

2. TV media is crap.  The NY Times and Washington Post reported day after day after day the total nonsense that was Donald Trump. But...Despite the best efforts by a few types, TV "news" completely abdicated their responsibility, opting instead to reap the financial benefits of sensationalism.  Cable news organizations are simply entertainment.   Jon Stewart, a blatantly entertainment entity, provided more "news".

3. We, the people, suck. We let it happen.  Our fault, most of all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 10, 2016, 05:56:46 pm
If there really that many misogynists and bigots and KKK folks out there, how the hell did Obama get elected twice?  I think it's sour grapes, and I didn't vote for Trump.  I'm sure a lot of those rednecks did vote for Trump, but their numbers probably don't come close to negating the Black and Latino vote for Hillary. 

Hillary made too many mistakes:
1. She should have dumped Bill 5 or 10 years ago.  Without his baggage, the misogynist claims against Trump would have carried more weight.
2. She let the NRA and Trump define her stand on the 2nd Amendment.
3. Dumbass wants to build a wall and send criminals back to Mexico; I don't know her position.  I know she has one but she never clarified it.
4. Other than continuing on the same track, I'm unsure of her foreign policy ideas.  Certainly better than dumbass' but what is it?
5. Instead of talking what her plans were, she got down in the mud with Trump and slung crap with him.
6. She seemed to be more concerned about breaking the glass ceiling for women than showing how she was a better choice than dumbass.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 10, 2016, 06:04:31 pm
People who voted for Trump are rubes.  It may be hurtful to hear that but the truth can hurt.  Those same people may not think they are racists and misogynists but they are endorsing a man who most definitely is and they are aligning with folks like the KKK and Nazi's. So, they may not think they are racists and misogynists but their actions in this case say otherwise.
Oddly enough, when Hillary called Trump's supporters a basket of deplorables is when many in his campaign credit as the moment things started clicking.  The deplorables didn't care, and the ones who weren't deplorable got angry and motivated.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 10, 2016, 06:05:41 pm
Hillary was the Bob Dole of the Democratic Party.  "Hey, she deserves it.  Let her give a shot."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 10, 2016, 06:07:02 pm
The "deplorables" didn't care because they didn't know what the word deplorable meant.  Sounds like adorable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 06:09:47 pm
The Clinton Foundation (which she actually took flack for) does great charity work around the world.  The Donald Trump Foundation (to which he doesn't even contribute) appears to benefit primarily Donald Trump.

I always find this one amusing.  So you are trying to suggest that most of the "charitable spending" by the Clinton Foundation comes from the pocket of the Clintons?

How much money did she contribute to the Foundation each of the last several years.  From the wikileaks documents it appears the Clintons not only were not giving their own money to heir foundation, but that they were using it as a means of getting contributors to poney up more than $60 MILLION paid directly to Bill.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on November 10, 2016, 06:13:57 pm
Calling a huge portion of the electorate "deplorables" was a "New Coke" level bad idea.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 06:28:42 pm
Hillary was the Bob Dole of the Democratic Party.  "Hey, she deserves it.  Let her give a shot."

Sort of.  It was carefully engineered by the Clinton machine to seem that way.  "Why I never considered running for office in New York.  Do you really think I should?  Well, I guess so. . . ."  A total load of horseshit.  My own personal opinion is that she stuck with Bill *because* she wanted to run for president and was just waiting for her turn.  I could be wrong about that, though.

Part of why people hate her is she does a crappy job of covering up what a shrewd politician she is.

Her flaws as candidate and campaign are just part of the perfect storm that conspired to give us Trump as president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 10, 2016, 06:47:28 pm
Here you go, Trump voters.  Here's your chance to celebrate.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/under-the-dome/article113915898.html (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/under-the-dome/article113915898.html)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 10, 2016, 07:01:30 pm
Jes, anyone who takes you off ignore long enough to argue with you is also a rube.
I'm going to assume Jes replied to one of my posts with his usual one-sided nonsense.  Your advice to not override his ignore status is correct.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ray on November 10, 2016, 07:09:59 pm
Ouch.  Names hurt. 

So some think folks shouldn't vote if you don't agree with who got their vote?  Wow.  No comment.

I think a lot of folks who voted Trump were looking at supreme Court and perhaps undoing some of Obamas more damaging stuff in addition to not thinking much of Hillary. If both candidates are bad, then look for other reasons to elect one.   It doesn't have to be because I'm a racist or a rube or any of the other stuff you care to label me. 
 

I didnt enter this to have some huge debate and be ridiculed but some of the labels are so inaccurate and ill informed some people here are painting half the country with, I ended up posting and probably shouldn't have because no good will come of it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 10, 2016, 07:23:58 pm
[quote author=DelMarFan link=topic=96.msg297036#msg297036 date=1478818673
She's spent her whole career championing the rights of children.  Donald Trump champions himself.  The Clinton Foundation (which she actually took flack for) does great charity work around the world.  The Donald Trump Foundation (to which he doesn't even contribute) appears to benefit primarily Donald Trump.  The list goes on.  It is well documented
[/quote]

The Clinton Foundation does very little actual charity work.

It donates money to The Clinton Health Initiative. There isn't a website for what this actually does.

It donates money to the Clinton Health Access Initiative. They negiotiate with companies to get low cost HIV medications. They could buy the medicine, but they don't. The lowest percentage goes to this.

They donate money to Clinton Library. I'm not sure how this is consider charity work. If you take out the overhead and the money that goes to the Clinton Library and assume that the Clinton Health Initiative is an actual charity, then less than 80% of the money goes to charity work, which is a pretty crappy percentage. This isn't Jimmy Carter and Habit for Humanity.

Clinton and Trump are two sides of the same coin. If he does something stupid he'll lose the congress and grid lock will happen. Hopefully he'll do a better job. If not it is another 4 years of doing nothing about our nations problems. Much like it was been since Clinton and the congress quit working with each other.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 10, 2016, 07:30:51 pm
Why?

And if they attempt to do so, do you send in federal troops, a la Lincoln, which started a civil war resulting in the death of one of every twenty people in the country?

The civil war started when South Carolina fired upon Federal troops in Fort Sumpter.  Since you know everything, you must know that.  Of course, facts mean nothing to you unless they support your agenda of the day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 10, 2016, 07:35:40 pm

For me personally, the moral part of it matters.  I think it's important that the president is someone that kids can look up to. 


I made quite a few enemies among conservatives when I criticized them for wanting to impeach Bill Clinton for his sexual preditory actions against a young intern.  I have no idea how old you are, but if you were an adult at that time, I assume you were calling for his impeachment along with them.  If so, then you are truly a consistent person.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 08:45:37 pm
I made quite a few enemies among conservatives when I criticized them for wanting to impeach Bill Clinton for his sexual preditory actions against a young intern.

Hmmm.... I don't recall that being among the articles of impeachment.  Could you perhaps point it out to me?  Just to make it easy:

Article I: States that in his conduct while President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has willfully corrupted and manipulated the judicial process of the United States for his personal gain and exoneration, impeding the administration of justice, in that William Jefferson Clinton swore to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before a Federal grand jury of the United States. States that contrary to that oath, William Jefferson Clinton willfully provided perjurious, false and misleading testimony to the grand jury.

Article II: States that in his conduct while President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has willfully corrupted and manipulated the judicial process of the United States for his personal gain and exoneration, impeding the administration of justice in that William Jefferson Clinton willfully provided perjurious, false and misleading testimony as part of a Federal civil rights action brought against him.

Article III: States that in his conduct while President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, and has to that end engaged personally, and through his subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or scheme designed to delay, impede, cover up, and conceal the existence of evidence and testimony related to a Federal civil rights action brought against him in a duly instituted judicial proceeding.

Article IV: States that using the powers and influence of the office of President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has engaged in conduct that resulted in misuse and abuse of his high office, impaired the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, and contravened the authority of the legislative branch and the truth seeking purpose of a coordinate investigative proceeding, in that, as President, William Jefferson Clinton refused and failed to respond to certain written requests for admission and willfully made perjurious, false, and misleading sworn statements in response to certain written requests for admission propounded to him as part of the impeachment inquiry authorized by the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States. States that William Jefferson Clinton, in refusing and failing to respond and in making perjurious, false and misleading statements, assumed to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the sole power of impeachment vested by the Constitution in the House of Representatives and exhibited contempt for the inquiry.

States, with reference to each article of impeachment, that: (1) in so doing, William Jefferson Clinton has undermined the integrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the Presidency, has betrayed his trust as President, and has acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States; and (2) William Jefferson Clinton, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.


Despite the Clinton team's successful spin that it was all about him having sex with Lewinsky, that actually was not involved at all.  Had he done everything he did EXCEPT for diddling the intern, he still would have been impeached, only without the chance of spinning it the way he did he likely then would have actually been removed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 09:00:17 pm
I ended up posting and probably shouldn't have because no good will come of it.

The fact that not everyone agrees with you, or that some strongly disagree and even call you names, does not mean no good comes from a post or a discussion.  Don't let those who pis$ and moan on hearing something they don't like discourage you from trying to engage in conversation.... and if you limit yourself to exchanges which will never offend anyone, you are only going to contribute to really boring exchanges.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 09:06:20 pm
If (Trump) does something stupid he'll lose the congress and grid lock will happen.

Gridlock..... if we first kill ObamaCare and then we get gridlock so we have no other similar stupidity forced on us, I might actually end being a big fan of Trump's.

Unfortunately I suspect he will end up doing more than his share of very harmful $hit, like passing the childcare plan he tossed out there to try to win women voters.  Dems will love it, and enough Republicans would join that passage would be a near certainty.... and it would be horrible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 09:07:53 pm
The civil war started when South Carolina fired upon Federal troops in Fort Sumpter.  Since you know everything, you must know that.  Of course, facts mean nothing to you unless they support your agenda of the day.

Not really, despite the northern effort to spin it that way.  No Union troops died in the attack, and if Lincoln had not sent in troops, there would have been no war.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 09:12:13 pm
I thought about including this in my response to Jeff but didn't.  I think the government functioned well during the Clinton years.  In a lot of ways, I would like to have that kind of administration again (in terms of a congress that could work together, even a little bit).  I did not vote for his re-election, however, primarily for the reasons you are calling me on.  Asking that I called for impeachment is a bit of a stretch.  You cherry-picked from what I said, too.  It's a spectrum.  The "good person" is just part of it.

Quote
I think a lot of folks who voted Trump were looking at supreme Court and perhaps undoing some of Obamas more damaging stuff in addition to not thinking much of Hillary.

That's not what you said first, Ray.  You said something about Hillary being a worse person than Donald Trump, which is why I responded the way I did.  I'm careful about what I say.  I never said "Anyone who voted for Donald Trump is a rube," nor do I believe that.  If you're that worried about the Supreme Court, fine.  That's different.  I don't agree, but that's life.

My point is that there are a bunch of people out there who voted for Donald Trump because exactly what you said--they believe Hillary is a worse person than Donald Trump because Rush Limbaugh told them so.  They believe that that Trump cares about them and will fight to make their lives better.  They couldn't name a Supreme Court justice if their life depended on it nor come up with the real nuts and bolts of why the Supreme Court is important.  These are the rubes I'm talking about, and they tipped the election to Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 09:16:01 pm
Here you go, Trump voters.  Here's your chance to celebrate.


Neither Trump, nor any of his inner circle, have ever been associated with the Klan, nor have they invited the Klan to have any part in the campaign or celebration.  Quite a bit different from FDR, who appointed a Klansman to the Supreme Court, or Bill Clinton, who worked very closely with a Klansman in the Senate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 10, 2016, 10:25:33 pm
Most of us "rubes" have to whisper - or use similes or metaphors to have daily discussions about what is degrading our society into 3rd world status...

You seriously think we are degrading into a 3rd world status?  Have you been to a 3rd world country and actually stayed in the country.  That is just a wrong statement.  You should spend some time in one before you make that statement.  We are a spoiled society.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 10, 2016, 10:28:02 pm
The Clinton Foundation does very little actual charity work.

It donates money to The Clinton Health Initiative. There isn't a website for what this actually does.

It donates money to the Clinton Health Access Initiative. They negiotiate with companies to get low cost HIV medications. They could buy the medicine, but they don't. The lowest percentage goes to this.

They donate money to Clinton Library. I'm not sure how this is consider charity work. If you take out the overhead and the money that goes to the Clinton Library and assume that the Clinton Health Initiative is an actual charity, then less than 80% of the money goes to charity work, which is a pretty crappy percentage. This isn't Jimmy Carter and Habit for Humanity.

Clinton and Trump are two sides of the same coin. If he does something stupid he'll lose the congress and grid lock will happen. Hopefully he'll do a better job. If not it is another 4 years of doing nothing about our nations problems. Much like it was been since Clinton and the congress quit working with each other.

Where did you get your information?  This site tells a different story of the foundation:

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 10:39:54 pm
Come on, man.  Any organization called FactCheck is clearly a liberal media shill.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 10, 2016, 10:56:35 pm
Ok then point me to a place that investigated this more than just Trump saying "I've heard from some people..."

I'm willing to be educated, just not by FoxNews. Or by Trump the liar.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2016, 11:04:52 pm
sorry, left out the purple again.  Was being sarcastic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 10, 2016, 11:48:10 pm
sorry, left out the purple again.  Was being sarcastic.

It is not the name which shows its political leanings, but its origin, funding, and track record.  It is about as neutral as MSNBC.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 11, 2016, 08:18:35 am
Right Jes.  So do you suggest another independent site (at least as independent as can be in this environment)?

I'm seriously trying to get to the truth rather than spewing information from MSNBC or FoxNews because I don't fully trust either one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 11, 2016, 11:02:40 am
I can totally understand the bitterness and feelings of loss that are being felt by many on this board right now.  I felt the same way in 2008 and 2012.  I couldn't understand how people could elect a President that so differs from my own values.  I couldn't understand how someone could pick a president who sat in sermons for 20 years as his pastor berated and condemned America, a President who had many communist friends and was a big fan of Saul Alinsky.  Especially in 2012 I grieved after the election.  I barely watched the news.  I didn't want to know what was going on.  I grieved for the country I felt had turned from me.  I totally get your feelings Delmar and Grrr and others.  I felt them 4 years ago.  I won't tell you to rally behind Trump as I didn't vote for him either.  He is a blustering buffoon who isn't anywhere near as smart as he thinks he is, which may be his most dangerous fault.   I do think labeling anyone who voted for him as deplorable, racist or fill in the blank is way out of line.  Many of my non-racist, intelligent, successful, good-natured friends voted Trump.  How dare anyone label them with such things just because they disagree politically.  There were a host of reasons to vote for Trump which had nothing to do with racism, mysogeny or any other of your labels.  Are you really suggesting that more than 55 million Americans are racist idiots?  Can your narrow world view not expand enough to include the very thought that people who don't agree with you may be normal good people too?  I realize you were venting and again, I get it.  However, your comments and labels were offensive, inappropriate an quite frankly, immature.  I don't need an apology because I didn't vote for Trump, but maybe when you calm down you can see that your behavior has sunk below the very kinds of people that you condemn. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 11:14:46 am
Agreeing somewhat with Robb.  I think the irony is in the rubes.  Just doing some reading and watching some opinionated tv, and the common theory put forward at the moment is that Trump struck a nerve with all those people tired of being politically correct and considered rubes.  It's that elitist thing again.  And I see that in some of your comments.  I didn't vote for Trump.  I consider him a dumbass, but I know people who did.  I don't think they're rubes but they sure will get their backs up if you treat them that way.  Maybe the key is to not only respect people of different races and beliefs, but also of different education levels and intelligence.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 11, 2016, 11:19:34 am
My final post in this topic

Trump supporters will soon be thinking of this old adage

(http://i.quoteaddicts.com/media/q4/1317629.png)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2016, 11:28:44 am
Where did you get your information?  This site tells a different story of the foundation:

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/



https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680

Administrative Expensenses: 8.7%
Fundraising Expenseneses: 4.2%
Clinton Presidentional Center: 6.1%

They update the numbers so that comes out to 81%

The rest of the money goes to
Clinton Health Access Initative
http://www.clintonhealthaccess.org/about/

Clinton Global Initiative
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative

It sounds like they do some really neat conferences.

Clinton Climate Initiative
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative

I hope those are ok sites to use.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 11, 2016, 11:30:59 am

Are you really suggesting that more than 55 million Americans are racist idiots? . 

Yes. Actually the number of racist idiots is much higher but that's the number that showed up to vote on Tuesday.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2016, 11:35:20 am
I think that only a small minority of those who voted for Trump are racist idiots.  Most have legitimate grievances that their government has not worked well for them.  Many do not like the direction things have gone in this country in terms of social issues.  Many are looking for solutions to complex world problems that will ease their fear of terrorism.  Many feel that that rolling the dice with an unknown as President, someone who promises "change", is a better bet for them than continuing with the status quo (i.e., Hillary).

For me, Clinton's character issues are very troubling but Trump's are disqualifying.  But now that he has been elected, my hope is that most of the crazy stuff he spouted represented a strategy for winning the election that he will abandon now that it has served his purpose.  Historically, his political stances seem to have been quite moderate and I'm hopeful that he will govern that way.  Time will tell.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 11:36:05 am
Warren Buffett on President-elect Trump: 'He deserves everybody's respect'
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2016, 11:36:58 am
Trump has done nothing to earn my respect.  I hope that will change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 11:39:24 am
Trump has done nothing to earn my respect.  I hope that will change.
LOL  Mine either, but I thought Buffett's comment was interesting since he was so anti before the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 11, 2016, 11:43:23 am
I think that only a small minority of those who voted for Trump are racist idiots.  Most have legitimate grievances that their government has not worked well for them.  Many do not like the direction things have gone in this country in terms of social issues.  Many are looking for solutions to complex world problems that will ease their fear of terrorism.  Many feel that that rolling the dice with an unknown as President, someone who promises "change", is a better bet for them than continuing with the status quo (i.e., Hillary).

For me, Clinton's character issues are very troubling but Trump's are disqualifying.  But now that he has been elected, my hope is that most of the crazy stuff he spouted represented a strategy for winning the election that he will abandon now that it has served his purpose.  Historically, his political stances seem to have been quite moderate and I'm hopeful that he will govern that way.  Time will tell.



The big problem is that Trump is likely to delegate the work to a group of people that are much worse than he is.   Mike Pence is an absolute nightmare and he'll probably end up as the de facto President as soon as Trump realizes how hard the job is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2016, 11:44:35 am
The office of the Presidency does deserve respect though.  The not my President crap from both sides needs to end.  If Trump turns out to be every -ist in the book, that won't do much to distinguish him from other office holders and America survived them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 11, 2016, 11:44:39 am
It's true that a small percentage of Trump supporters are racist idiots.  Most are merely idiots.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 11, 2016, 11:50:33 am
Under the heading of Be Careful What You Ask For.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/n-kkk-group-hold-victory-parade-donald-trump-article-1.2868491
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2016, 11:54:37 am
Trump should come out with a strong, unambiguous statement about the abhorrence of racism with a specific denunciation of the Clan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 11, 2016, 11:56:22 am
Why would he start now?  He had an entire election cycle to make such a statement and didn't.  He won, he doesn't have to say anything now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 11:58:09 am
Has Jes said, "Trump is toast" yet?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dihard on November 11, 2016, 12:00:30 pm
As one of the few people on this board who is not a straight, white, male, I need to chime in.  I need to say that it terrifies me that we have put someone in the White House of the character and temperament of Trump.  But even more than that, it terrifies me what he has emboldened in others.  I feel like I know many of you.  I like and respect almost all of you, regardless of some of the things I've read in this thread that I vehemently disagree with.  (And the Bears board version of this, which I accidentally stumbled upon, actually left me unable to sleep.)  I hope you'll read this article, as it says almost exactly what I would say to each of you who supported Trump.  And lest you think the reports of people exhibiting hatefulness are being overblown by the media, I will tell you that I have already had multiple friends experience it personally, being called racial or homophobic slurs.  In a metropolitan area.  In a blue state.  I can only imagine what it is like in other parts of the country.  Thanks to those of you willing to read this, and do what you can to support your fellow Americans right now, who are scared, and not without reason to be.  I hope and pray we can heal and protect each other from the ugliest among us.

https://medium.com/@jessicashortall/voted-for-trump-i-have-only-one-plea-7d5994c7a3d1#.2bb4yrn2i 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 12:02:09 pm
heh, this Calexit and 2012's Texas threat really echo Mikhail Gorbachev's prophecy that the United States would break up just like the Soviet Union did.  My recollection is that he even had a map that showed California and a sector from North Dakota straight south through Texas as the "new nations."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2016, 12:07:24 pm
As one of the few people on this board who is not a straight, white, male, I need to chime in.  I need to say that it terrifies me that we have put someone in the White House of the character and temperament of Trump.  But even more than that, it terrifies me what he has emboldened in others.  I feel like I know many of you.  I like and respect almost all of you, regardless of some of the things I've read in this thread that I vehemently disagree with.  (And the Bears board version of this, which I accidentally stumbled upon, actually left me unable to sleep.)  I hope you'll read this article, as it says almost exactly what I would say to each of you who supported Trump.  And lest you think the reports of people exhibiting hatefulness are being overblown by the media, I will tell you that I have already had multiple friends experience it personally, being called racial or homophobic slurs.  In a metropolitan area.  In a blue state.  I can only imagine what it is like in other parts of the country.  Thanks to those of you willing to read this, and do what you can to support your fellow Americans right now, who are scared, and not without reason to be.  I hope and pray we can heal and protect each other from the ugliest among us.

https://medium.com/@jessicashortall/voted-for-trump-i-have-only-one-plea-7d5994c7a3d1#.2bb4yrn2i 

That is the approach that should be taken, thanks for posting it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2016, 12:11:52 pm
The racists and other bigots are not really of much use to Trump now.  He's smart enough to understand that denouncing them in clear terms serves his interests regardless of what he really feels.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 11, 2016, 12:15:46 pm
I don't think Trump is that smart. I think he reacts without thought and will never admit he was wrong afterward.  The more people plead with Trump to do the right thing, the more he will resist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 11, 2016, 12:20:54 pm
So in response to Robb and partly Curt.  I think that about 90% of my friends voted for Trump.  I live in Indiana.  That's what is bothering me the most.  I don't understand how my friends could vote for him.  I also believe the many things he said and did are disqualifying.  Things no other candidate could get away with.  I don't think that my friends know that I am a Democrat.  I normally try to stay away from political discussions because my parents never talked politics (probably because my Dad was a Democrat and my mom was a Republican).  I have always felt your political leaning is personal - and it is.  I'm angry that my friends don't see him as disqualifying with his behavior and beliefs and intentions.  Its disheartening.  I'm not talking policy differences which it seems that Robb felt disheartened with in 2008 and 2012.  I understand people will differ with respect to the role of the government in society.  I accept that and didn't feel this way after Bush was elected.  I respected Bush as a person, but disagreed with his policy.  That's fine. Most of my friends are very passionate about not allowing gay marriage and I'm sure that and abortion were the 2 main issues in them voting for Trump.  I believe it isn't the governments place to regulate those issues.  My problem isn't with policy (really we don't know what Trump's policy is going to be at all), but its with the man himself.  I'm embarrassed that he is the leader of our country. Mortified of his behavior and what it will do globally.  Ashamed that my kids have to watch him govern our country.

I wouldn't say that 55 million people are racist or bigots or sexists.  I would say that 55 million people do not care enough about those issues.  They care about others issues more than plain human decency. That makes me very sad.  Already hate crimes are up after Trump's election.  Those that voted for him whether they agree with his racism/sexism own that part of him too during his stint. They are essentially saying that his behavior is ok even though I know for sure they would be mortified if any of their kids behaved that way.  To me that is very hypocritical.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 11, 2016, 12:55:13 pm
I appreciate your comment Grrr, it has to be tough living among people so opposed to your viewpoints.  I will say that for all of the issues I had with Trump I had just as many with Clinton.  She didn't just look the other way as her husband ****, fondled and harassed scores of women, she threatened, bullied and destroyed the reputations of those woman for dare speaking out.  Does that no disqualify her in your mind as well?  Clinton was grossly negligent in protecting our foreign workers abroad and 4 men died because of it.  Then she stood next to their caskets and lied to their grieving families.  It takes a special kind of sadistic person to do that.  She and Bill operated a pay for play scheme with her office, growing rich through their public "service".  Hilary was fired from the Watergate commission by a democrat for lying and cheating.  There are many disqualifying actions Hilary is every bit as guilty of as Trump that could make her disqualified to run this country.  But many here were willing to look the other way because they agreed with her policies.  Sound familiar?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 01:19:36 pm
We're all over-analyzing as is the media.  Step back.  Take a deep breath.  Let's see how things sort out.  Bottom line more people, given a hobson choice, chose Trump.  Probably half his votes were not votes for him but votes against Hillary.

We simply don't have the spirit of the past.  We refuse to accept the will of the majority as expressed in the electoral system.  Happens at every level.  Hell, it happens in high school at Homecoming Queen elections.  We need to get back to basics of majority rule.  When I was younger and advising student council it was amusing how often we voted on things until the vote came out the way a few of the leaders wanted.  Seems like that's still the case.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2016, 01:21:28 pm
Grr, you might want to watch the Michael Moore Morning Joe interview.  I think he gives a reasonable explanation of Trump voters and why African Americans didn't vote in Michigan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 11, 2016, 01:52:22 pm
I've been boycotting the Homecoming dance for 40 years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 02:03:13 pm
I've been boycotting the Homecoming dance for 40 years.
You weren't elected queen either?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2016, 02:14:25 pm
Curt, if we were back to the basics of majority rule, Hillary would be President.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 02:17:03 pm
Curt, if we were back to the basics of majority rule, Hillary would be President.
That's why I said within our electoral system.

If we didn't have the electoral college, we could just let California and New York vote and see who we get.  The founders were wise to put that in, and people who espouse getting rid of it are foolish.  It would take an amendment, and I can figure 40 states who would vote no.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2016, 02:18:39 pm
I prefer the electoral college system, but it's not majority rule.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on November 11, 2016, 02:20:38 pm
I wonder how the election would have turned out if "popular vote wins" was in place before the election.  You have to think that there are many millions of people who don't vote simply because they live in a comfortably red or blue state.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 02:30:23 pm
It's a majority of the electoral votes, right?  270 is majority.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2016, 02:51:31 pm
It's a majority of something, that's true.  Just not voters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 11, 2016, 02:53:02 pm
Hmmm.... I don't recall that being among the articles of impeachment.  Could you perhaps point it out to me?  Just to make it easy:


Reading comprehension, Jes.  Did I say that was among the articles of impeachment.  I said that many conservatives wanted to impeach him for that reason.  It may surprise you to know that I had no direct conversations with a single member of the House that created the articles of impeachment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 11, 2016, 03:01:24 pm
Not really, despite the northern effort to spin it that way.  No Union troops died in the attack, and if Lincoln had not sent in troops, there would have been no war.

Despite your effort to spin it that way, the first state seceded from the union more than two months BEFORE Lincoln became president.  Would there have been a war if Lincoln had not sent in troops.  Of course not.  And there would have been no World War ll if Roosevelt had not sent troops against Japan and Germany.  By your logic, the Unites States started the war.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 11, 2016, 03:07:19 pm

My point is that there are a bunch of people out there who voted for Donald Trump because exactly what you said--they believe Hillary is a worse person than Donald Trump because Rush Limbaugh told them so.

I believe that Hillary is a much worse person than Trump, and I have not listened to a single word that Limbaugh has said in the past ten years.

But that is not the reason why I voted for Trump.  Quite simply, I voted for him because I believe that the policies I expect him to implement, (in spite of several things I am against) will on the whole be much better for the country than those that I would have expected Hillary to have implemented (or maintained).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on November 11, 2016, 03:07:50 pm
A majority rules for POTUS?  I saw a video today explaining that as two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

The Electoral College is one of the best things the forefathers put in place to select the POTUS.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 11, 2016, 04:13:01 pm
I appreciate your comment Grrr, it has to be tough living among people so opposed to your viewpoints.  I will say that for all of the issues I had with Trump I had just as many with Clinton.  She didn't just look the other way as her husband ****, fondled and harassed scores of women, she threatened, bullied and destroyed the reputations of those woman for dare speaking out.  Does that no disqualify her in your mind as well?  Clinton was grossly negligent in protecting our foreign workers abroad and 4 men died because of it.  Then she stood next to their caskets and lied to their grieving families.  It takes a special kind of sadistic person to do that.  She and Bill operated a pay for play scheme with her office, growing rich through their public "service".  Hilary was fired from the Watergate commission by a democrat for lying and cheating.  There are many disqualifying actions Hilary is every bit as guilty of as Trump that could make her disqualified to run this country.  But many here were willing to look the other way because they agreed with her policies.  Sound familiar?

Robb, I had started on a length discussion on all these points to show that I've found conflicting reports on their accuracy.  There is no doubt that Bill had sexual issues and that Hillary "attacked" the accusers.  On a personal note - after I learned of Bill's sexual misconduct, I voted for Perot.  I guess I believe that Hillary's attacks as initially believing her husband was innocent - he seemed to be very good at lying.  And it really wasn't "scores of women."  But the Watergate firing is flat out wrong if you look it up.

So the issue comes down to that there are conflicting reports on Hillary's involvement on everything she's been accused of.  But there is no confusion on Trump because we have video proof of him saying these things.  And we still don't have his tax returns!  We don't know what type of conflicts he is going to have. I just don't see Hillary's issues as damning as Trumps.  Not even close in my book and I guess that's where we should just agree to disagree.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 11, 2016, 04:49:34 pm
I wonder how the election would have turned out if "popular vote wins" was in place before the election.  You have to think that there are many millions of people who don't vote simply because they live in a comfortably red or blue state.
2016 numbers are not yet available.  Here's a chart of 2012 turnout by state.  Note that California is 41st and New York is 44th.

1. Would those not voting have done so in the same percentage as those who did?  Who's to say. 

2.  Did the non-voters not go to the polls because they knew their candidate had already lost?  Again, who's to say.

3.  Flip question 2.

(https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2013/03/chart34.jpg&w=742)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 11, 2016, 04:59:41 pm
Right Jes.  So do you suggest another independent site (at least as independent as can be in this environment)?

I'm seriously trying to get to the truth rather than spewing information from MSNBC or FoxNews because I don't fully trust either one.

Not everyone here limits their posts to spew, though quite clearly many do.

As for another site, if you find one where you have a much higher percentage to wheat to chaff, please do let me know.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 11, 2016, 05:05:02 pm
Already hate crimes are up after Trump's election.

Are you counting the hate crimes by liberals and anti-Trump protestors against anyone they think my be sympathizing with Trump, or in your mind does the hate only run in one direction?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 11, 2016, 05:05:47 pm
I don't think Trump is that smart. I think he reacts without thought and will never admit he was wrong afterward.  The more people plead with Trump to do the right thing, the more he will resist.

While that is a reasonable belief, and one I share, there is still ample room for hope.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 11, 2016, 05:11:23 pm
Reading comprehension, Jes.  Did I say that was among the articles of impeachment.  I said that many conservatives wanted to impeach him for that reason.  It may surprise you to know that I had no direct conversations with a single member of the House that created the articles of impeachment.

I never thought you did, but those were the opinions that mattered.  If you are saying you spoke to some yahoos who voiced a desire to impeach Clinton for diddling Monica, I wouldn't question that in the least, but it was NOT the reason he was impeached, and was an opinion shared by yahoos who made no difference in anything that happened.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 11, 2016, 05:13:33 pm
I wonder how the election would have turned out if "popular vote wins" was in place before the election.  You have to think that there are many millions of people who don't vote simply because they live in a comfortably red or blue state.

That's an important point, but only half of the matter.

If the election turned on who won the popular vote, campaigns, campaign stops, organization and ad spending would be vastly different.

Trump won under the rules in place at the time.  That is all that really matters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 11, 2016, 05:15:43 pm
Despite your effort to spin it that way, the first state seceded from the union more than two months BEFORE Lincoln became president.  Would there have been a war if Lincoln had not sent in troops.  Of course not.  And there would have been no World War ll if Roosevelt had not sent troops against Japan and Germany.  By your logic, the Unites States started the war.

That's an impressive cluster of contortion and non-sequitor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 11, 2016, 05:33:44 pm
And it really wasn't "scores of women."

Actually it WAS "scores of women."

In my prior life I worked in news, a career that started in 1982 with the ABC TV affiliate in Jonesboro, Arkansas, as a reporter.  One weekend I went out to cover a stop Governor Clinton was in the NW corner of the state to make announcements related to recent flood damage in the area and we were there, along with all the Little Rock and Memphis stations, all of whom had much greater familiarity with Clinton and his behavior.

As small as the station was, when I was volunteering to cover this on a weekend, I was doing it without a photographer and was shooting the story along with reporting it.  To help me out, and because I liked her company, I had my 19-year-old girlfriend (I was then 28) along with me to hold the microphone and learn a bit of the business.  She was an intern there.  She was also quite attractive.

At the conclusion of the news conference after his statement, all of the other news crews were packing up, and Clinton took two steps forward to where my girlfriend was still standing with the microphone in her outstretched hand, put his right hand right behind her right elbow at that arm still held out the mic, and then used his left hand to gently stroke the top side of her forearm, looked her gently in the eyes and cooed to her about how he had never seen her before but he knew she would have a bright future in the business because she was so attractive.

Shannon, my girlfriend was stunned.  She just sort of stammered and pulled back.  Not one of the other news people reacted at all.  To them it was simply another day covering Clinton.  They had seem him do the same sort of thing time after time.

Even before I saw him trying to hit on my girlfriend I had heard the stories about his womanizing.  Thinking that "scores" is in any way an exaggeration really underestimates just how much of a dog he was.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 11, 2016, 05:41:32 pm
Grrr, what did you find out about Clinton on Epstein's plane?  How about his trips to sex-slave island?  Perhaps Hilary should have listed her husband at the top of her deplorable list.  Trump has cheated on 3 wives which I find deplorable and morally reprehensible so what to do when you have to choose the Clintons or Trump?  I voted third party.  Others looked at the issues and voted for the policies that most closely aligned with their own.  That included people in former Obama states like Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Iowa and Wisconsin.  Did those folks become racist ignoramus's the past four years because they are the same people who put Obama in office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 11, 2016, 06:03:05 pm
Thanks for the story Jes.  If it wasn't so reprehensible, it might be funny.  I'd only heard about alleged womanizing and only found a couple of documented sexual assault, and a few sexual indiscretions which appeared to be mutual.

In reference to the "scores" comment I thought Robb was referring to the sexual assault cases against him not the total of womanizing allegations.  But that's all semantics.  He was a pig and I was disappointed I supported him the first go round.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on November 11, 2016, 06:05:43 pm
Grrr, what did you find out about Clinton on Epstein's plane?  How about his trips to sex-slave island?  Perhaps Hilary should have listed her husband at the top of her deplorable list.  Trump has cheated on 3 wives which I find deplorable and morally reprehensible so what to do when you have to choose the Clintons or Trump?  I voted third party.  Others looked at the issues and voted for the policies that most closely aligned with their own.  That included people in former Obama states like Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Iowa and Wisconsin.  Did those folks become racist ignoramus's the past four years because they are the same people who put Obama in office.

Robb, again I'm not saying those people became racist or are racist, but they are responsible for putting a racist in office and anything that goes along with that.  They have to own that aspect of his presidency good or bad or ugly they are responsible. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 11, 2016, 11:22:21 pm
Thanks for the story Jes.  If it wasn't so reprehensible, it might be funny.

Oh, it is funny, now, though at the moment I was not laughing about it.  Haven't had any contact with the old girlfriend in more than 30 years, though I sometimes wonder if she has also shared the story...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2016, 11:36:54 pm
Some excellent stats in here:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-voters-dislike/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 12, 2016, 12:07:28 am
I hope these people don't do this for a living.   http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-here-s-our-final-electoral-map-of-the-1478473458-htmlstory.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 12, 2016, 10:04:39 am
My projection wouldn't have been too much different.  I thought he would win Florida and Ohio, but I really never dreamed that he would win Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.  And I felt North Carolina was a coin toss.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 12, 2016, 11:43:09 am
One thing I am tired of hearing is that we are deeply divided nation.  How many elections have been blowouts?  Especially not involving an incumbent?  I would imagine the phrase deeply divided nation could have applied in all but a very small handfulls of elections.  Small issue I know but to me it's just lazy.  America is and will probably always be divided.  Unless we start raising children in brainwashing camps and programming them from childhood we are always going to be divided. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 12, 2016, 12:44:08 pm
One thing I am tired of hearing is that we are deeply divided nation.  How many elections have been blowouts?  Especially not involving an incumbent?  I would imagine the phrase deeply divided nation could have applied in all but a very small handfulls of elections.  Small issue I know but to me it's just lazy.  America is and will probably always be divided.  Unless we start raising children in brainwashing camps and programming them from childhood we are always going to be divided. 

We were a lot more divided in 1860 anyway.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 12, 2016, 01:10:21 pm
For the last 40 years, the election map that went county by county showed massive red area compared to smaller blue around big cities.  Even California, Washington, and Oregon are much more red than blue.  Ever since WWII, the country has gotten more urban and rural people feel left out.  Rubes, if you will.  Often I find that city folks have totally lost touch with the roots...where there food comes from, small town values, faith, etc.  There are other issues that divide us, but unlike slavery, JR, they aren't localized to a certain group of states like slavery, which it made it relatively easy to break apart and fight.  Abortion for instance.  It divides our country, but how do you have a civil war about it?  So it just tears us and polarizes us. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 12, 2016, 04:41:48 pm
One thing I am tired of hearing is that we are deeply divided nation.  How many elections have been blowouts?  Especially not involving an incumbent?  I would imagine the phrase deeply divided nation could have applied in all but a very small handfulls of elections.  Small issue I know but to me it's just lazy.  America is and will probably always be divided.  Unless we start raising children in brainwashing camps and programming them from childhood we are always going to be divided.

Have you sat in on any public school classrooms lately?

There is a real effort to do just that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 12, 2016, 04:45:29 pm
We were a lot more divided in 1860 anyway.

As Curt mentioned, it really is not so much that we are less divided than in 1860, but that the division is not divided along such easily identified political/geographic lines.  Urban/rural might come close to identifying the division, but the "urban/rural" division does not really lend itself to clean divisions of political units.

I suspect we are every bit as divided as we were in 1860.  It is just that there is much more mixing of the division.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 12, 2016, 06:56:03 pm
I think a lot of the sense of division comes from the gerrymander districts in the House. Republicans and a democratic have mostly safe congressional districts and very few swing districts. This has gutted both parties centers and it makes bipartisan bills nearly impossible. Throw in ways that liberal/conservatives can go after RINO/DINO and it really limits working across the aisle. While I think the difference between the average democrat and republican is great, in congress the gap is much, much wider.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 12, 2016, 07:26:44 pm
I think a lot of the sense of division comes from the gerrymander districts in the House. Republicans and a democratic have mostly safe congressional districts and very few swing districts. This has gutted both parties centers and it makes bipartisan bills nearly impossible. Throw in ways that liberal/conservatives can go after RINO/DINO and it really limits working across the aisle. While I think the difference between the average democrat and republican is great, in congress the gap is much, much wider.

So if the "sense of division" is greater today than in the past, is this gerrymander thing new?

(http://www.commoncause.org/states/massachusetts/news/the-original-ma-gerrymandered.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 12, 2016, 07:30:15 pm
More seriously, this is interesting -- http://www.columbia.edu/~so33/SusDev/Lecture11MinorityExample.pdf
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 12, 2016, 07:50:54 pm
So if the "sense of division" is greater today than in the past, is this gerrymander thing new?

(http://www.commoncause.org/states/massachusetts/news/the-original-ma-gerrymandered.jpg)

It isn't new. It has been greatly improved to the point where most districts are now safe Dem or Repub.  How many blue dog democrats are left?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 12, 2016, 08:16:46 pm
It isn't new. It has been greatly improved to the point where most districts are now safe Dem or Repub.  How many blue dog democrats are left?

Take a look at the pdf link I posted.  It explains a lot about why it has gotten worse, and more common, and how it leads to greater polarization.... and greater gridlock.  Of course, since I am far more concerned with what Congress does do than what it doesn't do, I don't mind gridlock nearly as much as most.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 13, 2016, 07:49:37 am
This is a thing who spent years trying to deligitimize an African American president with a crazy birth certificate conspiracy.

This a thing who called Mexicans rapists, murders, and some are probably OK.

I could copy and paste quotes that are examples of a morally bankrupt and dangerous person, but we've all seen them.

I can not forgive anyone who voted for that piece of filth. Imagine if this thing was your kids teacher.  Imagine leaving your daughter in a room with it.

This is a moral Armageddon.  An embarrassing stain for anyone who has ethics. This is the Cubs losing game 7 and then Joe Maddon complaining it's bc of the Mexican Umpire.

Don't reply with an attack on other candidates with fodder from the usual suspects; defend a son of a man who attended KKK rallies and whose demonstrated the sins of its father.  Who claims to not know who David duke is and was ok with the support of white supremacist groups.

Fu@&ing defend that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 13, 2016, 08:53:56 am
Don't reply with an attack on other candidates with fodder from the usual suspects; defend a son of a man who attended KKK rallies and whose demonstrated the sins of its father.  Who claims to not know who David duke is and was ok with the support of white supremacist groups.


Great debate strategy.  This is horrible, but now take your number reason the guy is President, the number one reason why a moral, intelligent person might have voted for him off the table because it destroys my argument.  Therefore, you can't use it because it's not fair.  One could reverse your post and plug in the many sins of the Clintons and it would read pretty much the same.  Therefore, if it is the same, then perhaps people voted for the issues instead of the person.  Of course that can't be.  It has to be that people who voted for him are rubes, bigots, racist idiots.  When you start from a place of anger and hostility; what do you expect in return?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 13, 2016, 09:10:33 am
What does Joe Buck have to do with Donald Trump?

Some on each side see only what they want to see.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2016, 09:50:33 am
In more fun political news, Senator Ben Sasse spent Saturday afternoon as an Uber driver in Lincoln.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 13, 2016, 10:55:24 am
That thing is all anger and hostility. I didn't start with it. I'm responding to it.

You can't be moral and vote for that thing. You can point to your ideology but that's not morality.  What that means is just so long as your precious issue is taken care..  @#&# women and Mexicans and Muslims and everyone but you. This thing makes hatred OK.  I didn't do that.

I am asking a simple thing: defend that thing. Take its words and defend them on their own merits.  Don't talk to me about secretary Clinton (unless you know of an innumerable racist, sexist history) .. Bc then you need to talk about Kasich.. Rubio.. Et al. Defend it.  Defend it like they were your kids grade school teacher.  You'd be cool with that type of person teaching kids, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 13, 2016, 11:24:52 am
This is a thing who spent years trying to deligitimize an African American president with a crazy birth certificate conspiracy.

This a thing who called Mexicans rapists, murders, and some are probably OK.

I could copy and paste quotes that are examples of a morally bankrupt and dangerous person, but we've all seen them.

I can not forgive anyone who voted for that piece of filth. Imagine if this thing was your kids teacher.  Imagine leaving your daughter in a room with it.

This is a moral Armageddon.  An embarrassing stain for anyone who has ethics. This is the Cubs losing game 7 and then Joe Maddon complaining it's bc of the Mexican Umpire.

Don't reply with an attack on other candidates with fodder from the usual suspects; defend a son of a man who attended KKK rallies and whose demonstrated the sins of its father.  Who claims to not know who David duke is and was ok with the support of white supremacist groups.

Fu@&ing defend that.

"This is a thing...."

You challenge others to "defend" someone you in your very first sentence brand as a "thing," a non-human, and then you repeat that in your next sentence and once more later.

There is no sincerity in your challenge when you begin it that way, and there is no actual desire to discuss issues.

I do not shy away from anything remotely resembling an argument or debate, but you made it more than clear in your very first sentence you are not interested in anything resembling that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 13, 2016, 11:28:08 am
Guess what..... the claims that Trump's election have brought a wave of hate crime against minorities is nonsense.  Imagine that.  http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/11/election-night-hijab-attack-false
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 13, 2016, 01:01:36 pm
I think we're seeing more rancor post election because almost everyone expected a Clinton win.  I tuned in to the election coverage expecting Clinton to be declared the winner as soon as a dozen polls closed.  We live in a replay and do-over society when we don't like a result.  I expect it to continue for some time.  I doubt there would have been this much rancor by Trump supporters had Clinton won; some, but not this much.  I think the Democratic Party just underestimated how disliked she is by the masses.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 13, 2016, 01:33:43 pm
That thing is all anger and hostility. I didn't start with it. I'm responding to it.

You can't be moral and vote for that thing. You can point to your ideology but that's not morality.  What that means is just so long as your precious issue is taken care..  @#&# women and Mexicans and Muslims and everyone but you. This thing makes hatred OK.  I didn't do that.

I am asking a simple thing: defend that thing. Take its words and defend them on their own merits.  Don't talk to me about secretary Clinton (unless you know of an innumerable racist, sexist history) .. Bc then you need to talk about Kasich.. Rubio.. Et al. Defend it.  Defend it like they were your kids grade school teacher.  You'd be cool with that type of person teaching kids, right?

Bitter has always been a whiny little thing, but this does seem a little extreme, even for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 01:59:42 pm
Disagree, Curt. Trump would have ranted about his "second amendment people" "doing something" about the "rigged election." There would absolutely have been protests, and given what actually happened at his rallies, perhaps much more violent protests than we're seeing now. His campaign showed a penchant for inciting violence - why in the world would we assume things would be different had he lost? Hell, even though he *WON*, so much of his public commentary has been to either continue to aggrandize himself ("Mitt called to congratulate me" "Kasich called to congratulate me" "Jeb, George W, and George HW called to congratulate me") or to continue to whine about those who disagree with him ("Professional protestors/media very unfair!" "NYT losing thousands of subscribers because of their poor coverage of me" "NYT so dishonest"). This guy and his followers were going to be noble in defeat? I don't think so - he's been a mixed bag at best in victory!

For however much Clinton is "disliked by the masses" let's not forget that Trump is disliked even more. His favorability ratings were lower, and Clinton is going to end up with at least a million more votes than him. Let's not let the electoral college obscure that fact.

Also think there's a LOT more to current protests than people simply expected Clinton to win. As mentioned before, she's going to win the popular vote by a VERY sizable margin, and many of the people who are protesting feel that Trump is personally dangerous to them. That combination of factors is leading to the "not my president" stuff that you're hearing. Had Trump not called Mexicans rapists or threatened Nazi-style registration of Muslims, had he vehemently disavowed the full-throated support of white supremacy groups, were his comments (to say nothing of the present allegations) about women not so vile, the post-election mood would be VERY different. Millions of voters legitimately FEAR what this outcome means for them. Pundits who want to boil these protests down to millennial cry babies who didn't get their way are painfully and sanctimoniously out of touch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 13, 2016, 02:07:57 pm
You may be right, tico, but most of the people I know that voted Trump were resigned to Clinton winning.

I don't think we will ever see a Republican or conservative candidate win the popular vote again.  Just too many urban voters and the number is growing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2016, 02:09:25 pm
Well if you want our country over run with Muslims when we're clearly at war with them then Hillary was your man.

The Mexicans OTOH are a different issue.

They're normally very nice, hard working, people so if they want to come here and do the jobs the rest of us don't want to do for 10 times the pay they'd get at home then God bless them.

Just make them legal and make them pay taxes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 13, 2016, 02:26:54 pm
I could care less if the country is "over run" with muslims, as long as they come here legally, and are vetted to reduce the likelihood of bringing in those who come with the intention of doing harm.  In most muslim countries, this is quite possible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 13, 2016, 03:01:05 pm
"Just make them legal and make them pay taxes."

Like Trump?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 04:16:09 pm
The vetting
...and are vetted to reduce the likelihood of bringing in those who come with the intention of doing harm.  In most muslim countries, this is quite possible.

This is already in place and happening. The vetting process for someone coming out of the Middle East takes 1-2 years to complete normally. Trump's suggestion that all immigration from the Middle East needs to stop until an appropriate vetting process is in place is nothing more than prejudice-inciting red herring.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 13, 2016, 04:31:00 pm
Yes, Tico.  It is taking place in areas where it can be done.  But there is no way to vet many of those asking for asylum from Syria.  There is literally no way to determine if a great many are who and what they say they say they are.  Those who can not be proven to be who and what they say they are should not be allowed into the country, no matter how long we have unsuccessfully tried to vet them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 04:51:58 pm
Yes, Tico.  It is taking place in areas where it can be done.  But there is no way to vet many of those asking for asylum from Syria.  There is literally no way to determine if a great many are who and what they say they say they are.  Those who can not be proven to be who and what they say they are should not be allowed into the country, no matter how long we have unsuccessfully tried to vet them.

Actually, my friend has worked extensively with the Syrian refugee population. When our elected officials suggest it is no system to vet these people, they are either ignorant or selling you an easy line for their own political gain. The truth is the system works so "well" that many have no prayer of passing, and those that do literally take YEARS.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 04:54:33 pm
You are literally more likely to be killed by the clothes you are wearing than an immigrant terrorist. That's the actual data to this point, as opposed to the inflaming and dishonest narrative that pols use to rally their base.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2016, 05:15:09 pm
Well when your wife or kids get beheaded or blown up dont come crying to me.

Truth is I've heard more Trump supporters say this is why they're behind him than for any other reason.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 05:24:03 pm
Don't let the actual facts and a vulnerable view of humanity get in the way of bigotry, Dusty.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2016, 05:24:19 pm
I see good and bad in both of them.

There's a reason I didn't vote.

I just think this is one in the "good" column for Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 05:28:23 pm
Dusty, I'm no fan of Hillary, either. The way the media simply ignored her collusion with the DNC and major news outlets to secure the Democratic nomination and influence the presidential debates was beyond shameful. The fact that she knowingly lied about Benghazi, telling the families of killed Americans that it was all due to an internet video is reprehensible. I have little doubt there are serious issues with her charity and donors gaining influence in her State Department. Both nominees were criminal and embarrassing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2016, 05:45:50 pm
I agree Tico.

I have a Filipino wife and half Filipino son and you saw my post in regards to the Mexicans so I can honestly say from the bottom of my heart that I'm not a racist.

I just don't quite believe its a great idea to be bringing the Syrians over here RIGHT NOW.

In the future if the process seems to be better then most definitely but not right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 13, 2016, 05:54:11 pm
Actually, my friend has worked extensively with the Syrian refugee population. When our elected officials suggest it is no system to vet these people, they are either ignorant or selling you an easy line for their own political gain. The truth is the system works so "well" that many have no prayer of passing, and those that do literally take YEARS.

I would be interested in hearing how they do it for refugees in Syria.  If they indeed do not allow anyone in to the country until their past has been vetted, I have no problem with it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2016, 05:56:17 pm
We live in a time where race is a serious issue.

Much more than any other time in my life and it was heavily discussed recently with the presidential debates and such and my wife said multiple times "Dusty you're not racist but you are horribly sexist".

Seeing that I hand her my paycheck every week and never tell her what she can and can't do or buy I'm not sure "horribly" quite fits but with my good ol' Southern Baptist background I'm sure she's right to an extent.

Guess that's why I'm not heartbroke that Trump won even if I may think he's unfit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 13, 2016, 06:07:09 pm
Your wife is done with you the instant she gets her green card.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2016, 06:14:20 pm
LMFAO

She's been here for 28 years.

She's adopted.

She's more Southern than me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 13, 2016, 06:18:17 pm
Don't confuse Cletus with facts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2016, 06:22:49 pm
Just to show you all the mindset of my wife I didn't vote but she did.

She's not one bit upset by who won.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 13, 2016, 07:04:32 pm
Quote
You are literally more likely to be killed by the clothes you are wearing than an immigrant terrorist. That's the actual data to this point, as opposed to the inflaming and dishonest narrative that pols use to rally their base.

Quote
Truth is I've heard more Trump supporters say this is why they're behind him than for any other reason.

Rubes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2016, 07:10:04 pm
Trump on 60 minutes seemed to have lost some of the swagger and seemed more reasonable. I hope that is the Trump that shows up to the White House.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 08:37:55 pm
I would be interested in hearing how they do it for refugees in Syria.  If they indeed do not allow anyone in to the country until their past has been vetted, I have no problem with it.

Dave, I personally am not intimately familiar with the process, but you don't have to search very hard to find multiple articles on the subject. Here's one that overviews the basics:

http://time.com/4116619/syrian-refugees-screening-process/

The gist of it is that refugees are first vetted by UNHCR, a process that often takes more than a year. After passing UNHCR's extensive background checks, interviews, biometric scans against known databases, etc., they then have to go through screening on the US side of things, because we're not going to take UNHCR's word. And if the refugees are Syrian, the US uses even tighter screening measures.

The notion that the screening process is a dangerous sieve by which terrorists are coming into the country is a vile lie that scheming pols have used to grossly manipulate a willfully ignorant voting population.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 08:48:50 pm
This article goes into much more detail:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/cosmostheinlost/2015/11/19/exclusive-longtime-immigration-lawyer-pastor-explains-the-refugee-process/

Trump's lies about immigration are some of the most hurtful he has spoken, as they damage not a political opponent, but the ability of another human being to flee absolute hell and come to the country that holds up the Statue of Liberty as one of its icons.

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 13, 2016, 08:54:13 pm
For however much Clinton is "disliked by the masses" let's not forget that Trump is disliked even more. His favorability ratings were lower, and Clinton is going to end up with at least a million more votes than him. Let's not let the electoral college obscure that fact.

You can try to twist and explain and justify, though efforts to do any of them involve more projection than they involve actual knowledge.  There is little more we actually know beyond one simple thing, and let's not let the demonstrations obscure that fact -- Trump won.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 13, 2016, 09:09:50 pm
Actually, my friend has worked extensively with the Syrian refugee population. When our elected officials suggest it is no system to vet these people, they are either ignorant or selling you an easy line for their own political gain.

The word that there was no effective vetting process in place did not come from "our elected officials," but from multiple Obama administration appointees.

 Jeh Johnson, the head of Homeland Security, has said that “we’re not going to know a whole lot” about Syrian refugees. FBI Director James Comey told Congress that the FBI cannot adequately check the backgrounds of Syrian refugees because the necessary records do not exist. Former FBI director James Kallstrom said the refugee policy was “crazy.”....  Assistant director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, Michael Steinbach, said of the vetting process that “it’s not even close to being under control.” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan and NCTC Director Nicholas Rasmussen have made similar statements.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 09:26:27 pm
Also, Dave, in case you're wondering, the "more likely to be killed by your clothes" isn't a pithy comment. It's actually true. Here's a superficial story reporting on extensive research by the Cato Institue (study linked in web article) on the likelihood of death-by-immigrant-terrorist.

http://www.vox.com/2016/9/13/12901950/terrorism-immigrants-clothesHere's
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 13, 2016, 10:35:42 pm
Tico - thanks for the article.  I appreciate the help.

First, let me start by saying that I do not believe that refugee groups make up a substantial threat to the general population of the United States beyond that which already exists, for no other reason than I believe that if a terrorist wants to come here, there are so many ways that he could come here that there would be no reason to go through the process.

However, that said, the article you cited does very little to quell the fears of anyone that is concerned about them.

The fact that a refugee can not be guaranteed entry to the United States would seem rather unimportant, since the entire west is a target for terrorists.  If they wanted to go through the refugee process, they would probably be equally satisfied with going to Germany or France as the United States.k

The article entirely glosses over the vetting process itself.  It would seem to me that if a terrorist were to go through the process, it would be quite easy to go through an interview process.  In a previous life I spent a lot of time in Syria and Turkey purchasing spices grown in the area.  Even during time of peace, I can not conceive of a way to independently verify if a person came from a particular town,  went to a particular school, what kind of associations he had with various groups, whether he had spent time in an army, militia, etc.  What mosque he might have attended and what was taught in those mosques, who were his associates, etc, which I would expect to be the core of any "vetting"

As I said, I see very little danger in refugees, even those from Syria.  But I don't think it is fair to look down on those who legitimately believe that actual vetting can not be conducted in a third world country that has been in revolution for a decade.  If you believe that terrorists would want to come through the refugee system, it is not unrealistic to believe that the current vetting system would not stop them.

One large problem with our political (and social) system is that each side tends to dismiss the views of others, rather than understand and refute them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 13, 2016, 11:00:00 pm
The article from Patheos goes into some detail about the process from an immigration attorney. As I personally know people involved in the process, all I can say is their opinion backed by their expertise means significantly more than at-a-distance speculation. The people on the ground actually conducting the vetting say it works, and the data completely backs them up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 13, 2016, 11:37:32 pm
Quote
Trump on 60 minutes seemed to have lost some of the swagger and seemed more reasonable. I hope that is the Trump that shows up to the White House.

I couldn't bring myself to watch, but I certainly hope that this is true.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 13, 2016, 11:43:58 pm
Also, Dave, in case you're wondering, the "more likely to be killed by your clothes" isn't a pithy comment. It's actually true. Here's a superficial story reporting on extensive research by the Cato Institue (study linked in web article) on the likelihood of death-by-immigrant-terrorist.

http://www.vox.com/2016/9/13/12901950/terrorism-immigrants-clothesHere's

Sorry, tico, and not really wanting to let facts, logic or math get in the way of what you think is at least a pithy comment, but you are wrong when you write, "You are literally more likely to be killed by the clothes you are wearing than an immigrant terrorist."

The error is more than just a grammatical one in the wrong tense of the verb "are."  The reason for the choice of the present tense "are" is to suggest that the data of what has happened up to this point is meaningfully predictive of what will happen in the future if we continue to allow immigrants to enter under the same policies we have.  That is an exceedingly foolish assumption.  In other words the error would not appear to be innocent, but instead to be deliberately misleading.

Neither you, I, davep, the CATO Institute, nor the liberal hack who writes for vox.com who made the claim you repeat know what the odds of death by terrorist in the future WILL BE.  We can only look at what the odds in the past HAVE BEEN.  The analyst with CATO knew this, which is why he wrote that "From 1975 through 2015, the chance of an American being murdered by a foreign-born terrorist was 1 in 3,609,709 a year," using the correct verb tense "was."  The hack with vox.com seemed to miss that.

While neither you, I, davep, the CATO Insititute, nor the liberal hack writer with vox.com know what the odds WILL BE in the future, particularly if ISIL does as it has promised, or as we have seen it do in European nations, it does stand to reason that the odds will be higher if we as a nation have lax to no vetting of immigrants than if we have heightened scrutiny.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 13, 2016, 11:58:34 pm
Don't let the actual facts and a vulnerable view of humanity get in the way of bigotry, Dusty.

You don't really think he was waiting for your permission, do you?

I see good and bad in both of them.

There's a reason I didn't vote.

Whatever the reason, we are thankful for it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 14, 2016, 10:01:40 am
I couldn't bring myself to watch, but I certainly hope that this is true.

Some of the highlights
- Going to repeal Obamacare and keep the parts that people like.  I'll be interested to see how this is going to work, because it likely will send prices soaring.
- Still going to build a wall, but parts might be a fence.  Frank Luntz tweeted that building a wall on the Mexican boarder would take 3x more concrete than the Hoover Dam
- Only going to deport illegals with criminal records at the start.  Trump estimated the number at 2-3 million (I'm not sure where he came up with that number).  The rest would be TBD after the boarder was secure. 
- Bannon as an adviser worries me, but at least he wasn't the Chief of Staff. I took away that a lot of what he said in the campaign will be on the table.  I could be wrong.  I didn't vote for the guy, but I hope for the countries sake he doesn't govern like the Alt-Right wants him too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 14, 2016, 10:22:48 am
Quote
Bannon as an adviser worries me, but at least he wasn't the Chief of Staff. I took away that a lot of what he said in the campaign will be on the table.  I could be wrong.  I didn't vote for the guy, but I hope for the countries sake he doesn't govern like the Alt-Right wants him too.

Yeah that scares the crap out of me too.  Bannon is really bad news.  Whatever argument there might be that Hillary has as bad or worse character than Trump, she certainly does not have worse character than Bannon, and it looks like he has a powerful position in Trump's administration. 

Like you said, at least Bannon isn't Chief of Staff, but it certainly sounds like he has a John Ehrlichman type role in Trump's administration, and that's bad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 14, 2016, 10:31:52 am
Bannon is the only move that concerns me so far.  Knowing he would back off a lot on the wall, Obamacare, deportation, and everything else was a given.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 14, 2016, 10:56:46 am
Interesting.  Before he was appointed yesterday (or the day before) I had never heard of him (I assume I have heard his name on some newscast or other, but nothing that caused it to stick).  The only thing I have heard about him since then is that he works for Breitbart, which doesn't help a lot since I have never read Breitbart and no nothing about it other than that Otto doesn't like them.

Can someone point to impartial information about him?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 14, 2016, 11:10:50 am
Bannon is a smart guy.  Ivy League school and a graduate degree in economics.  He worked with Goldman Sacs.  From there he made a documentary with Michelle Buchanan.  He used a few more conservatives to get into Palin's inner circle.  After Palin he became friends with Breitbart and took over Breitbart media after his death.  Breitbart was then turned into two things 1) Alt-right jumping off point and 2) Trump media.  There is an open question of how much he is using the alt-right vs him really believing in it.  It does seem that wants to turn the Republican party into a more European conservative movement, which would have a much different feel than the current Republican party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 14, 2016, 12:44:06 pm
Irony: the Electoral College was originally set up by the Founders, not only so larger and more populous states could not control the other states and dominate the election, but also by putting in that extra step, it would make it harder for the rubes to get control and the elites could maintain control because the college would be a buffer.  Damn Elites.  Damn Rubes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 14, 2016, 01:55:48 pm
It does seem that wants to turn the Republican party into a more European conservative movement, which would have a much different feel than the current Republican party.

Can you give a short description of a European conservative movement?  It is another term that I haven't heard.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 14, 2016, 02:18:32 pm
It is a far more populist movement with a large amount of racial bigotry thrown in.

This would be an example, UKIP is another

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Front_(France)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 14, 2016, 04:49:45 pm
Can you give a short description of a European conservative movement?

The NAZI's were a European conservative movement.... and much of the alt-right would be very comfortable there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 14, 2016, 05:37:01 pm
Who is the alt-right, and what do they have in common with the NAZIs?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 14, 2016, 06:10:10 pm
Who: People who get endorsed by Nazis
In common with: Nazis
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 14, 2016, 06:19:43 pm
And I anticipate a possible next question, "what do Nazis stand for?"

This is starting to remind me of Harry Belefonte's old song, "Hole in the Bucket". 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 15, 2016, 11:00:01 am
Who is the alt-right, and what do they have in common with the NAZIs?

Dave, I was looking up some stuff on why I strongly oppose Bannon and to answer your alt-right question. 

And then I came across this article straight from the leaders of the alt-right movement themselves, and I think this answers everything.

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/

Basically this article admits that alt-right is a cultural movement that's more into white identity politics than economic conservatism. 

Quote
In fairness, many establishment conservatives aren’t keen on this stuff either — but the alt-right would argue that they’re too afraid of being called “racist” to seriously fight against it. Which is why they haven’t. Certainly, the rise of Donald Trump, perhaps the first truly cultural candidate for President since Buchanan, suggests grassroots appetite for more robust protection of the western European and American way of life.

Alt-righters describe establishment conservatives who care more about the free market than preserving western culture, and who are happy to endanger the latter with mass immigration where it serves the purposes of big business, as “cuckservatives.”

Halting, or drastically slowing, immigration is a major priority for the alt-right. While eschewing bigotry on a personal level, the movement is frightened by the prospect of demographic displacement represented by immigration.

The alt-right do not hold a utopian view of the human condition: just as they are inclined to prioritise the interests of their tribe, they recognise that other groups – Mexicans, African-Americans or Muslims – are likely to do the same.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 15, 2016, 11:08:37 am
CBJ, I actually hadn't quite appreciated the idea that the alt-righter's and people like Bannon were trying to move the Republican party to a UKIP style party (or the French New Right like like Marine Le Pen) until you mentioned it and until I read that article. 

I guess I also always viewed the alt-right as racist uneducated people or radio, internet and TV hosts profiting off of those people.  I actually didn't realize Bannon was an Ivy Leaguer until you mentioned it, and after reading that article, I think Milo Yiannopoulos is right in describing his alt-right crowd as "dangerously bright". 

I'm even more glad I voted against Donald Trump now that I'm learning more about these people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 15, 2016, 11:14:48 am
Interesting.  Before he was appointed yesterday (or the day before) I had never heard of him (I assume I have heard his name on some newscast or other, but nothing that caused it to stick).  The only thing I have heard about him since then is that he works for Breitbart, which doesn't help a lot since I have never read Breitbart and no nothing about it other than that Otto doesn't like them.

Can someone point to impartial information about him?

And in addition to the above, here are a few other reasons why I think Bannon is a scumbag, some of which you might agree or disagree with.

For starters, some Breitbart editors feel Trump provided financial backing to Breitbart to basically turn it into his propaganda arm.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/breitbart-staffers-believe-trump-has-given-money-to-site-for?utm_term=.bi2evqeLn#.vbd6p86zE (https://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/breitbart-staffers-believe-trump-has-given-money-to-site-for?utm_term=.bi2evqeLn#.vbd6p86zE)

Here's an article from CNN Money with some of Breitbart's most incendiary headlines since it became the trumpet site for the alt-right.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/14/media/breitbart-incendiary-headlines/ (http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/14/media/breitbart-incendiary-headlines/)

Breitbart coordinated with a Democratic operative to help take down Marco Rubio during the primaries.

http://www.redstate.com/patterico/2016/10/25/breitbart-reporter-proud-working-shady-democrat-operative-expose-rubio/ (http://www.redstate.com/patterico/2016/10/25/breitbart-reporter-proud-working-shady-democrat-operative-expose-rubio/)

http://www.redstate.com/joesquire/2016/10/24/breitbart-news-worked-alongside-leftist-activist-attack-conservatives/ (http://www.redstate.com/joesquire/2016/10/24/breitbart-news-worked-alongside-leftist-activist-attack-conservatives/)

Breitbart kept up a major false narrative in Paul Ryan's primary race that he was in the "fight of his life" and kept pumping up his Trump style primary opponent.  Ryan, of course, wound up winning that primary with 84% of the vote.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/19/desperate-paul-ryan-floods-wisconsin-airwaves-misleading-television-ads/ (http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/19/desperate-paul-ryan-floods-wisconsin-airwaves-misleading-television-ads/)

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/09/good-soul-paul-ryan-bows-populism-career-flashes-eyes/ (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/09/good-soul-paul-ryan-bows-populism-career-flashes-eyes/)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 15, 2016, 12:06:45 pm
CBJ, I actually hadn't quite appreciated the idea that the alt-righter's and people like Bannon were trying to move the Republican party to a UKIP style party (or the French New Right like like Marine Le Pen) until you mentioned it and until I read that article. 

I guess I also always viewed the alt-right as racist uneducated people or radio, internet and TV hosts profiting off of those people.  I actually didn't realize Bannon was an Ivy Leaguer until you mentioned it, and after reading that article, I think Milo Yiannopoulos is right in describing his alt-right crowd as "dangerously bright". 

I'm even more glad I voted against Donald Trump now that I'm learning more about these people.

I think it is going to be a realllllllllllllllly interesting 4 years.  One one side you will have the Tea Party which is the smaller governement on the other will be the Trumpkins which want massive spending, protecting social spending.  I just can't see how they work together, unless the Tea Party folds.  Eventually, I think one of Prebius or Bannon will win out.  If Prebius ends up staying then the Ryan wing of the Republican wins and I feel ok with a Trump Presidency.  If Bannon wins then poop. 

The alt right is scary because they are smart.  They can hit enough conservative notes that people won't notice all the other crap that they stand for.  I'm quite happy with my vote for Johnson and if the Republicans continue down this path, then I have a feeling I will be voting for a lot more 3rd party people at the presidential level.  I'll stay registered a Republican to be able to vote for local primaries, but if the Trump wing takes over then I'm out too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 15, 2016, 02:15:52 pm
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37985967
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 15, 2016, 02:24:24 pm
"Pamela Ramsey Taylor, who runs a local non-profit group in Clay County, referred to the first lady as an "ape".
"It will be refreshing to have a classy, beautiful, dignified first lady in the White House. I'm tired of seeing a Ape in heels," she said.

Ms Taylor told local news outlet WSAZ, which first carried the story, that she acknowledged her Facebook post could be "interpreted as racist, but in no way was intended to be", and that she was expressing a personal opinion on attractiveness, not the colour of a person's skin."

I mean that seems possible.  I am also purple impaired.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 15, 2016, 02:27:18 pm
"Pamela Ramsey Taylor, who runs a local non-profit group in Clay County, referred to the first lady as an "ape".
"It will be refreshing to have a classy, beautiful, dignified first lady in the White House. I'm tired of seeing a Ape in heels," she said.

Ms Taylor told local news outlet WSAZ, which first carried the story, that she acknowledged her Facebook post could be "interpreted as racist, but in no way was intended to be", and that she was expressing a personal opinion on attractiveness, not the colour of a person's skin."I mean that seems possible.  I am also purple impaired.

That isn't racist like "While eschewing bigotry on a personal level, the movement is frightened by the prospect of demographic displacement represented by immigration," isn't a racist sentiment either by the alt-right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 15, 2016, 02:32:50 pm
JR, I'm confused. Are you saying that referring to the First Lady as an Ape is not racist? I can't imagine that's what you are saying...but I'm unclear on your meaning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 15, 2016, 02:36:12 pm
Oh wait, I think I understand. Carry on the good work!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 15, 2016, 02:40:06 pm
Oh wait, I think I understand. Carry on the good work!

Yeah I need to learn how to use purple myself . . .
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 15, 2016, 02:43:43 pm
Bannon has supporters.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/305912-kkk-american-nazi-party-praise-trumps-hiring-of-bannon
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 15, 2016, 02:50:18 pm
My mother-in-law, a 92 year old holocaust survivor and a US citizen for over 65 years, is frightened for her (and our) safety for the first time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 15, 2016, 04:17:19 pm
Even the backwoods hillbilly knows you can't call blacks "apes".

Lol
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 15, 2016, 04:44:25 pm
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/white-supremacist-groups-love-stephen-bannon-article-1.2873208

“The racist, fascist extreme right is represented footsteps from the Oval Office,” Republican operative John Weaver, who managed John Kasich’s presidential bid, tweeted. “Be very vigilant, America.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 15, 2016, 04:53:32 pm
"Pamela Ramsey Taylor, who runs a local non-profit group in Clay County, referred to the first lady as an "ape".
"It will be refreshing to have a classy, beautiful, dignified first lady in the White House. I'm tired of seeing a Ape in heels," she said.

Ms Taylor told local news outlet WSAZ, which first carried the story, that she acknowledged her Facebook post could be "interpreted as racist, but in no way was intended to be", and that she was expressing a personal opinion on attractiveness, not the colour of a person's skin."

I mean that seems possible.  I am also purple impaired.

It make sense for those in Clay County, West Virginia, to be upset by this.... all 9,386 (according to the last census).

The rest of us.... not so much.  It is an utterly insignificant backwater effecting no one.

When you have to look for something said by someone in Clay County, West Virginia, in order to get offended, you are working too hard at being offended.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 15, 2016, 05:03:53 pm
Who's offended?  You are the only person who appears agitated. Simply passing on interesting tidbits others might have missed.

For instance, did you know that North Korea is asking China to quit calling the fat little kid with nucs, fat?

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/11/15/north-korea-begs-china-to-stop-calling-kim-jong-un-fat.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 15, 2016, 09:00:29 pm
Who's offended?  You are the only person who appears agitated

You do understand that "offended" and "agitated" are different words for a reason.... don't you?

Assuming that I am agitated by the posts of others here about the comment (which I am not), that would not mean I am offended by the comment from someone I do not know, in a place I have never heard of (which I am not), which not only makes no difference to me, it is a comment which will not actually cause any harm to anyone in any way.... other than those who wake up in the morning eager to find the next opportunity to be offended.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 15, 2016, 10:24:48 pm
Obviously not a KKK or Nazi endorsed move.  Good for you Donald. (Although might be against the nepotism law.)

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/donald-trump-requests-security-clearance-son-law-jared-kushner-n684491
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 16, 2016, 11:45:44 am
That is an issue that I have never heard discussed.  I can't imagine that the President's wife does not become privy to a lot of secret information.  Is she given a security clearance. 

For that matter, does the President require a security clearance?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 16, 2016, 12:48:19 pm
Of course the President requires a clearance. And anyone with a clearance knows better than to divulge information to their spouse, unless, of course, said spouse also has a clearance AND A NEED TO KNOW.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 16, 2016, 12:51:55 pm
Which brings up the case of Hillary Clinton.  Part of her "defense" was that she didn't realize classified data was not being handled properly.  Clinton had a clearance and was therefor responsible for the proper dissemination of classified data. At that point ignorance is no longer a real excuse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 16, 2016, 03:25:26 pm
Those who were on the board back in about 2010 might well remember discussions concerning how soon the world would run out of oil.  The general prediction at that time was about 30 years, although there were some that predicted that extracting oil from shale deposits could double that.

Currently, proven world reserves are estimated at about 100 years, factoring into account the increase of usage through the years.  Mostly because of the oil fields coming on line in Wyoming, North and South Dakota.

Today, the Geological Survey announced the discovery in Texas that is the largest oil discovery ever in the United States, estimated to be a minimum of triple the size of the deposits in Wyoming, North and South Dakota.  Even more important, the cost of extraction, estimated to be on average about 50 dollars per barrel in the north are expected to be about half that in West Texas.  With this discovery, proven oil supplies are now expected to be 300 years or more.

"The U.S. Geological Survey has made its largest discovery of recoverable crude ever under parts of West Texas, the federal agency announced Tuesday.

A recent assessment found the "Wolfcamp shale" geologic formation in the Midland area holds an estimated 20 billion barrels of accessible oil along with 16 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 1.6 billion barrels of natural gas liquids. That's three times higher than the amount of recoverable crude the agency found in the Bakken-Three Forks region in the upper midwest in 2013, making it "the largest estimated continuous oil accumulation that USGS has assessed in the United States to date," according to a statement.

“The fact that this is the largest assessment of continuous oil we have ever done just goes to show that, even in areas that have produced billions of barrels of oil, there is still the potential to find billions more,” said Walter Guidroz, program coordinator for the USGS Energy Resources Program.

Guidroz attributed that potential to "changes in technology" — i.e., the advent and perfection of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling. Such advances "can have significant effects on what resources are technically recoverable," he said.

The announcement comes the same day the U.S. Energy Information Administration said that U.S. drilling activity has become "increasingly concentrated in the Permian Basin," the ancient seabed teeming with hydrocarbons that spans West Texas and southeastern New Mexico. That's even as crude prices have remained in the lower, $40- to $50-per-barrel range.

"The Permian now holds nearly as many active oil rigs as the rest of the United States combined, including both onshore and offshore rigs, and it is the only region in EIA’s Drilling Productivity Report where crude oil production is expected to increase for the third consecutive month," according to the energy administration.

During the oil downturn, the Permian Basin has remained one the most active oil fields in the United States.

That's because extracting fossil fuels from the ground is cheaper to do there than in other places, independent oil producer Don McClure told the Tribune this summer. That means it is generally the last place producers leave and the first place they return to when prices plummet, he said, noting Permian wells also produce for decades longer on average than those in other regions."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 16, 2016, 03:26:40 pm
Of course the President requires a clearance.

Which brings up an obvious question.  What if the President didn't meet the requirements to get a clearance?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 16, 2016, 03:58:26 pm
Beats me. 

I know that the investigators pay close attention to social media. They also take a very dim view of past bankruptcies.  BUT...Although no one would ever admit it,  the rules are obviously different for politicians.  If I had operated an open classified server, I'd be in jail.  Hillary got to run for President.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 16, 2016, 10:31:18 pm
Of course the President requires a clearance. And anyone with a clearance knows better than to divulge information to their spouse, unless, of course, said spouse also has a clearance AND A NEED TO KNOW.

I think Hillary pretty much demolished the idea that anyone with a clearance would "know better" of much of anything.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 16, 2016, 10:36:07 pm
Those who were on the board back in about 2010 might well remember discussions concerning how soon the world would run out of oil.  The general prediction at that time was about 30 years, although there were some that predicted that extracting oil from shale deposits could double that.

I was around then, and likely took part in any such discussion, but I genuinely don't remember it.  I know I have taken part in several such discussions over the years, and generally forget all of them fairly quickly because the position the world will soon "run out of oil" are so patently absurd that it is just hard to credit them with enough merit to commit them to memory.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 16, 2016, 10:38:27 pm
"I think Hillary pretty much demolished the idea that anyone with a clearance would "know better" of much of anything."

That statement is about 100% incorrect. "Anyone with a clearance" does know better, including Hillary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 17, 2016, 04:47:43 am
And we get plenty of reminders - and annual refresher training
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 17, 2016, 07:50:10 am
A lot has changed since the Walker family fiasco.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 17, 2016, 08:27:22 am
And we get plenty of reminders - and annual refresher training

Except that Hillary apparently blew her training off.  After all, you don't need it when the rules don't really apply to you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 17, 2016, 09:22:08 am
A lot has changed since the Walker family fiasco.

What was the Walker family fisaco?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 17, 2016, 09:56:50 am
https://news.usni.org/2014/09/02/john-walker-spy-ring-u-s-navys-biggest-betrayal
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 17, 2016, 10:35:43 am
https://news.usni.org/2014/09/02/john-walker-spy-ring-u-s-navys-biggest-betrayal
Powers Boothe did a great job in the movie

https://www.amazon.com/Family-Spies-Powers-Boothe/dp/B00BBONM4U
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 17, 2016, 12:11:25 pm
I had heard of John Walker, but had not heard it referenced as the Walker Family Fiasco.

I was stationed in the Air Force Security Service base (the Air Force electronic spy arm) in Misawa Japan in the 1970s.  I was in purchasing, and had nothing to do with security or spy functions, but as a staff member I was not only allowed, but required to attend a security briefing every Tuesday morning.  At the time, it dealt with what was going on in Viet Nam, and even then I was surprised that so much classified information was given to so many support officers that had absolutely no reason to hear it.  I knew that since then, much of this was changed, but I do not know to what extent.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 17, 2016, 01:21:40 pm
I was in the Navy in the 80s - it was a daily topic of discussion for us
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 17, 2016, 02:00:09 pm
Over the last 20 years I've seen things get better and worse. For instance:

Better: Information became highly compartmentalized. A top secret clearance did not mean you had the need to know. There were entire projects/hallways/buildings completely off limits without the proper authorizations. General security briefings became rare.

Worse: At some levels computing moved from individual to centralized. More efficient and reliable but it also meant that system administrators, being able to access all data, became super security risks. I used to tell my bosses that their #1 security risk was ME. They used to laugh at that...until Snowden happened, that is. I'm retired now and I do not miss the extra scrutiny; the monthly polygraphs, the drug tests and monitoring of social media and personal relationships.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 17, 2016, 02:45:44 pm
I wonder what percentage of what's considered classified really needs to be classified.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 17, 2016, 02:47:44 pm
My experience?  Less than one percent.

The percentage rises significantly as unclassified data is combined with other unclassified data to create classified data. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 17, 2016, 02:49:49 pm
That's even less than what I would have guessed.  But doesn't surprise me.  Also why I was somewhat less hopped up than some people about the whole email thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 17, 2016, 02:55:17 pm
Sort of my feeling, EXCEPT for the deliberate, willful aspects. People who deliberately break the rules simply because it's easier are the last people to be trusted.

Also, and this might be the most troubling, the SOS has access to lots of human intelligence.  HUMIT requires THE highest level of security.  Far above, for instance, the design of nuclear weapons. A breach in HUMIT security often leads to people losing their lives.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 17, 2016, 03:04:58 pm
Luckily, most civil servants mistrust politicians with secrets. Having the clearance and the authorized need to know does not mean you will automatically receive information.

Which is why, for instance, I have to laugh when a private citizen/real estate magnate claims he knows more about a terrorist organization than generals.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 17, 2016, 03:42:30 pm
Quote
Which is why, for instance, I have to laugh when a private citizen/real estate magnate claims he knows more about a terrorist organization than generals.

Yes.  That was no more ludicrous than any of two-score other absurd things he said while campaigning, however.  Sad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 17, 2016, 03:58:06 pm
Agreed.  And lest my criticisms of Clinton are misconstrued, she broke the rules, Trump defies logic and decency.  One is Watergate, the other is Mussolini.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 17, 2016, 04:02:15 pm
“The racist, fascist extreme right is represented footsteps from the Oval Office,” Republican operative John Weaver, who managed John Kasich’s presidential bid, tweeted. “Be very vigilant, America.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 17, 2016, 07:48:15 pm
Funny you should mention Mussolini.   On one of the history channels tonight, they were showing footage of him.  Trump in a uniform.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 20, 2016, 04:34:52 pm
(https://scontent.fsnc1-5.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15181372_1647874985505165_5796175704953621327_n.jpg?oh=4569aed30e95c037aa9b666447ad26f0&oe=58B4D1F5)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 21, 2016, 07:26:17 am
Can't fix stupid
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 26, 2016, 12:51:26 am
We've lost Fidel Castro.

Rest in peace.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on November 26, 2016, 11:49:21 am
"We"?  My condolences to Tennessee.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on November 26, 2016, 01:10:47 pm
I said that as a joke.

I was trying to watch Lockup on MSNBC and saw it or I wouldn't have even knew it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on November 26, 2016, 02:51:50 pm
I said that as a joke.
I was trying to watch Lockup on MSNBC and saw it or I wouldn't have even knew it.

Considering that FDISK probably knew that Castro hasn't been living in Tennessee, most people probably took his post as even more clearly a joke than your post.  Sometimes it is a good idea to grant others the same consideration you would like yourself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 02, 2016, 09:21:35 am
Trump is nominating Mattis as Secretary of Defense.  What are the odds of his getting the law changed to allow this?  It should be a very easy law for the Democrats to filibuster.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on December 02, 2016, 11:07:08 am
The NPR report I heard this morning suggested he has democratic support as well, so he's likely to get the waiver required.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 02, 2016, 06:26:25 pm
I am surprised at that, but I hope it is true.  He would be a good one.  But he would have to have the vote of at least 8 Democratic Senators.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 04, 2016, 04:43:35 pm
The posts on the other thread were not very informative.  What did Arrieta tweet, and who complained about it, and for what reason?  And what made it anti-semetic?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 04, 2016, 05:16:09 pm
The posts on the other thread were not very informative.  What did Arrieta tweet, and who complained about it, and for what reason?  And what made it anti-semetic?

The mindset of the folks who claimed it was anti-semitic is the only thing that made it anti-semitic.

In other words, it wasn't.

Jake Arrieta ‏@JArrieta34  Nov 9
Time for Hollywood to pony up and head for the border #illhelpyoupack #beatit
5,654 replies 27,523 retweets 56,212 likes
Reply  5.7K   Retweet  28K   
Like 56K 
 
keithlawVerified account
‏@keithlaw
@JArrieta34 candidates & politics aside, this reads to me as an anti-Semitic comment (and I'm not Jewish).


More from Law here:
Ryan: Sometimes I wonder why you invite the type of firestorm that you did yesterday with the Arrieta tweet. You had to have known what 90% of the response would be before you tweeted it, and one would presume that you felt Arrieta meant nothing malicious or anti-semitic by the tweet in the first place. Yet now, there are inevitably people out there who might think less of Arrieta based on your tweet, and as a result he might want to have a word with you at some point. And it all could have been avoided. Intent might matter to you, but it might not matter to Arrieta, if he feels like he’s defending himself against baseless charges of bigotry by random internet people who latched onto your tweet.
Klaw: Because I say what I believe and don’t worry that a bunch of idiots might yell at me for it. (I did give the Block button a big workout yesterday.) Staying silent because you fear the reaction is how we end up here....
Lars: Can you explain why you thought Arrieta’s comments were anti-Semitic? The answer is probably obvious and I’m just being naive but it wasn’t clear to me.
Klaw: “Hollywood” as a dog-whistling term for anti-Semites goes back decades. It’s the whole conspiracy-theory bit about Jews controlling Hollywood, the media, the banks, etc., the modern twist on the Wandering Jew character of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Anti-Semitism isn’t as overt as it was a generation or two ago, so a lot of folks didn’t understand why I connected that word and usage to Judaism.....
Hugo Z: That’s a real reach with Arrieta, considering that he was obviously referencing non-Jews such as Cher and Lena Dunham.
Klaw: To be absolutely clear, again, I did not say he was trying to attack Jews. I said that was how it read, because I’m familiar with the dog-whistle use of the word. If I did that, and a couple of folks said to me, hey, Keith, that word means something, I’d delete and rephrase. (FTR, I didn’t realize so many celebs did the ‘leave the country’ bit. Alec Baldwin said it in 2004 and he’s still here. I guess I just ignored those quotes when they happened.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 04, 2016, 05:19:35 pm
http://thefederalist.com/2016/11/09/16-celebrities-who-said-they-would-leave-the-country-if-trump-won/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 04, 2016, 05:24:36 pm
Thanks.

OK.  So Arrieta made a joke and Law made an idiot of himself.  Where did Epstein come into the picture?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 04, 2016, 06:11:09 pm
As the point was also made that their is a difference between Hollywood and celebrities, all of those 14 have been in Hollywood movies. Hollywood has also been used to describe celebrities in common usage, usually a slur when they become full of themselves and having nothing do with being Jewish.

Jake on twitter is mostly tweeting about Health shakes, workouts and dominating other teams.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 04, 2016, 06:24:57 pm
What did Epstein apologize for?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 04, 2016, 06:55:35 pm
He didn't unless there is another quote out there than the gm  meetings. When asked Espstein basically said he believes in the first amendment, but you have to take other peoples feelings into account.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: craig on December 05, 2016, 08:43:31 am
As the point was also made that their is a difference between Hollywood and celebrities, all of those 14 have been in Hollywood movies. Hollywood has also been used to describe celebrities in common usage.....

Thanks guys for explanation.  I had no clue, and was myself totally ignorant, that in generations past "Hollywood" had for some reason sometimes been associates with Jewish, or as a "dog-whistle" for anti-semitism.  That association apparently must exist, because reb and Keith Law both knew that.  I admit I certainly didn't, and my guess is that is a very uncommon association in the present culture.  So I think for most of us, that was indeed a "dog-whistle" that >95% of America wouldn't hear at all.  Law and reb obviously did, so presumably if they did there might be others who may have heard it also. 

Obviously for the other >95% of the culture, "Hollywood" alludes to celebrities and movie stars, the faces on grocery-store magazines, and sometimes associated with wine-women-and-song lifestyles and temptations.  Arrieta pretty obviously did not have anti-semitism in mind. 

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chgojhawk on December 05, 2016, 08:53:36 am
I am 50 years old, upper middle class, a huge Cubs fan, have a graduate degree and I am Jewish.

I have never heard "Hollywood" used as an anti-Semitic reference prior to reading posts this week. I have friends who are white sox fans who would love to find something, anything, to tarnish the Cubs right now. Guess what, I haven't heard from a single person about Jake's comment.

This seems to be a large pile of nothing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on December 05, 2016, 10:45:02 am
You need to find better friends
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 05, 2016, 01:07:34 pm
What a load of horseshit.   It isn't Jake's responsibility toresearch every possible obscure reference that may offend somebody before he's allowed to comment.   If the inference is so blatant then one wouldn't have to look it up to find it.   Political correctness run amok as usual.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on December 05, 2016, 01:36:48 pm
What a load of horseshit.   It isn't Jake's responsibility toresearch every possible obscure reference that may offend somebody before he's allowed to comment.   If the inference is so blatant then one wouldn't have to look it up to find it.   Political correctness run amok as usual.

I wouldn't say it's run amok, I'd say it's Keith Law doing Keith Law things.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 05, 2016, 05:21:39 pm
I am 50 years old, upper middle class, a huge Cubs fan, have a graduate degree and I am Jewish.

I have never heard "Hollywood" used as an anti-Semitic reference prior to reading posts this week. I have friends who are white sox fans who would love to find something, anything, to tarnish the Cubs right now. Guess what, I haven't heard from a single person about Jake's comment.

This seems to be a large pile of nothing.

I hesitate to post the link below but, on balance, it may be elucidating to some folks.  There is a ton of this kind of stuff out there, if you know where to look. Totally get that most folks here would be unaware of this.  Why should you know?  To my knowledge, nobody here is a wacko.  But, it's out there. Unfortunately, it is seeping into the mainstream a bit more these days. 

I went to Hollywood High School. Not just L.A. but the borders of Hollywood (believe me, not a glamorous neighborhood at all).  Know this territory.  Know several people on periphery of entertainment business, etc. I know about this, the code words that folks get when tell some what they do and where they live. The connection is subtle, generally, but out there. Wackos. No, don't think Arrieta knowingly made an anti-Semitic remark but think he was likely influenced by stuff out there. There is a history. You should know about it.

http://www.rense.com/general64/decon.htm
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 05, 2016, 05:51:17 pm
I hesitate to post the link below but, on balance, it may be elucidating to some folks.  There is a ton of this kind of stuff out there, if you know where to look. Totally get that most folks here would be unaware of this.  Why should you know?  To my knowledge, nobody here is a wacko.  But, it's out there. Unfortunately, it is seeping into the mainstream a bit more these days. 

I went to Hollywood High School. Not just L.A. but the borders of Hollywood (believe me, not a glamorous neighborhood at all).  Know this territory.  Know several people on periphery of entertainment business, etc. I know about this, the code words that folks get when tell some what they do and where they live. The connection is subtle, generally, but out there. Wackos. No, don't think Arrieta knowingly made an anti-Semitic remark but think he was likely influenced by stuff out there. There is a history. You should know about it.

http://www.rense.com/general64/decon.htm

Yes, of course he was influenced in his word choice and in his choice of commenting at all by "stuff out there," like the news reports of one bozo star or starlet after another quoted as spouting the, "I'll leave if Trump wins" nonsense most of us saw during the campaign.  There is absolutely no reason to think anything else was involved.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on December 05, 2016, 06:27:42 pm
I hesitate to post the link below but, on balance, it may be elucidating to some folks.  There is a ton of this kind of stuff out there, if you know where to look. Totally get that most folks here would be unaware of this.  Why should you know?  To my knowledge, nobody here is a wacko.  But, it's out there. Unfortunately, it is seeping into the mainstream a bit more these days. 

I went to Hollywood High School. Not just L.A. but the borders of Hollywood (believe me, not a glamorous neighborhood at all).  Know this territory.  Know several people on periphery of entertainment business, etc. I know about this, the code words that folks get when tell some what they do and where they live. The connection is subtle, generally, but out there. Wackos. No, don't think Arrieta knowingly made an anti-Semitic remark but think he was likely influenced by stuff out there. There is a history. You should know about it.

http://www.rense.com/general64/decon.htm

Yeah, he was influence by all the actors who publicly said they would leave the US if Trump was elected.  Sometimes things are just simple.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 05, 2016, 06:31:48 pm
Nor is there any reason why the bulk of society should research the odds and ends of society to ensure that they do not accidentally offend someone.  These nutjobs are going to be offended no matter how much they are catered to.  I would much rather that general society were unaware of the silly mind and word games that whackos on both sides play.

I have never read Brietbart, and avoid Huffington Post whenever possible.  I have no desire to learn in detail what scum they spread, and do not care in the slightest if I say something that would only offend someone on the one side or the other.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 05, 2016, 06:32:36 pm
Reb serious question if someone says to you "He/She has gone Hollywood" is the first thing that pops into your head that person converted d to Judaism?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 05, 2016, 06:36:16 pm
This would be a good watch for those offended by Arrieta's comments.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceS_jkKjIgo
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2016, 12:45:27 am
This can't be real, can it?   

http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2016/12/09/sources-former-red-sox-manager-bobby-valentine-being-considered-for-united-states-ambassador-to-japan/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on December 09, 2016, 12:52:45 am
Trump did hire Vince McMahon's wife.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 09, 2016, 01:10:02 am
This can't be real, can it?   

http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2016/12/09/sources-former-red-sox-manager-bobby-valentine-being-considered-for-united-states-ambassador-to-japan/

It would seem to be.  http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/news/bobby-valentine-us-ambassador-japan-president-donald-trump-administration-red-sox-mets/1ayx3zfnevkt51msaiarwqsvoj    http://nypost.com/2016/12/09/trump-considering-bobby-valentine-for-ambassador-to-japan/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 09, 2016, 07:37:06 am
This can't be real, can it?   

http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2016/12/09/sources-former-red-sox-manager-bobby-valentine-being-considered-for-united-states-ambassador-to-japan/
If WWE's Linda McMahon can be nominated to head the SBA, why not?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on December 09, 2016, 07:58:35 am
Too bad Yokozuna and Mr. Fuji have passed on or else one of them would probably already have the ambassadorship in the bag.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2016, 08:07:26 am
I don't really see anything egregious about nominating Linda McMahon.  Yeah, it's easy to dismiss her as just being part of WWE.  But really, she and her husband took over a small business in 1980, and it is now one of the biggest entertainment companies in the world.  She has always received a lot of credit for being the smarter business mind in her family.  She actually seems like she could be qualified for the position she is taking over. 

But I don't understand how being a baseball manager in Japan for a few years in any way gives Valentine the qualifications to be an Ambassador.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 09, 2016, 08:20:37 am
Linda does not wear a fake mustache with the same panasche.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 09, 2016, 09:05:36 am
I don't really see anything egregious about nominating Linda McMahon.  Yeah, it's easy to dismiss her as just being part of WWE.  But really, she and her husband took over a small business in 1980, and it is now one of the biggest entertainment companies in the world.  She has always received a lot of credit for being the smarter business mind in her family.  She actually seems like she could be qualified for the position she is taking over. 

But I don't understand how being a baseball manager in Japan for a few years in any way gives Valentine the qualifications to be an Ambassador.
At least Linda was smart enough to make sure it was Vince's hair on the line in the match with Donald Trump, not hers.

And you did not hear much about her when Vince almost went to prison over the steroid scandal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 09, 2016, 09:59:42 am
This can't be real, can it?   

http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2016/12/09/sources-former-red-sox-manager-bobby-valentine-being-considered-for-united-states-ambassador-to-japan/

Probably no worse than Shirley Temple as ambassador to the UN.  Might as well give useless jobs to useless people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 09, 2016, 10:04:54 am
Although Trump is perhaps the last of the Republicans that I wanted to see as President, I have to admit that so far, his major cabinet appointments are excellent.  Mattis, Sessions, Pruitt and DeVos are refreshing changes from what we have had in the past from both parties.

Of course, he could still screw it up with Romney as Secretary of State.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 09, 2016, 10:29:15 am
Pruitt is awful and Flynn is dangerous.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 09, 2016, 10:59:12 am
Welcome to the new Middle Ages.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 09, 2016, 11:14:38 am
Sessions should bring a nice dose of good ol boy racism which will certainly appeal to the Trump voters. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 09, 2016, 11:17:22 am
Sessions should bring a nice dose of good ol boy racism which will certainly appeal to the Trump voters. 

He reminds me a lot of Byrd of West Virginia.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 09, 2016, 11:18:52 am
Pruitt is awful and Flynn is dangerous.

What dangerous things do you think Flynn can do as Secretary of Homeland Security?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 09, 2016, 11:30:14 am
Probably no worse than Shirley Temple as ambassador to the UN.  Might as well give useless jobs to useless people.
Does that mean you're going to be Sec of State.?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on December 09, 2016, 11:37:36 am
Quote
She actually seems like she could be qualified for the position she is taking over. 

Don't forget that one of her chief qualifications is all the money they've given Donald Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 09, 2016, 12:01:53 pm
Does that mean you're going to be Sec of State.?

No.  I am holding out for the only really important job.  Ambassador to the Netherlands.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on December 09, 2016, 04:16:04 pm
I'm not a huge fan of Trump's cabinet picks up to this point.  I don't think having a general as Secretary of Defense is an especially healthy thing.  The whole point of having a Secretary of Defense is to emphasize civilian control over the military, and while someone like George Marshall was a good one, I still think it's best to have a civilian leading that department. 

After reading biographies on Lincoln, Truman, Kennedy, and Bush 43, every single one of them realized at some point in their presidencies, you have to make decisions for yourself when it comes to how the military should be used and not take whole cloth what career minded or, in a lot of cases, incompetent generals recommend.  Trump already has two of them in his cabinet and might have a third in Petraeus.  I hope Trump is going to be ready to overrule is generals whenever is necessary, but since it looks like he's relying on them heavily in his cabinet, it's a concern to me that he won't do that when he should.

And speaking of Petraeus, while I greatly respect what he's done as a truly great general, it does seem hypocritical that Trump spent much of the campaign threatening to throw Hillary in jail for the email server while he's considering someone who shared military secrets with his mistress for the very same cabinet position Hillary had.  Bob Corker is far and away the best choice for State, and I hope gets it.

Also, I have no idea what Ben Carson would know about housing and urban development, and no being a brain surgeon doesn't qualify him for that role any more than being a Muslim would disqualify someone from being President.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on December 09, 2016, 04:16:51 pm
Steve Mnuchin is a fine choice for Treasury, though, so I'll give him that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 09, 2016, 04:31:13 pm
Petraeus would be a very poor choice for Secretary of State by Trump, given that he has been convicted of the crime that Trump criticized Hillary for.  The fact that he would be very well qualified for the position in all other respects really fades into the background.

Our country has always had a philosophy of civilian control of the military.  And it has worked well, in spite of the fact that about 25% of our presidents have been military men.  Presidents have never been reluctant to replace Generals that do not consider themselves to be responsible to the civilian government, and I doubt very strongly that Trump would hesitate for a second to do so.

A Cabinet officer has no need to be a technocrat.  It is his job to administer the laws and the policies of the President.  A brain surgeon is probably as qualified to be Secretary of Housing and Urban Development as a Senator and former President's wife is qualified to be Secretary of State.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 09, 2016, 04:54:55 pm
Sessions should bring a nice dose of good ol boy racism which will certainly appeal to the Trump voters.

On what basis do you contend Sessions is a racist?  Anything more than good old northern bigotry toward the south?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 09, 2016, 04:57:23 pm
Probably no worse than Shirley Temple as ambassador to the UN.  Might as well give useless jobs to useless people.

Not to say that the ambassador to the U.N. is a useful job, but it is not one Shirely Temple ever held.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 09, 2016, 05:04:48 pm
I'm not a huge fan of Trump's cabinet picks up to this point.  I don't think having a general as Secretary of Defense is an especially healthy thing.  The whole point of having a Secretary of Defense is to emphasize civilian control over the military, and while someone like George Marshall was a good one, I still think it's best to have a civilian leading that department. 

After reading biographies on Lincoln, Truman, Kennedy, and Bush 43, every single one of them realized at some point in their presidencies, you have to make decisions for yourself when it comes to how the military should be used and not take whole cloth what career minded or, in a lot of cases, incompetent generals recommend.  Trump already has two of them in his cabinet and might have a third in Petraeus.  I hope Trump is going to be ready to overrule is generals whenever is necessary, but since it looks like he's relying on them heavily in his cabinet, it's a concern to me that he won't do that when he should.

And speaking of Petraeus, while I greatly respect what he's done as a truly great general, it does seem hypocritical that Trump spent much of the campaign threatening to throw Hillary in jail for the email server while he's considering someone who shared military secrets with his mistress for the very same cabinet position Hillary had.  Bob Corker is far and away the best choice for State, and I hope gets it.

Also, I have no idea what Ben Carson would know about housing and urban development, and no being a brain surgeon doesn't qualify him for that role any more than being a Muslim would disqualify someone from being President.

Corker is an incompetent buffoon, as evidenced by setting the treaty ratification process on its head with the Iran nuke deal.  As to the number of generals in his cabinet, it appears Trump will nominate three -- the exact same number Obama had to start his first term.  As to Carson, I don't even know what qualifies the federal government to HAVE a Department of Housing and Urban Development.  I will applaud Trump on that front if Carson either makes moves to eliminate the department or proves himself so utterly incompetent that it does nothing at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 10, 2016, 12:14:12 pm
The only appointments Trump has made that concern me are Flynn and the Breitbart guy.  otherwise, this looks like the winner of the student body election picking his prom committee
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 10, 2016, 12:45:51 pm
What are the concerns about Flynn?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 10, 2016, 12:58:54 pm
Like Trump he spouts things as fact and when proof cannot be supplied blames the fact finder
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 10, 2016, 01:00:48 pm
Flynn Facts...his own people called them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 10, 2016, 01:10:28 pm
Continuing the Dark Ages theme...the witch hunts begin.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-team-energy-department-staff-worked-climate-change/story?id=44100049
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dihard on December 10, 2016, 02:31:35 pm
Sigh. Another day, another terrifying or depressing story


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 10, 2016, 02:38:11 pm
At least we'll have a good buddy of Putin's at State.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 10, 2016, 02:46:09 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/12/07/tillerson-might-be-the-worst-one-on-trumps-list/?utm_term=.8b7dc7545ec8
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on December 10, 2016, 07:29:28 pm
At least we'll have a good buddy of Putin's at State.

And in the Oval Office, too, according to the CIA.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 10, 2016, 07:37:35 pm
Continuing the Dark Ages theme...the witch hunts begin.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-team-energy-department-staff-worked-climate-change/story?id=44100049

Removing, marginalizing, or restricting the future roles of anyone who has either pushed the Global Warming nonsense or gone along with international moves to do so is one of the best things Trump might do, and certainly very much in line with the wishes of those who elected him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 10, 2016, 07:39:47 pm
And in the Oval Office, too, according to the CIA.

So the CIA has not only concluded that Trump is a "good buddy of Putin," but they are also sharing reports to that effect with you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 10, 2016, 07:47:02 pm
A Gallup poll earlier this year indicated that almost 2/3 of those polled are worried either a "great deal" or a "fair amount" about global warming.  It seems that those who feel the issue of global warming is nonsense are in the minority.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 10, 2016, 08:13:21 pm
Well, that certainly is ironclad proof.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 10, 2016, 08:23:50 pm
Removing, marginalizing, or restricting the future roles of anyone who has either pushed the Global Warming nonsense or gone along with international moves to do so is one of the best things Trump might do, and certainly very much in line with the wishes of those who elected him.

You have no proof that "Global Warming is nonsense".   That's your belief, not necessarily a fact, and I support your right to follow any religion you see fit.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 10, 2016, 08:28:37 pm
"Well, that certainly is ironclad proof."

You are right, popular opinion is not ironclad proof. Unpopular opinion isn't either.

So why don't you prove something instead?  Logically, rationally, and dispassionately prove something instead of expecting everyone to simply believe what you believe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 10, 2016, 09:22:59 pm
The need for proof resides in he that proposes a principle or theory.  Those who propose the Anthropomorphic Global Warming theory have never allowed it to be peer reviewed, and have yet to provide the necessary raw data that would have to be available for peer review.

The contention has been based upon data gathered over the last 50 years by surface temperature readings that have been kept secret during that time.  Even though those results fly in the face of satelitte measurements during that time.  The theory has been totally unable to answer the most obvious inconsistency of the theory - the fact that during the past 18 years mankind has produced record amounts of global warming gasses yearly, with literally no corresponding increase in global temperatures.

But I agree with you.  Both sides accept their belief as a religion rather than as a science.  But in that sense, a new religion has taken over the reins of Government, and rightfully should take our policy in a new direction.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 10, 2016, 09:27:47 pm
A Gallup poll earlier this year indicated that almost 2/3 of those polled are worried either a "great deal" or a "fair amount" about global warming.  It seems that those who feel the issue of global warming is nonsense are in the minority.

Who won the election?

What was his position on Global Warming?  Didn't Hillary ever continually press that issue?  And didn't she lose?

Regardless what Gallup might have indicated, those you consider to be in the minority won, and the issue you, and Hillary, wanted to put front and center proved to be a loser.

Go Trump!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 10, 2016, 09:34:44 pm
Removing, marginalizing, or restricting the future roles of anyone who has either pushed the Global Warming nonsense or gone along with international moves to do so is one of the best things Trump might do, and certainly very much in line with the wishes of those who elected him.

You have no proof that "Global Warming is nonsense".   That's your belief, not necessarily a fact, and I support your right to follow any religion you see fit.

Nowhere in my post did I even suggest that Global Warming is nonsense.

The only proof required for my point is the electoral vote total.  I believe that proof will be coming shortly.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 10, 2016, 09:38:46 pm
"Nowhere in my post did I even suggest that Global Warming is nonsense"

Yo Jes, what about your exact phrase , "Global Warming nonsense"? 

LOL...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 10, 2016, 09:39:23 pm
LOL..../......
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on December 10, 2016, 09:48:02 pm
This should be highly entertaining.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 10, 2016, 09:55:20 pm
"Nowhere in my post did I even suggest that Global Warming is nonsense"

Yo Jes, what about your exact phrase , "Global Warming nonsense"? 

LOL...

I do without question consider it to be nonsense, but my intent in the post was to refer to what Trump voters (and I was not one) to be "Global Warming nonsense."  Poor writing initially on my part, and even poorer reading of your post by me in responding to it, particularly when you had accurately quoted my complete comment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 10, 2016, 09:59:28 pm
I believe the scientific evidence that our planet has gone through numerous Ice Ages and warming.  Why are we panicking as if this were something new?  I believe that man has some impact on the weather, but man is full of himself if he thinks he's the big deal; man is a pimple on the butt of an elephant.   I believe that while warmers and deniers are arguing blame, little is being done to prepare civilization for coming changes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ray on December 11, 2016, 10:04:48 am
I believe the scientific evidence that our planet has gone through numerous Ice Ages and warming.  Why are we panicking as if this were something new?  I believe that man has some impact on the weather, but man is full of himself if he thinks he's the big deal; man is a pimple on the butt of an elephant.   I believe that while warmers and deniers are arguing blame, little is being done to prepare civilization for coming changes.

This is what I've always thought.  Some things are simply bigger than man.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 11, 2016, 10:46:36 am
This is what I've always thought.  Some things are simply bigger than man.

But dismissing Global Warming alarmists as present day Chicken Little's misses the most important part of all of this.

If you look at those who are pushing Global Warming, or make even the most cursory look at the prescriptions they urge, what you will clearly see is that they are those calling for greater government control over private lives and over economic decisions and that the prescriptions they urge are, not surprisingly, doing exactly what they have generally been calling for all along -- greater government control over private lives and over economic decisions.

In other words you have socialists who have found a boogeyman which they hope will allow them to accomplish through fear-mongering the very same thing they could not successfully persuade the American public to embrace thru the traditional debate between socialist control and liberty.

Chicken Little was a foolish alarmist without an agenda.

Those behind Global Warming claims are not fools, but assume we are, and they without question have an agenda, extending far beyond scaring barnyard animals.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 11, 2016, 01:48:25 pm
Almost everything in nature is bigger than Man. That's why Man spends so much time trying to understand it. Science isn't a political party or a belief system.

Its completely understandable to BELIEVE in the existence or nonexistence of Global Warming.  That's a natural human response, although not systematic, and certainly not science.  My own disbelieve in Global Warming is a ready example.

But I know nothing. I'm not an expert and have not studied in the field. I haven't collected data, observed phenomenon, or developed hypothesis.  All I have are two things. An opinion and an open mind.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 11, 2016, 02:03:08 pm
Science, Bi_ch!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2016/12/11/watch-snl-go-after-trumps-cabinet-picks-by-introducing-walter-white-as-the-head-of-dea/?utm_term=.290ecf8bd267
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 11, 2016, 03:18:45 pm
Almost everything in nature is bigger than Man. That's why Man spends so much time trying to understand it. Science isn't a political party or a belief system.

Its completely understandable to BELIEVE in the existence or nonexistence of Global Warming.  That's a natural human response, although not systematic, and certainly not science.  My own disbelieve in Global Warming is a ready example.

But I know nothing. I'm not an expert and have not studied in the field. I haven't collected data, observed phenomenon, or developed hypothesis.  All I have are two things. An opinion and an open mind.

An open mind is a wonderful thing to have.  But how do you reconcile an open mind with the belief that someone that doesn't accept anthropomorphic Global Warming is returning to the News Dark Ages?

And how do you reconcile an open mind with the belief that political activity based on the belief in Anthropomorphic Global Warming is good, while political activity based on a rejection of Anthropomorphic Global Warming is bad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 11, 2016, 05:12:08 pm
My comment on the Dark Ages referred to the apparent willingness of Trump and his followers to begin a modern day witch hunt of any DOE employee who might have ever worked on any scientific (non-political) Global Warming study.  How do you reconcile that?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 11, 2016, 05:50:35 pm
Would it be proper for Trump to now make a list of all CIA employees who might have worked on intelligence regarding Russia's possible (probable) hacking?

Where does it stop?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 11, 2016, 06:13:24 pm
Well there has BEEN no such request regarding the hacking, perhaps because no one in the Trump camp is concerned by such an investigation and all understand that such an investigation was reasonable and needed.

As to the request regarding Global Warming, it has become so incredibly politicized and contrary to science that it seems perfectly reasonable to determine exactly who has been doing exactly what, and then to double-check any of the supposed science, with those who were not engaging in true scientific research or were involved in falsifying or withholding data or those who were involved in pushing the Global Warming agenda shown the door, or criminally prosecuted in those cases where a prima facie criminal case could be made out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 11, 2016, 06:35:42 pm
As to the request regarding Global Warming, it has become so incredibly politicized and contrary to science that it seems perfectly reasonable to determine exactly who has been doing exactly what, and then to double-check any of the supposed science, with those who were not engaging in true scientific research or were involved in falsifying or withholding data or those who were involved in pushing the Global Warming agenda shown the door, or criminally prosecuted in those cases where a prima facie criminal case could be made out.

I agree with part of what you just wrote.  The process has become highly politicized.  So much so, in fact, that the President-Elect has appointed a corporate fox to head the environmental hen house.

Questions: What criteria do you use to determine what is good science versus what is bad science?  Who makes those decisions?  Does the outcome of an election instantly qualify people to stand in judgement?

Another question:  What happens to the quality of science if the scientist has to worry about the political ramifications of any possible conclusion drawn from their work? Ramifications like....oh I don't know...say....being criminally prosecuted?

By the way, I've decided that my Dark Ages allusion is probably flawed. After all, the really famous witch hunts began long after the Middle Ages. They burned witches during the Reformation.  Galileo died under house arrest during the Renaissance.  (The people in political power, wanting of course to retain all the benefits of political power, decided that Galileo needed to be, in effect, criminally prosecuted for espousing a politically incorrect model of the solar system. ) 

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 11, 2016, 09:02:15 pm
Questions: What criteria do you use to determine what is good science versus what is bad science?  Who makes those decisions?  Does the outcome of an election instantly qualify people to stand in judgement?

If it is absent true peer review (which requires opening the actual data to public scrutiny), it is bad science.  If it involves altered data, it is bad science.  If those advancing a theory ignore reality, lie in presenting their data and theories, and bully and threaten (or at least advocate) the criminal prosecution of those challenging their theories simply on the basis of challenging them, it is likely bad science.  And if the hypothesis and predictions those hypothesis produce end up seriously missing the mark, but those proclaiming themselves as scientists steadfastly hold onto them, it is bad science.

Who makes those judgments?  The public, and true scientists who are not simply pushing a political agenda.

Another question:  What happens to the quality of science if the scientist has to worry about the political ramifications of any possible conclusion drawn from their work? Ramifications like....oh I don't know...say....being criminally prosecuted?

I am unaware of anyone urging any criminal prosecutions based solely on the conclusions drawn from their work.... except for those supporting Global Warming calling for the prosecution of those challenging the Global Warming alarmists.  I urged criminal prosecution for existing and actual crimes if a prima facie case can be made out, which is vastly different from prosecution for disputing the theory du jure of the established intelligencia.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 12, 2016, 01:32:49 am
Many of the links in the citations were partially truncated in cutting and pasting this, but with any real effort you should still be able to find the full urls even for the truncated links.
********************
Trump's choice to head the EPA, Scott Pruitt, has been widely maligned in the media as a “prominent denier of climate science.” [1] This portrayal of Mr. Pruitt, however, isn't justified. What Pruitt actually said was far less offensive than “I deny science.” Rather, as voiced in his op-ed, he merely stated that, “Healthy debate is the lifeblood of American democracy, and global warming has inspired one of the major policy debates of our time. That debate is far from settled. Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind. That debate should be encouraged.” [2] This isn't a denial of science. It's an acceptance that much ambiguity exists within the scientific research and has for quite some time.

INCONSISTENT WARNINGS:
To start, let's review the lack of historical consistency. In a 1950 article entitled “Is the World Getting Warmer,” we were warned of global warming, stating “In the United States, long-term climatological records which have been accumulating over many years indicate that the weather is becoming warmer and drier.” [3] But in 1958, geophysicist Maurice Ewing and geologist William Donn warned of a coming ice-age, rather than an age of increased warming. [4] [5] In 1965, an environmental report written by the President's Science Advisory Committee flipped the script again, warning President Johnson about global warming, rather than of a coming ice-age, advising “an increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide could act, much like the glass in a greenhouse, to raise the temperature of the lower air.” [6] But in 1970, a Washington Post's article entitled “Colder Winters Held Dawn of New Ice Age – Scientists See Ice Age In the Future” again went back to warning the public of a coming ice-age [7] and in 1972, geologists George J. Kukla and R. K. Matthews wrote to President Nixon also warning of the supposed “new ice age.” [8] In 1974, Time magazine released an article on global COOLING, advising that “when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe, they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades.” [9] In 1975, the New York Times also released an article on global cooling, citing a scientific study from the National Academy of Sciences which warned of “an abrupt end to the present interglacial period of relative warmth that has governed the planet's climate for the past 10,000 years.” [10]

In 1976, however, the tone began to flip back towards warming, with scientists concluding, “The data are scanty. We cannot be sure that these temperature fluctuations are be not the result of natural causes. [but] ...Because of the rapid diffusion of CO2 molecules within the atmosphere, both hemispheres will be subject to warming due to the atmospheric (greenhouse) effect...” [11] And by 1979, after studying early computer models, the somewhat stronger case for global warming appeared to solidify in a report entitled “Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A scientific Assessment,” which warned of the socioeconomic impacts of global warming. [12]

FRAUD EXPOSED:
Then a major scientific controversy occurred. In 1998, climatologist Michael E. Mann (along with others) developed new statistical models to produce global temperature patterns, creating a now infamous graph known as “the hockey stick graph.” [13] It was dubbed “hockey stick” because the line representing temperature was relatively perpendicular through most of the graph until it spiked straight up at the far right end, projecting large and sudden temperature increases in the near future. [14] This finding supposedly ended all debate and cemented cause for concern. It was widely circulated, widely cited, referenced as the basis for Al Gore's Oscar winning film “An Inconvenient Truth,” and used to foment fear and stir up support for drastic regulations. Many years later, however, it was thoroughly and widely discredited. [15][16] Mann had used a controversial subset of tree ring records from high and arid mountains in the US Southwest. ...The scientists who published that original data (Graybill and Idso 1993) had specifically warned that the ring widths should not be used for temperature reconstruction, and in particular warned that their 20th century portion is unlike the climatic history of the region and is probably biased by other factors.” [16] Never the less, Mann used this data and, in addition, “exaggerated the significance of the bristlecones so as to make their chronology out to be the dominant global climatic pattern rather than a minor (and likely inaccurate) regional one.” [16] His method also appeared to remove the “medieval warm period” which previously suggested a period of several hundred years which was warmer than our present day. It also appeared to remove the “little ice age” which occurred after the medieval warm period, which had strongly suggested that average temperatures fluctuate throughout history. [15] Doing so allowed Mann to misrepresent history and claim that the climate was mostly stable for about a thousand years up until the present, where he concluded that 1998 was the warmest year of the last millennium. “This claim was not, in reality, supported by data.” [16] “Furthermore, Mann put obstacles in place for subsequent researchers wanting to obtain his data and replicate his methodologies, most of which were only resolved by the interventions of US Congressional investigators and the editors of Nature magazine, both of whom demanded full release of his data and methodologies some six years after publication of his original Nature paper. [16] Most damning of all? “Mann had re-done his hockey stick graph at some point during its preparation with the dubious bristlecone records excluded and saw that the result lost the hockey stick shape altogether, collapsing into a heap of trendless noise. However, he never pointed this out to readers.” [16] Lastly, he also indicated that he had confirmed the statistical significance of his results, “yet when the scores were later revealed they showed no such thing; and by then he had taken to denying he had even calculated them.” [16] Essentially, he was caught lying in an attempt to foster a career advancing research paper. Though exposed as a fraud, the damage had already been done and numerous citizens, politicians, and activists have bought into it ever since. To this day, many individuals still believe in the supposed scientific consensus that began to emerge before this supposedly authoritative research was discredited.

NOT A CONSENSUS:
So why, to this day, do people still routinely hear the talking point “97% of scientists agree” when it comes to global warming? In 2013, Australian scientist John Cook - author of the book Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand - analyzed 12,000 abstracts (summaries of studies) and claimed “97% of climate papers stating a position on human-caused global warming agree global warming is happening and we are the cause.” [17] The problem? His method of review was so unthoughtful that it entirely distorted the results. Using the qualifier “papers taking a position,” Cook subjectively identified 34 percent of the papers as having supposedly expressed an opinion on anthropogenic climate change, and of that 34%, since 33% appeared to endorse anthropogenic climate change (in his assessment), he then divided 33 by 34 and got 97%. But as the National Review points out, “When David Legates, a University of Delaware professor who formerly headed the university’s Center for Climatic Research, recreated Cook’s study, he found that 'only 41 papers' of the 11,944 had endorsed what Cook claimed they endorsed.” That's only 0.3% of all 11,944 papers or “1% of the 4,014” that had specifically expressed an opinion. In addition, “several scientists whose papers were included in Cook’s initial sample also protested that they had been misinterpreted.” [18] Attempting to right this false public narrative, a 2015 NIPCC Report on Scientific Consensus advised the following:

“The claim of 'scientific consensus' on the causes and consequences of climate change is without merit. ...On the contrary, there is extensive evidence of scientific disagreement about many of the most important issues that must be resolved before the hypothesis of dangerous man-made global warming can be validated.” [19] (If interested in learning more about the many disagreements scientists have regarding climate change science, you're encouraged to read this cited paper.)

FAILED PREDICTIONS:
This isn't to say that Global Warming might not be true, it's simply to point out the extraordinary degree of ambiguity which exists within the research, complicated further by the numerous failed predictions by global warming alarmists. For instance, experts claimed the Arctic sea ice would melt entirely by September 2016. They were proven wrong. [20] While a 2013 IPCC report claimed that Antarctica was losing significant amounts of land ice, a 2015 NASA study used satellite data to debunk that notion and confirm that the Antarctic ice sheet actually gained in size nearly every year since 1992. [21] In a 1985 study, alarmists warned that “Beginning in a decade or two, scientists expect the warming of the atmosphere to melt the polar icecaps, raising the level of the seas, flooding coastal areas, eroding the shores and sending salt water far into fresh-water estuaries.” Again, we know this did not occur. [22] In 2007, U.N. scientists claimed the world only had eight years left to avoid the worst effects of global warming. [23] Eight years has passed and global devastation has yet to occur. Even Secretary of State John Kerry warned back in 2009 that "the Arctic will be ice-free in the summer of 2013. Not in 2050, but four years from now. Make no mistake: catastrophic climate change represents a threat to human security, global stability, and - yes - even to American national security." Again, this dire prediction never materialized, but no politician seems to answer for these fear tactics which empower them. [24]

And that's not all. For decades, the global warming alarmists were insisting that inclining CO2 levels were akin to pollution which would wreak havoc on our environment. Contrary to their projections, however, 28 years of satellite data have confirmed that the increased CO2 levels actually contributed to INCREASING global vegetation, since plants need CO2 to live. [25] And in addition to the above failed predictions, many continue to push the theory that natural disasters have been on the rise due to global warming. But per a 2014 International Federation of the Red Cross Natural Disaster Report, globally, there's actually been a decline in losses due to natural disasters. “Moreover, US hurricane and tornado activity trends since 1950 have remained flat or are decreasing respectively.” [26] Lastly, and most uncomfortable for those who insisted devastation was around the corner, satellite data confirms there's essentially been NO global warming since our last peak in 1997-1998. [27]

CONCLUSION:
To conclude with full disclosure, we at WAC are not climatologists. We're admittedly speaking outside our field of economics and are understandably limited in that sense. We can't be entirely sure if global warming is a legitimate concern or not. What we CAN offer, however, is an economist's perspective; one which seeks to verify statistical significance, looks for flaws in predictive modeling, looks for replication of results, looks for sampling set errors which inadvertently or purposely skew results, one which examines historical literature and cross references old predictions with reality, and one which questions the legitimacy of public policy responses. What we can conclude is that there exists much ambiguity with this issue. Yes, most scientists agree that the Earth has generally warmed since 1800. Yes, many agree that at least some part of this warming was partially the result of human existence. Yes, many scientists agree that CO2 levels have likely increased. The disagreements, however, are largely over the depth of our presumed impact, if it's mostly natural or not, whether it's actually linked to CO2 levels, whether it's reasonable to allocate resources towards alleviation efforts, and whether successfully alleviating climate change is even within the realm of plausibility. It's absolutely sensible to debate these finer points and doing so doesn't mean one is ignoring evidence. A scientist, for instance, might be unconvinced that temperature levels are following CO2 levels while believing that climate largely fluctuates over time, yet they may still accept that we're presently in a moderate warming phase and that humans are indeed a minor contributor to that. They could believe this despite also believing that our impact is so negligible that it's unreasonable to adopt reactionary socioeconomic policies which damage economic growth in a vain effort to combat moderate climate changes. Unfortunately, in today's toxic political atmosphere, such a stance would have a scientist labeled “a science denier,” despite their views falling within the parameters of current research. As Mr. Pruitt correctly concluded, the intricacies of this debate are “far from settled,” and discussion “should be encouraged.” It's not as simple as “join us in saving the world” or “admit you hate science.”
___________________________
Sources:
[1]
http://www.cnn.com/…/…/trump-picks-scott-pruitt-to-head-epa/

[2]
http://www.nationalreview.com/…/climate-change-attorneys-ge…

[3]
http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/…/is-the-world-getting-w…

[4]
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/123/3207/1061 (requires subscription)

[5]
http://harpers.org/archive/1958/09/the-coming-ice-age/ (an article about citation 4 with no subscription required, for those without a subscription to sciencemag.org)

[6]
http://dge.stanford.edu/…/PSAC,%201965,%20Restoring%20the%2…

[7]
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpos…/…/147902052.html…

[8]
http://www.economonitor.com/…/an-important-letter-sent-to-…/

[9]
http://www.wsj.com/…/notable-quotable-global-cooling-143034…

[10]
http://www.wmconnolley.org.uk/…/ice…/ny-times-1975-01-19.pdf

[11]
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/193/4252/447

[12]
https://www.nap.edu/…/carbon-dioxide-and-climate-a-scientif… (can be downloaded after logging in as a guest)

[13]
http://www.global-warming-and-the-climate.com/mann%27s-hock…

[14]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:T_comp_61-90.pdf (photo of graph only)

[15]
http://a-sceptical-mind.com/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-hockey…

[16]
http://www.rossmckitrick.com/…/hockey-stick-retrospective.p…

[17]
http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php…

[18]
http://www.nationalreview.com/…/climate-change-no-its-not-9…

[19]
https://www.heartland.org/…/12-04-15_why_scientists_disagre…

[20]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/experts-said-arctic-sea-ice-w…/

[21]
https://www.nasa.gov/…/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-i…

[22]
http://www.nytimes.com/…/ideas-trends-continued-a-dire-long…

[23]
https://www.theguardian.com/…/climatechange.climatechangeen…

[24]
http://www.politifact.com/…/kerry-claims-arctic-will-be-ic…/

[25]
http://www.wnd.com/…/oops-rising-co2-proves-beneficial-to-…/

[26]
http://notrickszone.com/…/inconvenient-truths-2014-global…/…

[27]
http://www.climatedepot.com/…/satellites-no-global-warming-…
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 12, 2016, 10:36:08 am
Volumes upon volumes upon volumes of data and studies have been released for peer review.  Over 90% of publishing scientists (peer reviewed?) believe Global Warming exists.  You have done an excellent job of representing the other 10%. 

By the way, "peer review" does not mean "released to the public".   It's a painstaking process which is not the least bit democratic.  The "public" are not involved in the process, lawyers do not sit in judgment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on December 12, 2016, 12:12:46 pm
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a7/Climate_science_opinion2.png/350px-Climate_science_opinion2.png)


Various surveys have been conducted to evaluate scientific opinion on global warming. They have concluded that the majority of scientists support the idea of anthropogenic climate change.

In 2004, the geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change.[114] She analyzed 928 abstracts of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003 and concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change.

Oreskes divided the abstracts into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Seventy-five per cent of the abstracts were placed in the first three categories (either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view); 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, thus taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. None of the abstracts disagreed with the consensus position, which the author found to be "remarkable". According to the report, "authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point."

In 2007, Harris Interactive surveyed 489 randomly selected members of either the American Meteorological Society or the American Geophysical Union for the Statistical Assessment Service (STATS) at George Mason University. 97% of the scientists surveyed agreed that global temperatures had increased during the past 100 years; 84% said they personally believed human-induced warming was occurring, and 74% agreed that "currently available scientific evidence" substantiated its occurrence. Catastrophic effects in 50–100 years would likely be observed according to 41%, while 44% thought the effects would be moderate and about 13 percent saw relatively little danger. 5% said they thought human activity did not contribute to greenhouse warming.[123][124][125][126]

Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch conducted a survey in August 2008 of 2058 climate scientists from 34 different countries.[127] A web link with a unique identifier was given to each respondent to eliminate multiple responses. A total of 373 responses were received giving an overall response rate of 18.2%. No paper on climate change consensus based on this survey has been published yet (February 2010), but one on another subject has been published based on the survey.[128]

The survey was composed of 76 questions split into a number of sections. There were sections on the demographics of the respondents, their assessment of the state of climate science, how good the science is, climate change impacts, adaptation and mitigation, their opinion of the IPCC, and how well climate science was being communicated to the public. Most of the answers were on a scale from 1 to 7 from 'not at all' to 'very much'.

To the question "How convinced are you that climate change, whether natural or anthropogenic, is occurring now?", 67.1% said they very much agreed, 26.7% agreed to some large extent, 6.2% said to they agreed to some small extent (2–4), none said they did not agree at all. To the question "How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, a result of anthropogenic causes?" the responses were 34.6% very much agree, 48.9% agreeing to a large extent, 15.1% to a small extent, and 1.35% not agreeing at all.

A poll performed by Peter Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman at University of Illinois at Chicago received replies from 3,146 of the 10,257 polled Earth scientists. Results were analyzed globally and by specialization. 76 out of 79 climatologists who "listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change" believed that mean global temperatures had risen compared to pre-1800s levels. Seventy-five of 77 believed that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. Among all respondents, 90% agreed that temperatures have risen compared to pre-1800 levels, and 82% agreed that humans significantly influence the global temperature. Economic geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in significant human involvement. The authors summarised the findings:

It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes.[115]

A 2010 paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States (PNAS) reviewed publication and citation data for 1,372 climate researchers and drew the following two conclusions:

(i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.[116]

A 2013 paper in Environmental Research Letters reviewed 11,944 abstracts of scientific papers matching "global warming" or "global climate change". They found 4,014 which discussed the cause of recent global warming, and of these "97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming".[120]

James L. Powell, a former member of the National Science Board and current executive director of the National Physical Science Consortium, analyzed published research on global warming and climate change between 1991 and 2012 and found that of the 13,950 articles in peer-reviewed journals, only 24 rejected anthropogenic global warming.[129] A follow-up analysis looking at 2,258 peer-reviewed climate articles with 9,136 authors published between November 2012 and December 2013 revealed that only one of the 9,136 authors rejected anthropogenic global warming.[130] His 2015 paper on the topic, covering 24,210 articles published by 69,406 authors during 2013 and 2014 found only five articles by four authors rejecting anthropogenic global warming. Over 99.99% of climate scientists did not reject AGW in their peer-reviewed research.[122]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change)


Quote
The claim of 'scientific consensus' on the causes and consequences of climate change is without merit.

The only thing here without merit is your argument against anthropogenic global warming. Which seems to be based on creating doubt instead of actual peer-reviewed scientific fact.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 12, 2016, 01:05:03 pm
The globe may indeed be warming but man's role in that cycle is anything but proven.  Scientists are still guessing at global temperature over the course of the planet's existence so how can they know if the globe has ever warmed naturally in the past?  Is man to blame for the increased temps or is this just a normal cycle that has more to do with external forces like sun activity?  I think the reason why many believe the science to be a hoax is because of the ridicule of any who oppose their theories as settled.  If I published a paper putting forth my theories I would want all data I could get to help prove or disprove my theory so I can get closer to the truth.  There may be 90% of scientists convinced anthropogenic climate change is real, but why are they so opposed to anyone of the opposite viewpoint?  Is any science ever truly settled?  Isn't questioning the majority not only encouraged but essential to science?  Why then the hostility toward anyone who doesn't fall in line?  Could it be because those whose livelihood is dependent on grant money that pours in from environmentalist donors and foundations would quickly dry up if they discovered the theory to be false? Enough documents have been leaked to show that there is a groupthink mentality among experts to shut down any discussion on alternatives which leaves many like me skeptical.  It really is too bad this had to enter the political arena.  We should all be in agreement that we want to leave the planet in better shape than we found it.  Unfortunately this has become yet another right vs left battle with closed minds on both sides more interested in winning than what is right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on December 12, 2016, 01:51:33 pm
Quote
There may be 90% of scientists convinced anthropogenic climate change is real, but why are they so opposed to anyone of the opposite viewpoint?

There is no may be. Also, you're arguing in support of a flat earth because that is all you see. Unlike the other which that uses scientific fact to prove that it is round.

Quote
Is any science ever truly settled?

Yes.

Quote
Isn't questioning the majority not only encouraged but essential to science?

Questioning with critical thinking is always encouraged and essential. Blind denial based on a political viewpoint is ignorant.

Quote
Why then the hostility toward anyone who doesn't fall in line?

Ridiculing your ignorant political viewpoint against anthropogenic global warming is not hostility.

Quote
Could it be because those whose livelihood is dependent on grant money that pours in from environmentalist donors and foundations would quickly dry up if they discovered the theory to be false?

I'm wondering how this is relevant. The same can be said of the head in sand deniers of warming. In regard to the people who study warming, their papers are peer-reviewed. Your denial is based on doubt (politically based) and without any peer-reviewed scientific facts.

Quote
Enough documents have been leaked to show that there is a groupthink mentality among experts to shut down any discussion on alternatives which leaves many like me skeptical.


What documents are you referring too?

Quote
It really is too bad this had to enter the political arena.

It entered the political arena for two reasons. One, it requires governments and people to change and second, it was made more political because your side found that it was easier to deny politically than with facts in the scientific world.

Quote
We should all be in agreement that we want to leave the planet in better shape than we found it.

We should be, but your side doesn't.

Quote
Unfortunately this has become yet another right vs left battle with closed minds on both sides more interested in winning than what is right.

Actually it is not left verses right. Its scientific fact verses a political viewpoint. 

I have an open mind if you can present actual facts to back your assertion that anthropogenic global warming is a myth started by the Chinese to undermine capitalism.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on December 12, 2016, 02:02:28 pm
Quote
but man is full of himself if he thinks he's the big deal; man is a pimple on the butt of an elephant.

One ant is your house is not a problem, 1 Trillion would be.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on December 12, 2016, 02:06:11 pm
Quote
Could it be because those whose livelihood is dependent on grant money that pours in from environmentalist donors and foundations would quickly dry up if they discovered the theory to be false?

Which seems more likely?  >90% of climatologists conspiring on a worldwide massive hoax in order to keep their grant money coming, or the petrochemical industry and those who profit from it most doing just about everything they can to deny that anything involving burning fossil fuels could be changing the planet?

Quote
this has become yet another right vs left battle with closed minds on both sides

Yes, it is unfortunate that this has become a right vs left battle, because the science is quite clear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on December 12, 2016, 02:20:36 pm
Scientific consensus:  http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 12, 2016, 10:09:14 pm
Volumes upon volumes upon volumes of data and studies have been released for peer review.  Over 90% of publishing scientists (peer reviewed?) believe Global Warming exists.  You have done an excellent job of representing the other 10%. 

By the way, "peer review" does not mean "released to the public".   It's a painstaking process which is not the least bit democratic.  The "public" are not involved in the process, lawyers do not sit in judgment.

Re-read my comment.  I did not write that peer review means released to the public.

I wrote that "true peer review... requires opening the actual data to public scrutiny."  That is not only a bit different from peer review meaning "released to the public," "peer review" was a phrase I introduced into the exchange at that point in the discussion, and since it is a phrase subject to somewhat different meanings, I was defining my use of it.  You don't get to define my terms, particularly when I offer a definition right in my post.  In this context you asked me what I would consider "good science."  I submit that my response makes considerable sense as to the meaning of "good science."  If the data is not available for examination, peers can not meaningfully review it or the publication based on it.  Publication which does not afford the opportunity for review of all of the data does not allow meaningful review.

The scientific method involves forming hypotheses and testing those hypotheses, including allowing others to make further observations and possibly replicate the experiments producing the data or conclusions.  In lab experiments, peers can run their own experiments.  In dealing with climate data, the "experiments" are to a very large degree the examination of the data.... and if the data, the RAW data and the way it is collected, is not made available, or is altered before it is made available, then no real peer review can take place and the conclusions are not really the result of science at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 12, 2016, 10:13:23 pm
Scientific consensus:  http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

As I mentioned in my last post, regardless the name of the organization or the url, when the raw, unfudged data used is not made available for public review, any "consensus" is something far less than scientific.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2016, 06:48:06 am
I find it ironic that Rick Perry is going to head the Department of Energy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 13, 2016, 07:30:22 am
I find it ironic that Rick Perry is going to head the Department of Energy.

Wasn't that the one he could not remember the name of?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 07:45:50 am
Quote
I have an open mind if you can present actual facts to back your assertion that anthropogenic global warming is a myth started by the Chinese to undermine capitalism.
Where in my response did I say anything of the kind?  Try this article to start.  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on December 13, 2016, 09:02:41 am
Robb

Citing an 7 year old story from the conservative noise machine that was debunked is not adding anything to the debate. Nor changing the scientific consensus on Global Warming.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/ (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/)


Can you provide any actual information?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 13, 2016, 09:18:21 am
Having the East Anglia University investigate the Global Warming Emails is rather like having Hillary and Bill Clinton investigate the Clinton Foundation bribes and kickbacks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 09:38:17 am
Classic liberal response.  Don't mention the valid arguments posted, simply attack the messenger.  This is why there is no dialogue in this country any more.  There is no allowance for belief other than your own.  In my original post I allowed that warming may be an issue but that I was skeptical of the science.  You respond by stating that it is a fact and anyone who doesn't agree with you is basically an idiot.  Like I said, typical.  Scientists in the 70's were sure a new ice age was coming.  It was settled and of course it was all man's fault.  What happened to that?  Can you see why people would be skeptical?  Or is everybody who doesn't think what you think an idiot?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 09:40:14 am
Robb

Citing an 7 year old story from the conservative noise machine that was debunked is not adding anything to the debate. Nor changing the scientific consensus on Global Warming.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/ (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/)


Can you provide any actual information?

What does the age of the story have to do with anything?  If these guys were fudging results 7 years ago does that mean it is impossible it could still be going on today?  And please don't pretend factcheck.org is anything but another liberal wing of the media. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 09:45:23 am
Here is another article in Forbes.  Of course it is 3 years old so it can't be true any more.  http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/#113b1444171b

Just in case you didn't click the article here is the opening: "Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 09:49:17 am
Another interesting aspect of this new survey is that it reports on the beliefs of scientists themselves rather than bureaucrats who often publish alarmist statements without polling their member scientists. We now have meteorologists, geoscientists and engineers all reporting that they are skeptics of an asserted global warming crisis, yet the bureaucrats of these organizations frequently suck up to the media and suck up to government grant providers by trying to tell us the opposite of what their scientist members actually believe.

People who look behind the self-serving statements by global warming alarmists about an alleged “consensus” have always known that no such alarmist consensus exists among scientists. Now that we have access to hard surveys of scientists themselves, it is becoming clear that not only do many scientists dispute the asserted global warming crisis, but these skeptical scientists may indeed form a scientific consensus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 09:49:56 am
Now please tell me what factcheck.org says about this survey.  I'm sure it was all made up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 13, 2016, 11:33:01 am
Try this article to start.  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html

"Climategate" investigated 8 times and all investigations concluded that generally, there was no wrongdoing.  Some of them seemed to have minor issues with scientists' willingness to share computer files a specific graph within their report.  But overall there was nothing wrong with their conclusions, and data was not inappropriately manipulated.  Here's the Wikipedia list of all the investigations; you can follow the links there for more information.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy#Inquiries_and_reports

Scientists in the 70's were sure a new ice age was coming.  It was settled and of course it was all man's fault.  What happened to that?

That was never scientific consensus.  That was a  minority position that got a lot of attention in a couple magazine articles, but research still supported warming over cooling. http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/#113b1444171b

Just in case you didn't click the article here is the opening: "Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem."

I haven't seen that quoted before, but here's my initial take after a few minutes of Googling and skimming some of the journal article:

 - The sample may be problematic.  Geoscientists and engineers may be scientists, but they're not climate scientists there is no reason to consider them to be authorities on climate change.  It's the same thing as surveying chemists about evolution, and then using it as evidence that biologists are wrong.

 - Additionally, the sample was made up of members of the Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta (APEGA), whose members often work in the petroleum industry.  There's an obvious conflict of interest here--if you  survey tobacco CEOs they're going to tell you smoking doesn't cause cancer.  And if you survey people deep enough in the petroleum industry that they join a professional association of petroleum workers, they're going to tell you their products aren't warming the earth.

 - The journal is called "Organizational Studies."  That journal is dedicated to studying how organizations work.  It focuses on social science, not climate science.  Without reading the full article, I'm not even sure that it was intended to take a position on climate change--it fits the journal better if it's an attempt to document how APEGA members understand climate change.

 - The Forbes article you linked and quoted was an opinion piece in a publication that focuses primarily on business news.  I don't think that author's interpretation has much relevance to the climate change debate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2016, 11:42:19 am
Wasn't that the one he could not remember the name of?

Yes it was.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2016, 11:48:22 am
Climate change is real.  Man is certainly a major cause.  The left ignoring nuclear power, a cheap non-carbon emitting power source, in favor of solar and wind power is agenda driven and stupid.  If the left was really serious about we would be building nuclear power plants like the France and switching the trucking industry to natural gas.  These would decrease carbon emissions quickly in the US and wouldn't increase costs.  Instead we waste large amounts of money on wind and solar and get no where.  Both parties are part of the problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on December 13, 2016, 12:05:50 pm
Well, it's pretty clear what we're going to do now.  Burn more oil and coal.  That's sure to help.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 12:06:37 pm
Why are you so sure more carbon is bad?  There is a saturation point where carbon essentially has no effect at all on surface temperatures.  Implementing all of the climate change proposals would at most lower average temperatures by a degree and even that is iffy.  And judging by history man thrives in warmer temperatures and struggles during colder cycles.  No matter the opinions of the "Experts" here, the science is anything but settled.  Considering the fact that temperatures are impossible to accurately determine even a hundred years ago let alone thousands, we don't know how many times the earth has cycled through warmer and cooler periods.  Around 1,000 AD many scientists believe the Earth was at least as warm as it is now if not warmer.  What was the cause then?  Camel farts? 

The point of the climategate article was not to discredit the global warming believers as a whole, it was to point out that bias does exist and dissenters are shut down.  What other area of science ridicules anyone who dare question the consensus?  What are they so afraid of? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 12:08:43 pm
http://www.drroyspencer.com/my-global-warming-skepticism-for-dummies/  Roy Spencer is a climatologist who doesn't believe in man-made global warming.  Does that make him a tool of the right?  Uneducated?  An idiot?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 13, 2016, 12:18:50 pm
Why are you so sure more carbon is bad?  There is a saturation point where carbon essentially has no effect at all on surface temperatures.

Yes, and when that happens you get Venus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2016, 12:30:00 pm
Well, it's pretty clear what we're going to do now.  Burn more oil and coal.  That's sure to help.

Well, it's pretty clear what we're going to do now. Continue to burn oil and coal.  That's sure to help.

Fixed it for you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 13, 2016, 12:58:16 pm
http://www.drroyspencer.com/my-global-warming-skepticism-for-dummies/  Roy Spencer is a climatologist who doesn't believe in man-made global warming.  Does that make him a tool of the right?  Uneducated?  An idiot?

I don't know what his motivations are, but Googling "Roy Spencer" or "Roy Spencer is wrong" brings up plenty of detailed rebuttals to his claims.  Here's one: https://www.skepticalscience.com/Roy_Spencer_quote.htm

He's also an intelligent design proponent (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer_(scientist)#Intelligent_design), so his disbelief of the scientific consensus isn't limited to just one field.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 02:13:38 pm
What does intelligent design belief have to do with global warming?   Since the consensus seems to be king on global warming shouldn't that also apply to intelligent design?   The vast majority of humans believe in some form of intelligent design so that makes it right.  Right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2016, 02:16:14 pm
Well there is intelligent design in that God made the world and there is intelligent design that the world is 6000 years old.  I'm guessing, without looking, that Roy Spencer is the 6,000 year old intelligent design.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:26:02 pm
Classic liberal response.  Don't mention the valid arguments posted, simply attack the messenger. 

Robb, Robb, Robb.  Really? Look what happened when I simply posted that DOE employees shouldn't be persecuted by the incoming administration.  Is that being a  liberal?

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:27:37 pm
Scientists in the 70's were sure a new ice age was coming.

Another thing I missed in the 70's!  DAMN that Coors Light! 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:34:37 pm
American Meteorological Society ( A leading, nonpartisan scientific journal):

"Warming of the climate system now is unequivocal, according to many different kinds of evidence. Observations show increases in globally averaged air and ocean temperatures, as well as widespread melting of snow and ice and rising globally averaged sea level. Surface temperature data for Earth as a whole, including readings over both land and ocean, show an increase of about 0.8°C (1.4°F) over the period 1901─2010 and about 0.5°C (0.9°F) over the period 1979–2010 (the era for which satellite-based temperature data are routinely available). Due to natural variability, not every year is warmer than the preceding year globally. Nevertheless, all of the 10 warmest years in the global temperature records up to 2011 have occurred since 1997, with 2005 and 2010 being the warmest two years in more than a century of global records. The warming trend is greatest in northern high latitudes and over land. In the U.S., most of the observed warming has occurred in the West and in Alaska; for the nation as a whole, there have been twice as many record daily high temperatures as record daily low temperatures in the first decade of the 21st century.
"Climate is always changing. However, many of the observed changes noted above are beyond what can be explained by the natural variability of the climate. It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide. The most important of these over the long term is CO2, whose concentration in the atmosphere is rising principally as a result of fossil-fuel combustion and deforestation. While large amounts of CO2 enter and leave the atmosphere through natural processes, these human activities are increasing the total amount in the air and the oceans. Approximately half of the CO2 put into the atmosphere through human activity in the past 250 years has been taken up by the ocean and terrestrial biosphere, with the other half remaining in the atmosphere. Since long-term measurements began in the 1950s, the atmospheric CO2 concentration has been increasing at a rate much faster than at any time in the last 800,000 years. Having been introduced into the atmosphere it will take a thousand years for the majority of the added atmospheric CO2 to be removed by natural processes, and some will remain for thousands of subsequent years."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:41:32 pm
American Physical Society (Leading American Physics, peer reviewed journal)

https://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/201204/manheimer.cfm
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 02:44:47 pm
Well there is intelligent design in that God made the world and there is intelligent design that the world is 6000 years old.  I'm guessing, without looking, that Roy Spencer is the 6,000 year old intelligent design.
I am of the opinion that God made the Earth in 6 creative periods he called days.  How many years were those periods?  No idea.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 02:45:05 pm
American Physical Society (Leading American Physics, peer reviewed journal)

https://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/201204/manheimer.cfm
It's decided!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:49:15 pm
NO, it's not decided.  Just more opinions. Are we to only consider the studies...the research...which supports our predetermined opinions? (Besides, if you had actually read the article, and unless you are a SUPER fast reader you didn't, you would see the author is sort of a moderate.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:52:01 pm
It seems to me that the logical, rational, most careful approach would be to at least listen to experts. Unless, of course, a political agenda is more important to you than the truth.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:57:11 pm
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/


Run for cover, NASA scientists. They're coming for you!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:58:12 pm
American Association for the Advancement of Science:

"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (2006)3
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:58:49 pm
American Chemical Society:

"Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem." (2004)4 ::)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:59:17 pm
American Geophysical Union:

"Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes." (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007, 2012, 2013)5
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 02:59:42 pm
American Medical Association:

"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2013)6
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:00:08 pm
American Meteorological Society:

"It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide." (2012)7
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:00:32 pm
American Physical Society:

"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (2007)8
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:00:55 pm
The Geological Society of America:

"The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s." (2006; revised 2010)9
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:01:23 pm
International academies: Joint statement:

"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)10
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:01:49 pm
U.S. National Academy of Sciences:

"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere." (2005)11
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:02:42 pm
U.S. Global Change Research Program:

"The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases. Human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice." (2009, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12

Geeze Loiuse...I hope those people have money in the Bank....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:03:06 pm
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:

“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.”13

“Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems.”14
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:04:04 pm
Obviously we are witnessing one of the greatest conspiracies in the history of the (non-warming) world....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:08:38 pm
http://time.com/4502561/donald-trump-stephen-hawking-climate-change/

Lock him up!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:09:31 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plReQcO6sz0&ab_channel=LarryKing

Another crackpot
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 13, 2016, 03:20:52 pm
What does intelligent design belief have to do with global warming?   Since the consensus seems to be king on global warming shouldn't that also apply to intelligent design?   The vast majority of humans believe in some form of intelligent design so that makes it right.  Right?

There's a difference between scientific consensus and belief.  Evidence drives scientific consensus, while faith drives belief.  Evidence is objective, while faith is subjective.

People believe in intelligent design because of their faith.  Scientists accept climate change to be true because of evidence.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:27:58 pm
If you want to see my post that was just removed (for whatever reason) , simply google DeGrasse Tyson + Global Warming
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 03:55:27 pm
These scientists have said that it is not possible to project global climate accurately enough to justify the ranges projected for temperature and sea-level rise over the next century. They may not conclude specifically that the current IPCC projections are either too high or too low, but that the projections are likely to be inaccurate due to inadequacies of current global climate modeling.

    David Bellamy, botanist.[19][20][21][22]
    Lennart Bengtsson, meteorologist, Reading University.[23][24]
    Piers Corbyn, owner of the business WeatherAction which makes weather forecasts.[25][26]
    Judith Curry, Professor and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.[27][28][29][30]
    Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society.[31][32]
    Ivar Giaever, Norwegian–American physicist and Nobel laureate in physics (1973).[33]
    Steven E. Koonin, theoretical physicist and director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University.[34][35]
    Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences.[36][37][38][39]
    Craig Loehle, ecologist and chief scientist at the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement.[40][41][42][43][44][45][46]
    Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics and CBE Chair in Sustainable Commerce, University of Guelph.[47][48]
    Patrick Moore, former president of Greenpeace Canada.[49][50][51]
    Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution (1999–2003).[52][53]
    Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre, visiting fellow Australian National University.[54][55]
    Roger A. Pielke, Jr., professor of environmental studies at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado at Boulder.[56][57]
    Tom Quirk, corporate director of biotech companies and former board member of the Institute of Public Affairs, an Australian conservative think-tank.[58]
    Denis Rancourt, former professor of physics at University of Ottawa, research scientist in condensed matter physics, and in environmental and soil science.[59][60][61][62]
    Harrison Schmitt, geologist, Apollo 17 Astronaut, former U.S. Senator.[63]
    Peter Stilbs, professor of physical chemistry at Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.[64][65]
    Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London.[66][67]
    Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute.[68][69]
    Anastasios Tsonis, distinguished professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.[70][71]
    Fritz Vahrenholt, German politician and energy executive with a doctorate in chemistry.[72][73]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 03:55:43 pm
These scientists have said that the observed warming is more likely to be attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.

    Khabibullo Abdusamatov, astrophysicist at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences[75][76]
    Sallie Baliunas, retired astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[77][78][79]
    Timothy Ball, historical climatologist, and retired professor of geography at the University of Winnipeg[80][81][82]
    Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[83][84]
    Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland[85][86]
    David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester[87][88]
    Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University[89][90]
    William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy; emeritus professor, Princeton University[91][92]
    Ole Humlum, professor of geology at the University of Oslo[93][94]
    Wibjörn Karlén, professor emeritus of geography and geology at the University of Stockholm.[95][96]
    William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology[97][98]
    David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware[99][100]
    Anthony Lupo, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Missouri[101][102]
    Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[103][104]
    Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.[105][106]
    Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of mining geology, the University of Adelaide.[107][108]
    Arthur B. Robinson, American politician, biochemist and former faculty member at the University of California, San Diego[109][110]
    Murry Salby, atmospheric scientist, former professor at Macquarie University and University of Colorado[111][112]
    Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University[113][114][115]
    Tom Segalstad, geologist; associate professor at University of Oslo[116][117]
    Nir Shaviv, professor of physics focusing on astrophysics and climate science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem[118][119]
    Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia[120][121][122][123]
    Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[124][125]
    Roy Spencer, meteorologist; principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville[126][127]
    Henrik Svensmark, physicist, Danish National Space Center[128][129]
    George H. Taylor, retired director of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University[130][131]
    Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa[132][133]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 03:56:11 pm
These scientists have said that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural.

    Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.[134][135]
    Claude Allègre, French politician; geochemist, emeritus professor at Institute of Geophysics (Paris).[136][137]
    Robert Balling, a professor of geography at Arizona State University.[138][139]
    Pål Brekke, solar astrophycisist, senior advisor Norwegian Space Centre.[140][141]
    John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC reports.[142][143][144]
    Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.[145][146]
    David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.[147][148]
    Vincent R. Gray, New Zealand physical chemist with expertise in coal ashes[149][150]
    Keith E. Idso, botanist, former adjunct professor of biology at Maricopa County Community College District and the vice president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change[151][152]
    Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists.[153][154]
    Kary Mullis, 1993 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry.[155]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 03:56:26 pm
These scientists have said that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for society or the environment.

    Indur M. Goklany, science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior[156][157][158]
    Craig D. Idso, faculty researcher, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University and founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change [159][160]
    Sherwood B. Idso, former research physicist, USDA Water Conservation Laboratory, and adjunct professor, Arizona State University[161][162]
    Patrick Michaels, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and retired research professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia[163][164]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 03:57:33 pm
But you're right, the science is settled. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 03:58:54 pm
Actually...I said the opposite.  Typical Conservative response, attack the messenger.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 04:04:55 pm
Among the amazing total of 168 "scientists" (of the many, many thousands of scientists in the world) is  "Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.[145][146]". 

I've met Mr. Chylek. His argument is not so much against global warming as it is against lazy science. But having been a DOE contracted employee, I'm  sure he's on a list...somewhere.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 13, 2016, 04:05:51 pm
No attack FDISK, but you did present countless statements saying that in essence, the science is settled.  Just to quote one of your quotes,     **
    Posts: 81
        View Profile Personal Message (Online)

Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
« Reply #1205 on: Today at 03:02:42 pm »

    Quote

U.S. Global Change Research Program:

"The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases. Human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice." (2009, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12

How else can I read that statement than they are saying it is fact?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 13, 2016, 04:16:52 pm
Is the argument here really about whether or not there is scientific consensus on global warming?

I don't know what the dividing line is between not-consensus and consensus, but unless you're drawing that line at 99%, it's clear to any objective observer that there is absolutely scientific consensus on the matter. Arguing anything else is just silly, frankly. (Note: the ARGUMENT is silly. The PERSON is not, lest anyone run around crying "ad hominem!")

Want to argue that the consensus is wrong? Go for it! People much smarter than me say the consensus is wrong! Doesn't mean there's not a consensus.

At this point, it's more reasonable to argue that Trump won the popular vote than there is no consensus on global warming.

The consensus could be wrong! It's been wrong several times before! But accuracy does not mean anything one way or another as it relates to consensus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 04:38:28 pm
Consensus is fact.

But personal attacks are also fact.  I originally entered this discussion not because I had a relevant opinion on Global Warming, but instead because of Tump's call for a list of names in the DOE.   Clearly that is a form of personal attack and intimidation. 

But what's a little erosion of personal rights when compared to belief systems?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 13, 2016, 04:44:20 pm
The good news is that the DOE told Trump to **** off. They aren't participating in this witch hunt and giving him any names.  I hope as many people as possible stonewall this atrocity of a president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 04:51:56 pm
No, actually a union told Trump to jump in a lake.  From personal experience, that union represents a VERY small percentage of DOE and DOE contracted employees.

In the mean time, Trump has instructed followers to compose a list of people who agreed with the consensus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 13, 2016, 05:02:47 pm
The Director of Public Affairs for the DOE said they are not giving any names to the transition team. Sounds like more than an union objection to me.

“The Department of Energy received significant feedback from our workforce throughout the department, including the National Labs, following the release of the transition team’s questions. Some of the questions asked left many in our workforce unsettled,” said Eben Burnham-Snyder, a department spokesman. “Our career workforce, including our contractors and employees at our labs, comprise the backbone of DOE (Department of Energy) and the important work our department does to benefit the American people. We are going to respect the professional and scientific integrity and independence of our employees at our labs and across our department.

“We will be forthcoming with all publically-available information with the transition team. We will not be providing any individual names to the transition team.” Burnham-Snyder’s email had the last sentence in boldface for emphasis.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 05:43:20 pm
My mistake.  I just read about the DOE statement.  I was operating on old data...from this morning.

In a little over a month the DOE will be Trump's to do with as he pleases. If I was the Director of Public Affairs I would be seriously contemplating a career change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 13, 2016, 05:57:33 pm
Robb
Citing an 7 year old story from the conservative noise machine that was debunked is not adding anything to the debate. Nor changing the scientific consensus on Global Warming.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/ (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/)
Can you provide any actual information?

Claiming a consensus exists, does not make it so, nor does claiming something is science make it science, or calling a website "factcheck" make it at all concerned with checking facts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 13, 2016, 06:06:29 pm
We now have meteorologists, geoscientists and engineers all reporting that they are skeptics of an asserted global warming crisis....

Engineers?

Engineers?

Their qualifications would be.....?  What exactly?

And geoscientists.... in other words geologists -- rockhounds and the folks who figure out where to drill for oil.

Hey, I agree with their conclusions, but trotting them out as scientists on this issue steals credibility from any other arguments you present.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 13, 2016, 06:18:49 pm
My mistake.  I just read about the DOE statement.  I was operating on old data...from this morning.

In a little over a month the DOE will be Trump's to do with as he pleases. If I was the Director of Public Affairs I would be seriously contemplating a career change.

Is the Director of Public Affairs a civil service job, or a political appointee?  There isn't a lot that even the President can do if he is not a political appointee.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on December 13, 2016, 06:56:12 pm
I am not sure why some of you are quoting professional organizations staffed by professionals in their fields as any sort of proof. Not sure if you knew this or not, but 90% is not a consensus its a conspiracy.... its very very easy to see.

The sad part is that no one alive now will really see the brunt of the effects of anthropogenic effects on the climate and our planet... we'll be long gone before the real consequences are felt. Bright side here again, is we wont have to deal with this... we'd rather save 10-15% NOW! thats the best for all of us!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 08:05:52 pm
Is the Director of Public Affairs a civil service job, or a political appointee?  There isn't a lot that even the President can do if he is not a political appointee.

That might be the most naive thing I've ever seen you write.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on December 13, 2016, 08:08:53 pm
We desperately need some Cubs player movement.  This is brutal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 08:11:57 pm
I would be happy to move this to the Politics and Religion thread.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on December 13, 2016, 08:37:27 pm
Ha!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 13, 2016, 08:40:00 pm
Is the Director of Public Affairs a civil service job, or a political appointee?  There isn't a lot that even the President can do if he is not a political appointee.

That might be the most naive thing I've ever seen you write.

Things may well have changed since I have been in, but it was damb hard to fire anyone in the civil service that didn't commit public murder.  Government contracter personnel was a different thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 13, 2016, 08:58:12 pm
I guess you are right.  A vindictive President (Trump) would be powerless.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 13, 2016, 09:52:34 pm
Not powerless.  But certainly not all powerful.  Civil Service laws still exist and are in effect.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 01:45:04 am
Is the Director of Public Affairs a civil service job, or a political appointee?  There isn't a lot that even the President can do if he is not a political appointee.

That might be the most naive thing I've ever seen you write.

What part of it is naive?  Is the question naive, or is it naive to point out the even Presidents can have considerable difficulty in firing federal employees who are not political appointees?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 01:57:01 am
I am not sure why some of you are quoting professional organizations staffed by professionals in their fields as any sort of proof. Not sure if you knew this or not, but 90% is not a consensus its a conspiracy.... its very very easy to see.

The sad part is that no one alive now will really see the brunt of the effects of anthropogenic effects on the climate and our planet... we'll be long gone before the real consequences are felt. Bright side here again, is we wont have to deal with this... we'd rather save 10-15% NOW! thats the best for all of us!

Considering the effect of compound growth (which is much the same as compound interest), thinking that even if the Global Warming forecasts come to pass they would so great as to outweigh what would amount to increasing economic growth to the degree represented by what you would get from reducing costs by 10-15% a year, evidences either a complete lack of understanding of economics or blind worship to the alter of environmentalism.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 02:13:21 am
There's a difference between scientific consensus and belief.  Evidence drives scientific consensus, while faith drives belief.  Evidence is objective, while faith is subjective.

And "scientific.... evidence" which is not subject to review is simply not evidence at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 02:18:54 am
But you're right, the science is settled.

When I was in TV news, working at several different stations, I worked with a number of meteorologists.  Everyone of them I spoke with about it was in agreement -- that claims of anthropogenic Global Warming were nonsense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 02:23:07 am
I originally entered this discussion not because I had a relevant opinion on Global Warming, but instead because of Tump's call for a list of names in the DOE.   Clearly that is a form of personal attack and intimidation.

If it is a personal attack or intimidation, exactly what is it that anyone is being threatened with, and just how does such a request compare to the calls from Global Warming alarmists that those they call "climate deniers" be criminally prosecuted and imprisoned?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 02:26:52 am
The good news is that the DOE told Trump to **** off. They aren't participating in this witch hunt and giving him any names.  I hope as many people as possible stonewall this atrocity of a president.

And any denial of the transition team's request will delay the gathering of that information by, what, two months?

Personally I would love to see efforts to "stonewall" the requests once repeated from the Oval Office instead of the transition team.

I suspect that such conduct would be beyond civil service protections and would make it very easy for Trump to do some needed housecleaning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 02:27:11 am
Actually...I said the opposite.  Typical Conservative response, attack the messenger.

There was no attack of the messenger... though your post above is a typical FDISK response, showing difficulty in understanding what is a personal attack and what is not.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 14, 2016, 08:17:44 am
Consensus is fact.


No, it's really not. I'm not trying to suggest that the consensus on global warming is wrong, merely challenging the way you are using the word here.

There is scientific *consensus* on the idea that athropogenic global warming is a *fact*.

con·sen·sus
kənˈsensəs
noun
general agreement.
"a consensus of opinion among judges"
synonyms:   agreement, harmony, concurrence, accord, unity, unanimity, solidarity; More
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 14, 2016, 08:21:34 am
Claiming a consensus exists, does not make it so...

In other news, Jes challenges the notion that there is consensus on the fact that the world is indeed round.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 14, 2016, 08:32:04 am
Well, the earth isn't round.  It's an oblate ellipsoid.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 14, 2016, 09:28:25 am
I believe the scientific evidence that our planet has gone through numerous Ice Ages and warming.  Why are we panicking as if this were something new?  I believe that man has some impact on the weather, but man is full of himself if he thinks he's the big deal; man is a pimple on the butt of an elephant.   I believe that while warmers and deniers are arguing blame, little is being done to prepare civilization for coming changes.
10 of these forum pages ago, that is what I posted.  In the meanwhile, we had 10 pages of proof or denial posts, nature vs. man posts, professional citation posts, but only one, ONE, offering any kind of solution.  Which was my point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 14, 2016, 10:22:57 am
No, it's really not. I'm not trying to suggest that the consensus on global warming is wrong, merely challenging the way you are using the word here.

There is scientific *consensus* on the idea that athropogenic global warming is a *fact*.


How am I using the word differently? When 90% of the "judges" agree is that not a consensus?  I think it is.  Therefore, consensus is fact. (Whether the judges ultimately turn out to be correct is another matter....)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 14, 2016, 10:25:14 am
Not powerless.  But certainly not all powerful.  Civil Service laws still exist and are in effect.

Dave, I worked for a prime contractor to a National Lab for my entire career.  NOT ONCE did I hear the phrase "Civil Service laws".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 14, 2016, 10:38:40 am
10 of these forum pages ago, that is what I posted.  In the meanwhile, we had 10 pages of proof or denial posts, nature vs. man posts, professional citation posts, but only one, ONE, offering any kind of solution.  Which was my point.

I think people need to be convinced that there is a possible problem before anything can be done. As for the Ice Ages, yes the last Ice Age was a mere blink of an eye ago.  If you believe in radical ideas (like the 4.5 billion year age of the Earth) then we might possibly still BE IN the Ice Ages. Yes warming and cooling has been a natural...and will continue to be a natural occurrence.  But if you read some of those boring professional citations you will see that real scientific work suggests that the accelerated and unprecedented carbon buildup in the atmosphere appears to be the primary source of the problem.   

If you want to do something about it then it seems that a reasonable approach would be to limit the possible harm until we understand the problem better.  If Man made Global Warming does indeed turn out to be incorrect then we have done no harm. (Except to the oil industry, that is.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 14, 2016, 12:03:09 pm
We are still arguing whether or not it's true, rather than some sensible solutions.  I think it was CBJ who suggested we take our left-wing brains out of the sand and follow France's lead of returning to nuclear power and going to natural gas to power trucks.  Those are solutions that are good for all of us regardless of global warming beliefs.  I think there are other rational solutions out there that go beyond what is causing climate change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 14, 2016, 12:35:08 pm
Curt, the argument against doing anything is that the problem doesn't exist. Trump (and a few people around here) argue that any changes are not needed because Global Warming is a hoax. Trump has appointed an oil state AG to head the EPA.  Trump has already indicated that he will pull out of international agreements on the environment. IF...and this is still an IF...IF man-made global warming exists then it is time for reasonable policy. My impression is that the motivation behind non-reasonable policy is nothing more than greed.

As for nuclear energy. If my father were alive he would say something like, "of course!"  I can hear his words now, "Burning hydrocarbons is a very wasteful use of a valuable resource that is needed, and will be needed, elsewhere."  Then he would break into a diatribe on ignorance and the state of my current report card.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 14, 2016, 01:27:03 pm

consensus is fact.


This is very obviously false, and I'm somewhat surprised that you're trying to make the equivalence.

Fact: the quality of being actual; something that has actual existence; an actual occurrence

Consensus: general agreement; group solidarity in sentiment and belief

These are clearly not the same things.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 14, 2016, 01:29:44 pm
Fact: the quality of being actual; something that has actual existence; an actual occurrence

Yes, I consider the 90% consensus on man-made global warming to be actual, it has actual existence, and is an actual occurrence.

That there is a consensus is a fact. Whether the consensus conclusions represent a fact is another question. I suspect our only problem here is in semantics.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 14, 2016, 01:31:24 pm
Yes the notion that there is a consensus on global warming as real is a fact. I agree completely and must have previously misunderstood.

I thought you were using the fact that consensus exists to then also argue that global warming is a fact.

Again, I believe global warming is a thing, not trying to argue otherwise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 14, 2016, 01:39:24 pm
The board has not reached a consensus on the meaning of the word "consensus".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 14, 2016, 01:41:00 pm
I suspect this board will never reach a consensus on that or anything else, for that matter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 14, 2016, 01:45:21 pm
I suspect this board will never reach a consensus on that or anything else, for that matter.
There could be a consensus on the above statement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 14, 2016, 02:25:09 pm
I suspect this board will never reach a consensus on that or anything else, for that matter.
The Cubs are world series champions.  There, dispute that!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 14, 2016, 05:42:14 pm
Not powerless.  But certainly not all powerful.  Civil Service laws still exist and are in effect.

Dave, I worked for a prime contractor to a National Lab for my entire career.  NOT ONCE did I hear the phrase "Civil Service laws".

Perhaps not surprising.  Prime contractors would not be subject to civil service laws, since they are not civil service employees.

I worked in government procurement, where 90 percent of the employees of Air Force Logistics Command were civil service employees.  I heard a LOT about the Civil Service Laws.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 07:12:26 pm
In other news, Jes challenges the notion that there is consensus on the fact that the world is indeed round.

This IS typical among those pushing Global Warming.  Instead of addressing the merits of an argument, they ridicule those disagreeing with them, claim there is a consensus, and insist that ends any rational discussion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 07:47:56 pm
Perhaps not surprising.  Prime contractors would not be subject to civil service laws, since they are not civil service employees.

I worked in government procurement, where 90 percent of the employees of Air Force Logistics Command were civil service employees.  I heard a LOT about the Civil Service Laws.

.... you really would have thought that FDISK would have understood that.  For some reason I would suspect that that the Director of Public Affairs would NOT be a prime contractor but was instead a direct federal employee, meaning the relevant question would be whether that person was covered by the Civil Service Laws or was a political appointee, as you originally suggested.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 14, 2016, 08:50:53 pm
10 of these forum pages ago, that is what I posted.  In the meanwhile, we had 10 pages of proof or denial posts, nature vs. man posts, professional citation posts, but only one, ONE, offering any kind of solution.  Which was my point.

No.  You may have only seen one post which YOU considered a "solution," but part of the reason for that is that you have been looking for the wrong thing to "solve," and would seem to consider as a "solution" the very thing most people in this country believe is a far greater concern that Global Warming represents even if it is real.

method inadvertently made the point very well with this post:
I am not sure why some of you are quoting professional organizations staffed by professionals in their fields as any sort of proof. Not sure if you knew this or not, but 90% is not a consensus its a conspiracy.... its very very easy to see.

The sad part is that no one alive now will really see the brunt of the effects of anthropogenic effects on the climate and our planet... we'll be long gone before the real consequences are felt. Bright side here again, is we wont have to deal with this... we'd rather save 10-15% NOW! thats the best for all of us!
  (emphasis added)

Costs of 10-15% a year would be a massive drag on the economy and on economic growth.  The difference between inflicting that on the economy and avoiding it would be close to the economic difference between no economic growth an an economic growth rate of roughly the same -- 10 to 15% a year, which would be absolutely massive, far greater economic growth that any of us have ever seen in the United States in our lives.

And despite that difference (and I am using method's own numbers in this discussion), Global Warming supporters dismiss the costs of the kind of government controls they support as if the controls would be insignificant, not worthy of concern.

The true "solution" needs to solve the right problem, and the problem of giving the government virtually unlimited control over all economic activity to fight the Global Warming boogeyman is a far greater problems than the Global Warmist predict.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 15, 2016, 01:30:11 am
Curt, the argument against doing anything is that the problem doesn't exist. Trump (and a few people around here) argue that any changes are not needed because Global Warming is a hoax. Trump has appointed an oil state AG to head the EPA.  Trump has already indicated that he will pull out of international agreements on the environment. IF...and this is still an IF...IF man-made global warming exists then it is time for reasonable policy. My impression is that the motivation behind non-reasonable policy is nothing more than greed.

Two points:

1) Trump may argue Global Warming is a hoax, and end his argument there, but many, including myself, have a bit more than that in our position.  I certainly agree that the idea of anthropogenic Global Warming is a hoax, but I go well beyond that, and so do many others.  My position continues to point out that A) even if it is not a hoax, warmer temperatures would likely be good for humans, not bad; B) That even if the effects were to be harmful and not helpful, that the cost of the proposed solutions would be far worse than any harmful effects from Global Warming.
2) Gordon Gekko was right -- Greed is good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 15, 2016, 01:46:03 am
I think people need to be convinced that there is a possible problem before anything can be done.

I agree.  And the possible problem is giving government control over virtually all economic activity, which is to say to give it control over nearly our entire lives.

If you want to do something about it then it seems that a reasonable approach would be to limit the possible harm until we understand the problem better.  If Man made Global Warming does indeed turn out to be incorrect then we have done no harm. (Except to the oil industry, that is.)

First, once government assumes a power, it rarely, gives it up, and only after considerable struggle.  Second, you dismiss both the economic costs, and giving government control over virtually all economic activity, as "no harm."  Many of us consider the harm from such economic costs and loss of freedom to be far greater than even what the fear mongering Global Warmists try to scare us with.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 15, 2016, 08:35:39 am
This IS typical among those pushing Global Warming.  Instead of addressing the merits of an argument, they ridicule those disagreeing with them, claim there is a consensus, and insist that ends any rational discussion.

Your post I responded to wasn't putting forth an argument against global warming. Your post said there is no scientific consensus, which is hogwash. There is scientific consensus. Disagree with it all you like. Many respected scientists much smarter and better informed than you and I do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on December 15, 2016, 02:36:39 pm
Tico, unfortunately the new government has no use for the logic of at least listening to an overwhelming consensus of scientists. And you know what they say about government, once it has power...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 15, 2016, 03:25:09 pm
Yeah, these cabinet appointments are terrifying in terms of the direction they signal for the country.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 15, 2016, 05:22:27 pm
Your post I responded to wasn't putting forth an argument against global warming. Your post said there is no scientific consensus, which is hogwash. There is scientific consensus. Disagree with it all you like. Many respected scientists much smarter and better informed than you and I do.

You are missing the point entirely, so much so that it would appear to be deliberate.

Your response in no way presented anything supporting your claim of scientific consensus.  Your post instead did exactly as I described -- instead of addressing the merits of an argument, you attempted to ridicule me (not even my position, but me directly) as is the playbook norm of ridiculing those disagreeing with you, you emptily claimed there is a consensus, and insist that ends any rational discussion.

Here again is your post to which I made my comment:
In other news, Jes challenges the notion that there is consensus on the fact that the world is indeed round.

And that was in response to this excerpt from one of my posts: "Claiming a consensus exists, does not make it so..."

And now YOU try to take the high ground in this?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 15, 2016, 09:31:30 pm
Apparently jes missed FD's 17 pages of consensus links, and orgs like NASA are full of ignorant ****.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 15, 2016, 09:47:50 pm
Apparently jes missed FD's 17 pages of consensus links, and orgs like NASA are full of ignorant ****.

You still can't address the merits of either the underlying issue, or of the question of whether your post was ridiculing those disagreeing with you. claiming there is a consensus and insisting that ends any rational discussion.

Is it really that hard to admit what you are doing?

It's Alinsky's rule #5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

Take pride in how well you stick to it, but, man, at least admit what you are doing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 15, 2016, 10:20:15 pm
Jes, there was no need to post anything supporting the notion of consensus given that FD had just exceeded creataforum's hosting bandwidth with page after page of articles and stories and publications and organizations supporting the notion of scientific consensus. I'm not "emptily claiming" anything. Would it make you feel better if I copy/pasted all the stuff you apparently ignored from FD? Why would anyone give you more evidence when you've simply ignored reams of it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 15, 2016, 10:39:14 pm
Jes, there was no need to post anything supporting the notion of consensus given that FD had just exceeded creataforum's hosting bandwidth with page after page of articles and stories and publications and organizations supporting the notion of scientific consensus. I'm not "emptily claiming" anything. Would it make you feel better if I copy/pasted all the stuff you apparently ignored from FD? Why would anyone give you more evidence when you've simply ignored reams of it?

When you make a claim without offering anything to support the claim, that is actually the very definition of "emptily claiming"... but you still can't acknowledge the degree to which you embrace Alinsky, can you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 16, 2016, 09:29:28 am
Jes, you're not an idiot. As you very well know, this has been a group conversation on an open internet forum. I did not make the claim with nothing to support it. My comments were clearly within the context of an ongoing thread of communication with any number of participants referencing each others' posts. Again, go back and read FD's stuff. I'm not copy/pasting things for you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 16, 2016, 09:36:02 am
The scientific method doesn't fit everyone's tastes.  Particularly when it contradicts their biases.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on December 16, 2016, 10:54:04 am
And some people don't understand it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 16, 2016, 02:16:23 pm
Yep.  People on both sides of the issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 16, 2016, 06:32:49 pm
Jes, you're not an idiot. As you very well know, this has been a group conversation on an open internet forum. I did not make the claim with nothing to support it. My comments were clearly within the context of an ongoing thread of communication with any number of participants referencing each others' posts. Again, go back and read FD's stuff. I'm not copy/pasting things for you.

I did read it, but the first time you mention it is in response to me pointing out the nature of your post.  And at no time have you denied use of the basic Alinsky tactic, nor would it be credible for you to do so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 16, 2016, 06:35:44 pm
The scientific method doesn't fit everyone's tastes.  Particularly when it contradicts their biases.

Could define what you mean when you used the phrase "the scientific method"?

And some people don't understand it.

Could you do the same?  In other words could you offer a working definition of the phrase "the scientific method"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 16, 2016, 08:36:08 pm
Look it up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 17, 2016, 12:59:13 am
I know what it means when I use the phrase.  And looking it up will tell me what others mean when they use the phrase.  But unless you are published somewhere addressing the meaning of the phrase, and you published under the name "Playtwo," looking it up will not help me understand  "what you mean when you used the phrase 'the scientific method.'"

I asked you for your working definition of the phrase because, from my understanding of it, and my understanding of how the scientific community uses the phrase, and how science teachers in public school teach their students about the meaning of "scientific method," the comment you made which prompted my question would actually have applied to you and to others supporting the theory of anthropogenic Global Warming, and from reading your posts my memory (which as I have mentioned before is more than mildly faulty) is that generally speaking you only try to ridicule those who disagree with you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 18, 2016, 08:22:49 pm
My comment on the Dark Ages referred to the apparent willingness of Trump and his followers to begin a modern day witch hunt of any DOE employee who might have ever worked on any scientific (non-political) Global Warming study.  How do you reconcile that?

Here is the real question -- how do you reconcile your strong concern here about what no one challenging the Global Warmists has even suggested with your silence on calls to imprison and the clear harassment of anyone not fully buying the nonsense?  And how do you fail to see that any claim of actual consensus becomes inherently suspect when those outside the orthodoxy are aware of the harassment and of the threats of imprisonment?
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/hans-von-spakovsky/attorney-general-lynch-looks-prosecuting-climate-change-deniers
DOJ referral to the FBI for possible RICO civil or criminal prosecution of "climate change deniers."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1s49lUneGM

Global warmists rather openly discuss jailing those who challenge them.
http://www.newsweek.com/should-climate-change-deniers-be-prosecuted-378652
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlk4Lt__Sn0

And of course even absent civil prosecution under RICO, or criminal prosecution, those pushing Global Warming have acted together to impose their will on others even in the absence of actual agreement.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/my-unhappy-life-as-a-climate-heretic-1480723518
My Unhappy Life as a Climate Heretic
My research was attacked by thought police in journalism, activist groups funded by billionaires and even the White House.

By ROGER PIELKE JR.   Updated Dec. 2, 2016 7:04 p.m. ET

Much to my surprise, I showed up in the WikiLeaks releases before the election. In a 2014 email, a staffer at the Center for American Progress, founded by John Podesta in 2003, took credit for a campaign to have me eliminated as a writer for Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight website. In the email, the editor of the think tank’s climate blog bragged to one of its billionaire donors, Tom Steyer: “I think it’s fair [to] say that, without Climate Progress, Pielke would still be writing on climate change for 538.”

WikiLeaks provides a window into a world I’ve seen up close for decades: the debate over what to do about climate change, and the role of science in that argument. Although it is too soon to tell how the Trump administration will engage the scientific community, my long experience shows what can happen when politicians and media turn against inconvenient research—which we’ve seen under Republican and Democratic presidents.

I understand why Mr. Podesta—most recently Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman—wanted to drive me out of the climate-change discussion. When substantively countering an academic’s research proves difficult, other techniques are needed to banish it. That is how politics sometimes works, and professors need to understand this if we want to participate in that arena.

More troubling is the degree to which journalists and other academics joined the campaign against me. What sort of responsibility do scientists and the media have to defend the ability to share research, on any subject, that might be inconvenient to political interests—even our own?

I believe climate change is real and that human emissions of greenhouse gases risk justifying action, including a carbon tax. But my research led me to a conclusion that many climate campaigners find unacceptable: There is scant evidence to indicate that hurricanes, floods, tornadoes or drought have become more frequent or intense in the U.S. or globally. In fact we are in an era of good fortune when it comes to extreme weather. This is a topic I’ve studied and published on as much as anyone over two decades. My conclusion might be wrong, but I think I’ve earned the right to share this research without risk to my career.

Instead, my research was under constant attack for years by activists, journalists and politicians. In 2011 writers in the journal Foreign Policy signaled that some accused me of being a “climate-change denier.” I earned the title, the authors explained, by “questioning certain graphs presented in IPCC reports.” That an academic who raised questions about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in an area of his expertise was tarred as a denier reveals the groupthink at work.

Yet I was right to question the IPCC’s 2007 report, which included a graph purporting to show that disaster costs were rising due to global temperature increases. The graph was later revealed to have been based on invented and inaccurate information, as I documented in my book “The Climate Fix.” The insurance industry scientist Robert-Muir Wood of Risk Management Solutions had smuggled the graph into the IPCC report. He explained in a public debate with me in London in 2010 that he had included the graph and misreferenced it because he expected future research to show a relationship between increasing disaster costs and rising temperatures.

When his research was eventually published in 2008, well after the IPCC report, it concluded the opposite: “We find insufficient evidence to claim a statistical relationship between global temperature increase and normalized catastrophe losses.” Whoops.

The IPCC never acknowledged the snafu, but subsequent reports got the science right: There is not a strong basis for connecting weather disasters with human-caused climate change.

Yes, storms and other extremes still occur, with devastating human consequences, but history shows they could be far worse. No Category 3, 4 or 5 hurricane has made landfall in the U.S. since Hurricane Wilma in 2005, by far the longest such period on record. This means that cumulative economic damage from hurricanes over the past decade is some $70 billion less than the long-term average would lead us to expect, based on my research with colleagues. This is good news, and it should be OK to say so. Yet in today’s hyper-partisan climate debate, every instance of extreme weather becomes a political talking point.

For a time I called out politicians and reporters who went beyond what science can support, but some journalists won’t hear of this. In 2011 and 2012, I pointed out on my blog and social media that the lead climate reporter at the New York Times,Justin Gillis, had mischaracterized the relationship of climate change and food shortages, and the relationship of climate change and disasters. His reporting wasn’t consistent with most expert views, or the evidence. In response he promptly blocked me from his Twitter feed. Other reporters did the same.

In August this year on Twitter, I criticized poor reporting on the website Mashable about a supposed coming hurricane apocalypse—including a bad misquote of me in the cartoon role of climate skeptic. (The misquote was later removed.) The publication’s lead science editor, Andrew Freedman, helpfully explained via Twitter that this sort of behavior “is why you’re on many reporters’ ‘do not call’ lists despite your expertise.”

I didn’t know reporters had such lists. But I get it. No one likes being told that he misreported scientific research, especially on climate change. Some believe that connecting extreme weather with greenhouse gases helps to advance the cause of climate policy. Plus, bad news gets clicks.

Yet more is going on here than thin-skinned reporters responding petulantly to a vocal professor. In 2015 I was quoted in the Los Angeles Times, by Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Paige St. John, making the rather obvious point that politicians use the weather-of-the-moment to make the case for action on climate change, even if the scientific basis is thin or contested.

Ms. St. John was pilloried by her peers in the media. Shortly thereafter, she emailed me what she had learned: “You should come with a warning label: Quoting Roger Pielke will bring a hailstorm down on your work from the London Guardian, Mother Jones, and Media Matters.”

Or look at the journalists who helped push me out of FiveThirtyEight. My first article there, in 2014, was based on the consensus of the IPCC and peer-reviewed research. I pointed out that the global cost of disasters was increasing at a rate slower than GDP growth, which is very good news. Disasters still occur, but their economic and human effect is smaller than in the past. It’s not terribly complicated.

That article prompted an intense media campaign to have me fired. Writers at Slate, Salon, the New Republic, the New York Times, the Guardian and others piled on.

In March of 2014, FiveThirtyEight editor Mike Wilson demoted me from staff writer to freelancer. A few months later I chose to leave the site after it became clear it wouldn’t publish me. The mob celebrated. ClimateTruth.org, founded by former Center for American Progress staffer Brad Johnson, and advised by Penn State’s Michael Mann, called my departure a “victory for climate truth.” The Center for American Progress promised its donor Mr. Steyer more of the same.

Yet the climate thought police still weren’t done. In 2013 committees in the House and Senate invited me to a several hearings to summarize the science on disasters and climate change. As a professor at a public university, I was happy to do so. My testimony was strong, and it was well aligned with the conclusions of the IPCC and the U.S. government’s climate-science program. Those conclusions indicate no overall increasing trend in hurricanes, floods, tornadoes or droughts—in the U.S. or globally.

In early 2014, not long after I appeared before Congress, President Obama’s science adviser John Holdren testified before the same Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. He was asked about his public statements that appeared to contradict the scientific consensus on extreme weather events that I had earlier presented. Mr. Holdren responded with the all-too-common approach of attacking the messenger, telling the senators incorrectly that my views were “not representative of the mainstream scientific opinion.” Mr. Holdren followed up by posting a strange essay, of nearly 3,000 words, on the White House website under the heading, “An Analysis of Statements by Roger Pielke Jr.,” where it remains today.

I suppose it is a distinction of a sort to be singled out in this manner by the president’s science adviser. Yet Mr. Holdren’s screed reads more like a dashed-off blog post from the nutty wings of the online climate debate, chock-full of errors and misstatements.

But when the White House puts a target on your back on its website, people notice. Almost a year later Mr. Holdren’s missive was the basis for an investigation of me by Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva, the ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee. Rep. Grijalva explained in a letter to my university’s president that I was being investigated because Mr. Holdren had “highlighted what he believes were serious misstatements by Prof. Pielke of the scientific consensus on climate change.” He made the letter public.

The “investigation” turned out to be a farce. In the letter, Rep. Grijalva suggested that I—and six other academics with apparently heretical views—might be on the payroll of Exxon Mobil (or perhaps the Illuminati, I forget). He asked for records detailing my research funding, emails and so on. After some well-deserved criticism from the American Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Union, Rep. Grijalva deleted the letter from his website. The University of Colorado complied with Rep. Grijalva’s request and responded that I have never received funding from fossil-fuel companies. My heretical views can be traced to research support from the U.S. government.

But the damage to my reputation had been done, and perhaps that was the point. Studying and engaging on climate change had become decidedly less fun. So I started researching and teaching other topics and have found the change in direction refreshing. Don’t worry about me: I have tenure and supportive campus leaders and regents. No one is trying to get me fired for my new scholarly pursuits.

But the lesson is that a lone academic is no match for billionaires, well-funded advocacy groups, the media, Congress and the White House. If academics—in any subject—are to play a meaningful role in public debate, the country will have to do a better job supporting good-faith researchers, even when their results are unwelcome. This goes for Republicans and Democrats alike, and to the administration of President-elect Trump.

Academics and the media in particular should support viewpoint diversity instead of serving as the handmaidens of political expediency by trying to exclude voices or damage reputations and careers. If academics and the media won’t support open debate, who will?

Mr. Pielke is a professor and director of the Sports Governance Center at the University of Colorado, Boulder. His most recent book is “The Edge: The Wars Against Cheating and Corruption in the Cutthroat World of Elite Sports” (Roaring Forties Press, 2016).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on December 22, 2016, 02:10:39 pm
Jed beard

The only thing pushing Global Climate Change is the planet.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 22, 2016, 06:14:45 pm
Jed beard

The only thing pushing Global Climate Change is the planet.




The little cutie finally got one right.  It is the planet that is causing Global Climate Change, not the activities of puny mankind.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 22, 2016, 07:31:47 pm
The little cutie finally got one right.  It is the planet that is causing Global Climate Change, not the activities of puny mankind.

I would actually cast my vote for the sun, if there is any change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 22, 2016, 07:50:31 pm
The correlation with sunspots is much better than the correlation with CO2 in the atmosphere.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 10, 2017, 04:50:39 pm
RFK Jr being appointed to chair a committee on vaccine safety is a joke right? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 10, 2017, 05:07:23 pm
This whole administration is an appalling joke. And it hasn't even started yet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 10, 2017, 07:32:44 pm
Well if you believe documents on Buzzfeed, Trump might make Dusty blush.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 10, 2017, 08:17:29 pm
Well if you believe documents on Buzzfeed, Trump might make Dusty Moises Alou blush.


Fixed that for you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 10, 2017, 08:26:59 pm
 ;D
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 11, 2017, 11:31:49 am
If I was a day trader I would abandon any current system and concentrate entirely on what Trump tweets and says. The pharmaceuticals tanked before Trump finished his third answer. .
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 11, 2017, 12:09:25 pm
I'm investing in Russian futures.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 12, 2017, 05:30:59 pm
Anyone else see the problem here?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/12/health/switzerland-citizenship-vegan-trnd/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 12, 2017, 07:49:00 pm
Say something in Swiss.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 12, 2017, 08:25:14 pm
Anyone else see the problem here?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/12/health/switzerland-citizenship-vegan-trnd/index.html

I agree that pig racing is a terrible thing.  A lot of the weight they lose through exercise could have been turned into bacon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 12, 2017, 09:16:13 pm
Say it in Swiss.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on January 12, 2017, 09:36:45 pm
"Yodel-Ay-Ee-Oooo"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 12, 2017, 11:48:24 pm
That's a cry for a throat lozenge.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 13, 2017, 04:38:04 pm
Anyone else see the problem here?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/12/health/switzerland-citizenship-vegan-trnd/index.html

The only problem I see is with the woman who wants to become a citizen of a nation where she rather clearly does not fit in.  I see no problem with the decision by the Swiss in denying her application.

Say it in Swiss.

I assume you are aware that is impossible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 14, 2017, 01:03:12 pm
I meant to post this a few weeks ago during the discussion in response to FDSK's fears the Trump administration is going to send those supporting Global Warming to re-education camps, but don't believe I got around to it and just ran across the link again today.
http://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2016/12/31/skeptical_climate_scientists_coming_in_from_the_cold.html

Skeptical Climate Scientists Coming In From the Cold
By James Varney, RealClearInvestigations  December 31, 2016

In the world of climate science, the skeptics are coming in from the cold.

Researchers who see global warming as something less than a planet-ending calamity believe the incoming Trump administration may allow their views to be developed and heard. This didn’t happen under the Obama administration, which denied that a debate even existed. Now, some scientists say, a more inclusive approach – and the billions of federal dollars that might support it – could be in the offing.

“Here’s to hoping the Age of Trump will herald the demise of climate change dogma, and acceptance of a broader range of perspectives in climate science and our policy options,” Georgia Tech scientist Judith Curry wrote this month at her popular Climate Etc. blog.

William Happer, professor emeritus of physics at Princeton University and a member of the National Academy of Sciences, is similarly optimistic. “I think we’re making progress,” Happer said. “I see reassuring signs.”

William Happer
William Happer
Despite harsh criticism of their contrarian views, a few scientists like Happer and Curry have pointed to evidence that global warming is less pronounced than predicted. They have also argued that this slighter warming would bring positive developments along with problems. For the first time in years, skeptics believe they can find a path out of the wilderness into which they’ve been cast by the “scientific consensus.” As much as they desire a more open-minded reception by their colleagues, they are hoping even more that the spigot of government research funding – which dwarfs all other sources – will trickle their way.

President-elect Donald Trump, who has called global warming a “hoax,” has chosen for key cabinet posts men whom the global warming establishment considers lapdogs of the oil and gas industry: former Texas Gov. Rick Perry to run the Energy Department; Attorney General Scott Pruitt of Oklahoma to run the Environmental Protection Agency; and Exxon chief executive Rex Tillerson as secretary of state.

But while general policy may be set at the cabinet level, significant and concrete changes would likely be spelled out below those three – among the very bureaucrats the Trump transition team might have had in mind when, in a move some saw as intimidation, it sent a questionnaire to the Energy Department this month (later disavowed) trying to determine who worked on global warming.

It isn’t certain that federal employees working in various environmental or energy sector-related agencies would willingly implement rollbacks of regulations, let alone a redirection of scientific climate research, but the latter prospect heartens the skeptical scientists. They cite an adage: You only get answers to the questions you ask.

“In reality, it’s the government, not the scientists, that asks the questions,” said David Wojick, a longtime government consultant who has closely tracked climate research spending since 1992. If a federal agency wants models that focus on potential sea-level rise, for example, it can order them up. But it can also shift the focus to how warming might boost crop yields or improve drought resistance.

While it could take months for such expanded fields of research to emerge, a wider look at the possibilities excites some scientists. Happer, for one, feels emboldened in ways he rarely has throughout his career because, for many years, he knew his iconoclastic climate conclusions would hurt his professional prospects.

When asked if he would voice dissent on climate change if he were a younger, less established physicist, he said: “Oh, no, definitely not. I held my tongue for a long time because friends told me I would not be elected to the National Academy of Sciences if I didn’t toe the alarmists’ company line.”

That sharp disagreements are real in the field may come as a shock to many people, who are regularly informed that climate science is settled and those who question this orthodoxy are akin to Holocaust deniers. Nevertheless, new organizations like the CO2 Coalition, founded in 2015, suggest the debate is more evenly matched intellectually than is commonly portrayed. In addition to Happer, the CO2 Coalition’s initial members include scholars with ties to world-class institutions like MIT, Harvard and Rockefeller University. The coalition also features members of the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorology Society, along with policy experts from the Manhattan Institute, the George C. Marshall Institute and Tufts University’s Fletcher School.

With such voices joining in, the debate over global warming might shift. Until now, it’s normally portrayed as enlightened scholars vs. anti-science simpletons. A more open debate could shift the discussion to one about global warming’s extent and root causes.

Should a scientific and research funding realignment occur, it could do more than shatter what some see as an orthodoxy stifling free inquiry. Bjorn Lomborg, who has spent years analyzing potential solutions to global warming, believes that a more expansive outlook toward research is necessary because too much government funding has become expensive and ineffective corporate welfare. Although not a natural scientist, the social scientist Lomborg considers climate change real but not cataclysmic.

Bjorn Lomborg
“Maybe now we’ll have a smarter conversation about what actually works,” Lomborg told RealClearInvestigations. “What has been proposed costs a fortune and does very little. With more space opening up, we can invest more into research and development into green energy. We don’t need subsidies to build something. They’ve been throwing a lot of money at projects that supposedly will cut carbon emissions but actually accomplish very little. That’s not a good idea. The funding should go to universities and research institutions; you don’t need to give it to companies to do it.”

Such new opportunities might, in theory, calm a field tossed by acrimony and signal a détente in climate science. Yet most experts are skeptical that a kumbaya moment is at hand. The mutual bitterness instilled over the years, the research money at stake, and the bristling hostility toward Trump’s appointees could actually exacerbate tensions.

“I think that the vast ‘middle’ will want and seek a more collegial atmosphere,” Georgia Tech’s Curry told RealClearInvestigations. “But there will be some **** people (particularly on the alarmed side) whose professional reputation, funding, media exposure, influence etc. depends on cranking up the alarm.”

Michael E. Mann, another climate change veteran, is also doubtful about a rapprochement. Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State and author of the “hockey stick” graph, which claims a sharp uptick in global temperatures over the past century, believes ardently that global warming is a dire threat. He concluded a Washington Post op-ed this month with this foreboding thought: “The fate of the planet hangs in the balance.” Mann acknowledges a brutal war of words has engulfed climate science. But in an e-mail exchange with RealClearInvestigations, he blamed opponents led by “the Koch brothers” for the polarization.


Michael Mann
Mann did hint, however, there may be some room for discussion.

“In that poisonous environment it is difficult to have the important, more nuanced and worthy debate about what to do about the problem,” he wrote. “There are Republicans like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bob Inglis and George Shultz trying to create space for that discussion, and that gives me hope. But given that Donald Trump is appointing so many outright climate deniers to key posts in this administration, I must confess that I – and many of my fellow scientists – are rather concerned.”

Neither side of the debate has been immune from harsh and sinister attacks. Happer said he stepped down from the active faculty at Princeton in part “to deal with all this craziness.” Happer and Mann, like several other climate scientists, have gotten death threats. They provided RealClearInvestigations with some of the e-mails and voice messages they have received.

“You are an educated Nazi and should hang from the neck,” a critic wrote Happer in October 2014.

“You and your colleagues who have promoted this scandal ought to be shot, quartered and fed to the pigs along with your whole damn families,” one e-mailed Mann in Dec. 2009.

Similar threats have bedeviled scientists and writers across the climate research spectrum, from Patrick Michaels, a self-described “lukewarmer” who dealt with death threats at the University of Virginia before moving to the Cato Institute, to Rajendra Pachauri, who protested anonymous death threats while heading the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Putting such ugliness aside, some experts doubt that the science will improve even if the Trump administration asks new research questions and funding spreads to myriad proposals. Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT and a member of the National Academy of Sciences who has long questioned climate change orthodoxy, is skeptical that a sunnier outlook is upon us.

“I actually doubt that,” he said. Even if some of the roughly $2.5 billion in taxpayer dollars currently spent on climate research across 13 different federal agencies now shifts to scientists less invested in the calamitous narrative, Lindzen believes groupthink has so corrupted the field that funding should be sharply curtailed rather than redirected.

“They should probably cut the funding by 80 to 90 percent until the field cleans up,” he said. “Climate science has been set back two generations, and they have destroyed its intellectual foundations.”

The field is cluttered with entrenched figures who must toe the established line, he said, pointing to a recent congressional report that found the Obama administration got a top Department of Energy scientist fired and generally intimidated the staff to conform with its politicized position on climate change.

“Remember this was a tiny field, a backwater, and then suddenly you increased the funding to billions and everyone got into it,” Lindzen said. “Even in 1990 no one at MIT called themselves a ‘climate scientist,’ and then all of a sudden everyone was. They only entered it because of the bucks; they realized it was a gravy train. You have to get it back to the people who only care about the science.”

*********************************************
I imagine I missed FDSK's outrage at the time about the Obama administration firing the Dept of Energy scientist because of his views on climate change.... 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 14, 2017, 09:25:09 pm
If I had known about it, I probably would have been mildly concerned.  Because unlike some, I don't think it is a political question to be proven by debate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 15, 2017, 09:20:10 am
The issue of what, if anything, government will do in response to climate changes IS a political question to be resolved by debate, and most of the time you see anything from supposed scientists claiming Global Warming (or climate change or whatever the name of the moment might be) exists or predicting it, what they say or write is accompanied by (or at the very least immediately followed by) calls for a major government response and for the people to give to government massive new powers to implement that response.

The issue has been politicized from its very inception, and those politicizing it were the ones advancing it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 15, 2017, 11:02:12 am
The scientific process itself is also based upon free and open debate.  When Einstein proposed his Special Theory of Relativity, it was debated for years before finally being accepted by fellow scientists.  The same thing occurred later when the Uncertainty Principle was first advanced.  And String Theory has been debated among scientists for decades with no clear cut total acceptance.

If there is no free and open debate, science can not advance.  This is even more important in those situations where no controlled and reproducible experimental proof is possible, and Climatology certainly falls into that category.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 15, 2017, 11:50:52 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZCD23oOaEQ
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 15, 2017, 03:12:23 pm
Science is debated by scientists. (As far as I know, you and Jes don't count). In so far as man-made global warming is concerned, the debate appears to be decidedly one-sided.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 15, 2017, 03:16:21 pm
On the one hand there is 97% of relevant science, on the other is Jesbeard.

On the one hand there is Stephen Hawking's opinion, on the other there is DaveP.

It's tough decisions like these that keep me up at night.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 15, 2017, 04:02:12 pm
I would place credence in an opinion on climatology if the opinion was coming from a climatologist.  But no one scientist is able to be familiar with every scientific subject.  I would place no more credence on the opinion of Stephen Hawkings on the subject of Climate change than I would place on his opinion of medical science or geology.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 15, 2017, 05:41:10 pm
I would place credence in an opinion on climatology if the opinion was coming from a climatologist.

I agree completely.  Which is why I give your opinion almost zero credence. Stephen Hawking might be an "amateur" but at least he has ANY track record in the area of science.

On the one hand there is Stephen Hawking's opinion, on the other there is DaveP.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 15, 2017, 09:10:34 pm
In shocking news the Clinton's are shutting down the Clinton Global Iniative. I guess all their charitable goals are complete....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 16, 2017, 09:42:06 am
Science is debated by scientists. (As far as I know, you and Jes don't count). In so far as man-made global warming is concerned, the debate appears to be decidedly one-sided.

As soon as the "scientists" went to Congress to testify on the issue and to call for sweeping government action, it ceased being science.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 16, 2017, 09:43:35 am
On the one hand there is 97% of relevant science, on the other is Jesbeard.

On the one hand there is Stephen Hawking's opinion, on the other there is DaveP.

It's tough decisions like these that keep me up at night.

Your "97%" figure is bogus, but it does reflect the current trend of how liberals try to close debate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 16, 2017, 11:13:05 am
Sorry...On the one hand there is 90% of relevant science, on the other is Jesbeard.

By the way, I'm not a liberal. Silly labels are the result of lazy logic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 17, 2017, 07:15:24 am
And your conclusion that anyone called you a liberal is the result of lazy ready, just as adjusting your 97% figure to 90% result of lazy thinking.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 17, 2017, 11:08:41 am
Actually...I've seen the 97% number more than the 90% number. But it doesn't matter. The question of man-made caused global warming has absolutely nothing to do with the question of man-made political persuasions. I know this is hard to swallow...but this issue won't (can't) be decided by rhetoric, argument or sophistry. Not even in the era of Donald Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 17, 2017, 06:20:08 pm
Actually...I've seen the 97% number more than the 90% number. But it doesn't matter. The question of man-made caused global warming has absolutely nothing to do with the question of man-made political persuasions. I know this is hard to swallow...but this issue won't (can't) be decided by rhetoric, argument or sophistry. Not even in the era of Donald Trump.

Seeing a number multiple times does nothing to establish it is anything less than junk, and reducing the number to 90% is nothing other than lazy thinking.  Nothing in your comment suggests otherwise.  As to your contention that a the political persuasion (which I take to mean a reference to political ideology, and less a reference to whether a person is a large "D" Democrat or a large "R" Republican) has nothing to do with the position a person (including those who claim to be scientists -- note that I wrote "CLAIM to be scientists") takes on the issue of "man-made caused global warming," your contention is utter nonsense.  Denying the relationship makes it very hard to take you seriously in this discussion.

As to how the issue will be decided, we need for a moment to come to agreement on what is meant by "this issue."

If we define "this issue" as including what should be done, contending it "won't (can't) be decided by rhetoric, argument or sophistry," is beyond utter nonsense.  It amounts to deliberate self-deceit.

If we define "this issue" as solely including whether the world is warming, whether that is good or bad for humans, and whether it is anthropogenic, it is hard to understand how you could even make the contention it "won't (can't) be decided by rhetoric, argument or sophistry," when that definition includes "whether it (and warming) is good or bad for humans."

If we define "this issue" SOLELY as whether the world is warming, then any conclusion can only be made if we agree on the data to be used and that data is made available for public review.... a release the self-proclaimed scientists have not done.  Beyond the issue of the release of the data for review, we (neither the scientific community or the members of the public who you want to dismiss from the discussion) have not really agreed on the data to be used.... though in the final analysis we are only going to be able to tell whether there has or hasn't been any meaningful warming AFTER it has already happened, meaning you and I and everyone else on this forum will already be dead.

If we define "this issue" as BOTH whether the world is warming, AND whether humans are the cause, you again are going to need a passage of time allowing a reflection back at a much larger accumulation of data than now exists, AND any meaningful conclusion will involve not only the scientific community but also the unwashed public masses which you appear to abhor.  This is because the conclusion will be meaningless unless the general public accepts it, and the general public is not going to blindly accept a pronouncement from the ivory towers on high.... particularly in the era of Donald Trump.

So, again, claiming that the issue "won't (can't) be decided by rhetoric, argument or sophistry" is foolish to the point of nonsense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 17, 2017, 07:15:17 pm
Legally Teaching fatuously


I have posted multiple times the proof of the 97-8% figure.

That fact that you continuously push the myth of no consensus is laughable.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 17, 2017, 10:08:17 pm
Legally Teaching fatuously

I have posted multiple times the proof of the 97-8% figure.

That fact that you continuously push the myth of no consensus is laughable.

No, you have posted several times different links of different idiots claiming such nonsense to be true, but despite my repeated requests that you post a link to the actual study reaching that conclusion, including the methodology used and what the author or authors included as any articles in support of Global Warming and which ones opposed it, so we could do our own peer review here and I could point out the serious flaws leading to the claim, flaws serious enough to leave meaningless any percentage the author presented.... and despite my repeated requests and my explanation as to why I was was making the request, you never offered a link.

Of course, if you would like you could always present it now.... though that, of course would allow it to be debunked  -- much easier to just keep tossing the number out there as if it actually meant something.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 10:30:31 am
As to how the issue will be decided, we need for a moment to come to agreement on what is meant by "this issue."

No...actually...WE don't.  That's the point. The fact, or lack of fact, of man made global warming has absolutely nothing to do with your ability to argue. Nothing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 10:49:13 am
http://www.noaa.gov/stories/2016-marks-three-consecutive-years-of-record-warmth-for-globe
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 18, 2017, 11:04:40 am
http://www.noaa.gov/stories/2016-marks-three-consecutive-years-of-record-warmth-for-globe
Good!  This guy at Stanford is probably one of the 3% though so I'm sure this article is all BS. https://web.stanford.edu/~moore/Boon_To_Man.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 11:05:58 am
Sort of how I feel right now.  The furnace died around Christmas.  Been waiting for the plumber for three weeks.

But I have an ace in the hole...
http://www.vermontcastings.com/Browse/Wood-Stoves.aspx#
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 11:24:12 am
Eh...Robb...Dr. Moore is an economist...which sort of precludes him being part of the 3-10% minority scientists. (Frankly, I have no more faith in economists than I do lawyers when it comes to science. But that's just me.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 18, 2017, 12:03:22 pm
After a quick glance, it looks like it was published in 1995?  Kind of old to be relevant, especially since he's probably one of the 3%.

There is clear consensus among people who understand the science, as evidenced by the scientific organizations (like, all of them) making extraordinary statements they have (and that I and others have already referenced).  The arguments against I have seen here are by people who don't understand science and/or use that lack of understanding as obfuscation of the issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 18, 2017, 12:05:12 pm
Comparison of the positives & negatives from higher temperatures (yes, there are some good things that happen...but the bad far outweighs the good):

https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm

The same website lists 7 separate studies that have come to the 91%+ consensus.  You can follow links to the reports by clicking on the authors' names (though some articles appear to be behind a pay wall). 

https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

An article examining the "consensus on consensus":

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002/pdf
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 12:10:55 pm
After a quick glance, it looks like it was published in 1995?  Kind of old to be relevant, especially since he's probably one of the 3%.

A paper written 22 years ago, by an economist, and noted tobacco industry lobbyist.

But to be fair, Al Gore had far less academic credentials when he managed to win a Nobel Prize.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 12:42:57 pm
Which reminds me.  Al Gore was the reason I first became interested in man made global warming, and not because I was persuaded by his argument.  I became interested exactly because it was a politician, not a scientist, who was doing the arguing.  That just didn't seem logical. Being surrounded, as I was, by PhD scientists, who actually were experts in a scientific field, the argument seemed all the more silly.  My PhD physicist father thought the Inconvenient Truth to be largely untruthful. My PhD paleontologist brother felt that Gore's assertions were lazy, unscientific, and largely populist pulp.  Early on I became highly skeptical of "lay experts" attempting to frame the problem in political or rhetorical terms. In that respect, I owe Al Gore a debt of gratitude. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 18, 2017, 12:58:02 pm
No one wants to listen to PhD scientists.  They aren't telegenic and use big words and make your eyes glaze over.

People are stupid.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 18, 2017, 01:01:25 pm
No one wants to listen to PhD scientists.  They aren't telegenic and use big words and make your eyes glaze over.
Other than Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 01:02:25 pm
...and Stephen Hawking.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 18, 2017, 01:05:48 pm
No one wants to listen to PhD scientists.  They aren't telegenic and use big words and make your eyes glaze over.

People are stupid.
I are not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 18, 2017, 01:07:51 pm
Quote
Other than Neil deGrasse Tyson.

He's part of the 3%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 01:08:37 pm
deGrasse Tyson is definitely not part of the 3-10%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 18, 2017, 01:17:01 pm
Sorry.  The 3% of scientists who are actually telegenic and might get listened to by the general population.

Mentally, I had already made this analogy and it's greater point:  You can find 3% of people who will agree to anything.  Take Jes, for example.  It doesn't mean that they're right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 18, 2017, 01:38:21 pm
P. T. Barnum

"You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 18, 2017, 02:47:10 pm
Thought that was Abe Lincoln...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 18, 2017, 03:14:41 pm
Are you sure about that 97% number you keep throwing out?  What studies are you referencing to get that number? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 03:22:27 pm
As to how the issue will be decided, we need for a moment to come to agreement on what is meant by "this issue."

No...actually...WE don't.  That's the point. The fact, or lack of fact, of man made global warming has absolutely nothing to do with your ability to argue. Nothing.

For us to have a discussion, yes, we DO need to come to agreement on what we are discussing... of course, like most good liberals on this, you not only do not want to have a discussion, you REFUSE to have a discussion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 03:23:17 pm
http://www.noaa.gov/stories/2016-marks-three-consecutive-years-of-record-warmth-for-globe

GIGO.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 03:25:14 pm
After a quick glance, it looks like it was published in 1995?  Kind of old to be relevant, especially since he's probably one of the 3%.

There is clear consensus among people who understand the science, as evidenced by the scientific organizations (like, all of them) making extraordinary statements they have (and that I and others have already referenced).  The arguments against I have seen here are by people who don't understand science and/or use that lack of understanding as obfuscation of the issue.

And your source for the 97% figure you use?

As I have pointed out, otto refuses to provide one.

Are you no better than otto?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 03:27:51 pm
Eh...Robb...Dr. Moore is an economist...which sort of precludes him being part of the 3-10% minority scientists. (Frankly, I have no more faith in economists than I do lawyers when it comes to science. But that's just me.)

Except that Moore's argument is not whether it has or hasn't happened, or is or isn't happening or is or is not anthropogenic, but instead that it is beneficial to human productivity.... which really IS the scope of the study of economics.

After a quick glance, it looks like it was published in 1995?  Kind of old to be relevant, especially since he's probably one of the 3%.

And also means that 1995 is not at all dated on the issue of relevancy of what he is discussing.

Did you even bother to look at it, even a cursory look, before you did your best to dismiss it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 18, 2017, 03:41:51 pm
Eh...Robb...Dr. Moore is an economist...which sort of precludes him being part of the 3-10% minority scientists. (Frankly, I have no more faith in economists than I do lawyers when it comes to science. But that's just me.)

Are you disputing that mankind does better as temperatures warm?  That was the point of the article and considering it is a look at history, I don't see how the age of the article is relevant.  As noted in the article, global temperatures have been higher in the past and every time mankind has flourished.  It leads to the question, if the globe has been warmer than this in the past before the industrial revolution, before fossil fuels and man-contributing carbon emissions, then is it feasible that the earth perhaps warms and cools naturally?  Is it ridiculous to suggest that perhaps there is some groupthink going on in the scientific community?  I wonder what happens to the grants and careers of those are labelled as skeptics, deniers, 3% or whatever you want to call them.  Is it impossible to believe that even a large number of scientists could agree on something and yet find out later it is wrong?  If any of my questions could be answered no, then why is descent so vehemently attacked?  Isn't scientific discovery based on questioning the "known" facts of the time?  Should science only limit itself to  the unknowns and never question the majority?  The vitriol and downright ridicule any of those who disagree receive is surely a deterrent to stepping forward and questioning the majority's conclusions, which is dangerous for science. 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle  This is a nice article about that 97% number that is repeated like a devotional to global warming believers.  By the way, why don't they say global warming as much any more? Why did they change it to climate change?  Is it perhaps because leading up to 2015 there was a 19 year period of temperatures not warming? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 05:07:53 pm
Are you disputing that mankind does better as temperatures warm?  That was the point of the article and considering it is a look at history, I don't see how the age of the article is relevant.  As noted in the article, global temperatures have been higher in the past and every time mankind has flourished.  It leads to the question, if the globe has been warmer than this in the past before the industrial revolution, before fossil fuels and man-contributing carbon emissions, then is it feasible that the earth perhaps warms and cools naturally?  Is it ridiculous to suggest that perhaps there is some groupthink going on in the scientific community?  I wonder what happens to the grants and careers of those are labelled as skeptics, deniers, 3% or whatever you want to call them.  Is it impossible to believe that even a large number of scientists could agree on something and yet find out later it is wrong?  If any of my questions could be answered no, then why is descent so vehemently attacked?  Isn't scientific discovery based on questioning the "known" facts of the time?  Should science only limit itself to  the unknowns and never question the majority?  The vitriol and downright ridicule any of those who disagree receive is surely a deterrent to stepping forward and questioning the majority's conclusions, which is dangerous for science. 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle  This is a nice article about that 97% number that is repeated like a devotional to global warming believers.  By the way, why don't they say global warming as much any more? Why did they change it to climate change?  Is it perhaps because leading up to 2015 there was a 19 year period of temperatures not warming? 

Oh, hush, you neanderthal Climate Denier.  Don't you know that peons like you are not even supposed to discuss this?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 05:17:45 pm
After a quick glance, it looks like it was published in 1995?  Kind of old to be relevant, especially since he's probably one of the 3%.

A paper written 22 years ago, by an economist, and noted tobacco industry lobbyist.

But to be fair, Al Gore had far less academic credentials when he managed to win a Nobel Prize.

Can you address any of the ideas he raises or the points he makes... or explain why, given the nature of the article, the fact that it is 22 years old makes any difference whatsoever?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 05:19:58 pm
Are you sure about that 97% number you keep throwing out?  What studies are you referencing to get that number? 

None.  You may have noticed that otto earlier claimed that he had previously provided the study, and when I reminded him that he had not and asked him to actually post it here, he suddenly became silent.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 18, 2017, 05:57:06 pm
Are you disputing that mankind does better as temperatures warm?  That was the point of the article and considering it is a look at history, I don't see how the age of the article is relevant.  As noted in the article, global temperatures have been higher in the past and every time mankind has flourished.

I posted earlier--the outcomes of climate change are likely to be more negative than positive: https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm.  Links to related research are on that page.

Quote
It leads to the question, if the globe has been warmer than this in the past before the industrial revolution, before fossil fuels and man-contributing carbon emissions, then is it feasible that the earth perhaps warms and cools naturally?

Yes, it does.  But it usually doesn't happen as rapidly as it has in the recent past.  The scientific evidence points to additional carbon dioxide in the air is typically the cause of change, and humans are putting a ton of carbon dioxide into the air.  https://skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm

Quote
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle  This is a nice article about that 97% number that is repeated like a devotional to global warming believers.

The National Review has a clear right wing bias, so I don't consider that to be especially trustworthy.  He referenced a study that supposedly debunked the 97% number...but the original source of the 97% consensus and the one this article used to debunk it measured completely different things. 

- The original study looked at the percentage of abstracts for peer-reviewed articles with explicit or implicit acceptance of anthropogenic climate change among those that took a position of some kind (3,896 out of 4,014 abstracts that took a position; almost 8,000 abstracts did not take a position either way and were not included).

- The authors of the study also emailed all authors of the abstracts they reviewed (including authors who didn't take a position in their abstract) and asked those authors to rate their own abstracts.  Of the authors who responded (1,189 authors representing 2,142 papers), 774 said their abstracts took a position one way or the other.  746 (96%) endorsed the consensus (this accounted for 1,342 out of 1,381 studies that took a position, which meant 97% of studies which took a position endorsed the consensus according to their own authors). 

- The so-called debunking article used an extremely narrow definition (explicitly saying within the abstract that they accept climate change caused by humans) out of all articles about global warming/climate change in the previous two decades (41 out of 11,944).  I've only had time to skim the actual article, but I didn't see them address the fact that a survey of the authors of those papers agreed with the conclusion of the original article.

Here are some references:
- The original study that was the source of the 97% number: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/meta
- It's just one of seven similar studies that have pinned the cause on humans that are all linked on this page: https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm 
- Here's a follow-up review on all of them attempting to get at a "consensus on consensus" (which also looks at level of expertise as a factor.  SPOILER ALERT: climate scientists are far, far less likely to reject anthropogenic climate change than scientists in only loosely connected fields) http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002
- And just to be fair, here's the debunking study listed in your National Review article: http://climaterealists.org.nz/sites/climaterealists.org.nz/files/Legatesetal13-Aug30-Agnotology%5B1%5D.pdf

Quote
By the way, why don't they say global warming as much any more? Why did they change it to climate change?  Is it perhaps because leading up to 2015 there was a 19 year period of temperatures not warming? 

First of all, the term "global warming" has been around since at least 1975...so it's not a new thing that started sometime in the late 90s/early 00s.  Secondly, "global warming" and "climate change" are two different things.  The link below is an article from NASA about the terms, and here is the key definition: Within scientific journals, this is still how the two terms are used. Global warming refers to surface temperature increases, while climate change includes global warming and everything else that increasing greenhouse gas amounts will affect.

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/climate_by_any_other_name.html

And by the way, warming has continued--you can only argue that it hasn't if you seriously cherry pick your date range.  Yes, 1998 temperatures were especially high--but that was because of El Nino impacting weather for that one year.  If you just compare 1998 to years since, then 1998 looks like the peak of warming.  But if you look at the larger trend going back several decades, temperatures have continued to steadily increase. http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/global-warming-stopped
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 06:03:24 pm
For us to have a discussion, yes, we DO need to come to agreement on what we are discussing... of course, like most good liberals on this, you not only do not want to have a discussion, you REFUSE to have a discussion.

Judging from your obvious "liberal bating" you aren't interested in a discussion.  All you want is an argument. Have fun.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 06:05:15 pm
Comparison of the positives & negatives from higher temperatures (yes, there are some good things that happen...but the bad far outweighs the good):

https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm

Whether the "bad" outweighs the "good" would be what kind of decision?

Scientific, where we mere peons ought not even comment, or economic, where an entirely different field of academics are involved and public argument is not only expected, but essential?


The same website lists 7 separate studies that have come to the 91%+ consensus.  You can follow links to the reports by clicking on the authors' names (though some articles appear to be behind a pay wall). 

https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

Just curious, but is 91% the same as 97%, or is that something different?

I mean for those of us who are not scientists, don't know such things, and shouldn't be debating such issues (or even trying to determine what the issues are) that can be a very tough question for us.


An article examining the "consensus on consensus":

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002/pdf

According to that link, the Cook study, which is the most likely source for the oft-repeated 97% claim, did not survey scientists in general, or even climatologist or meteorologists or auto mechanics in particular, but instead surveyed "11 944 abstracts of research papers," not even the actual papers, but the abstracts, without any indication of whether they were peer reviewed, or how many different authors were represented.

In fact, in the Cook study, which you will find here http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/meta (there is no reason to expect those pushing the 97% nonsense will ever actually provide the source -- rebuttal is too easy if they do) refers to the authors of the Cook study contacting many of the authors of the 11,944 abstracts they reviewed.  And it is important to remember that for many such "research papers" there are multiple authors -- the Cook study lists nine different authors who contributed to it, and the the link brjones provided as an article on the "consensus on consensus" also had Cook as its lead author (yes, in other words, Cook himself was writing about how he really had been right the first time) along with 15 other co-authors.  And that first Cook study also references efforts to actually contact the authors of the studies.

Now, you would think that with nearly 12K abstracts, each with at least one author, and perhaps with 16 different co-authors if Cook's own work is in any way representative, there must have been at least 12K different authors.  And that ignores the possibility of any co-authors.  If they averaged 10 co-authors each, which is well below the average of the two Cook articles, you would expect 120,000 authors.  Yet, when Cook explains in his first study that they made every effort to contact the authors, all presumably "real scientists," many presumably university professors or scientists at serious research facilities, Cook and his team were only able get email addresses "for 8547 authors."  Now, he does explain that they didn't really even TRY to contact all of the listed authors -- " typically from the corresponding author and/or first author."  And he also points out that that represented "email addresses were obtained for at least 60% of papers."

In other words, if you do the math it would be rather apparent that many of the authors wrote more that one research paper, meaning the more prolific writers essentially got more than one vote if you are tallying how many of the nearly 12K papers supported or opposed Global Warming.

But that leads to an even more important reason to discount, or outright dismiss the 97% nonsense Cook advanced -- according to Cook himself MOST of the papers expressed NO POSITION ON "anthropogenic global warming (AGW)."

This is taken from the Cook study itself, right from the abstract the study authors produced to summarize their findings:
We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.

So two thirds express NO position, and somehow for liberals that represents consensus to such a degree that there is no longer anything to debate.

You do not have to be a scientists to see the flaws in the BS arguments being presented.

You just have to actually look at what is presented in think.

The 97% claim is utter BS, and there are further, far more nuanced problems with the methodology and the conclusions for anyone actually willing to look at this, but those insisting there is consensus, that non-scientists should not even be debating it, and that there is really nothing TO debate don't want that, and they don't want it for a very important reason -- it is the same reason the Wizard of Oz insisted that people pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 18, 2017, 06:08:55 pm
Are you disputing that mankind does better as temperatures warm?

I'm not qualified to make a judgment one way or the other. What I do dispute is automatic legitimacy of anything in Dr. Moore's paper.  I care to think for myself.

But I have one quick, nonscientific observation. If, as I understand, a significant percentage of the global human population and infrastructure exists at or very near sea level, then I would start to worry about some stuff.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 06:10:39 pm
For us to have a discussion, yes, we DO need to come to agreement on what we are discussing... of course, like most good liberals on this, you not only do not want to have a discussion, you REFUSE to have a discussion.

Judging from your obvious "liberal bating" you aren't interested in a discussion.  All you want is an argument. Have fun.

I am not trying to either bait you or bate you.  And at no time have I so much as suggested that you are a liberal.  I have pointed out that you have used tactics in your posts which are extremely common among liberals (they are actually central to liberal arguments), but just as when other football teams began using the forward pass they were using the Knute Rockne/Notre Dame tactic of advancing the football did not make them members of the Fighting Irish, your use of liberal tactics does not make you liberal, nor have I suggested that it did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 06:15:53 pm
Are you disputing that mankind does better as temperatures warm?

I'm not qualified to make a judgment one way or the other. What I do dispute is automatic legitimacy of anything in Dr. Moore's paper.  I care to think for myself.

But I have one quick, nonscientific observation. If, as I understand, a significant percentage of the global human population and infrastructure exists at or very near sea level, then I would start to worry about some stuff.

If Al Gore and those of his ilk genuinely believed the nonsense they spout you would see them buying very cheap, currently relatively unproductive land in areas which will presumably become much more productive with the ice caps are gone and the seas rise (didn't Obama tell us he was going to stop that?  So perhaps that isn't a concern after his magnificent 8 years) and the climate changes.

But we do NOT see that, nor have we seen the ocean levels rise, or any loss in value for the ocean front real estate which you suggest will soon be under water.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 18, 2017, 06:17:53 pm
Are you disputing that mankind does better as temperatures warm?

I'm not qualified to make a judgment one way or the other. What I do dispute is automatic legitimacy of anything in Dr. Moore's paper. I care to think for myself.

Your blind embrace of Global Warming, and attempt to dismiss any discussion in light of the claimed 97% "consensus" strongly suggest otherwise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 19, 2017, 08:03:29 pm
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a7/Climate_science_opinion2.png/350px-Climate_science_opinion2.png)


(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Cook_et_al._%282016%29_Studies_consensus.jpg/220px-Cook_et_al._%282016%29_Studies_consensus.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 19, 2017, 08:09:59 pm
Legally Addled
Quote
but despite my repeated requests that you post a link to the actual study reaching that conclusion, including the methodology used and what the author or authors included as any articles in support of Global Warming and which ones opposed it, so we could do our own peer review here and I could point out the serious flaws leading to the claim, flaws serious enough to leave meaningless any percentage the author presented.... and despite my repeated requests and my explanation as to why I was was making the request, you never offered a link.


All the underlying sources have been provided to you, The problem is your ability to accept them considering your utter lack of relevant scientific background.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 20, 2017, 03:04:23 pm
Legally Addled

All the underlying sources have been provided to you, The problem is your ability to accept them considering your utter lack of relevant scientific background.

If they have been presented, it certainly would not be to0 burdensome for you to do so again -- You could even cut and paste the last time you posted it, and really make me look bad.

Please do so.... and if it is the worthless Cook "study," I have already addressed that here http://bbf.createaforum.com/general-discussion/politics-religion-etc/msg301374/#msg301374 and pointed out just  a few of the shortcomings which render the 97% claim utterly incredible, in the literal meaning of the word.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 20, 2017, 03:13:33 pm
I posted earlier--the outcomes of climate change are likely to be more negative than positive: https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm.  Links to related research are on that page.

That is one view.  It is not one I share.  It is not one the Moore study shared.  And it is not one any reasonable conclusion from looking at the historic record would share.



- The original study looked at the percentage of abstracts for peer-reviewed articles with explicit or implicit acceptance of anthropogenic climate change among those that took a position of some kind (3,896 out of 4,014 abstracts that took a position; almost 8,000 abstracts did not take a position either way and were not included).

So, as I Have previously pointed out, how can you have more than half of the studies take NO POSITION, and still end up with the conclusion that 97% of scientists agree with one particular conclusion?

The methodology there is not suspect, it is horsesh!t.

First of all, the term "global warming" has been around since at least 1975...so it's not a new thing that started sometime in the late 90s/early 00s.  Secondly, "global warming" and "climate change" are two different things.

Of course they are, which is why those doubting the BS point it out -- once those pushing the nonsense saw folks were not buying the Global Warming BS, they starting pushing the idea it was Climate Change, since ANYTHING that happened could fit into that.


And by the way, warming has continued--you can only argue that it hasn't if you seriously cherry pick your date range.

Or if you use the fat more reliable satellite date instead of the easily jiggered surface temperature measures, many of which are inherently suspect as a result of micro-environmental changes creating heat sinks where the measures are taken.  http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01/18/load-of-bollocks-2016-allegedly-hottest-year-by-immeasurable-1100-of-a-degree-while-satellites-show-pause-continues/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 20, 2017, 03:16:14 pm
But it sure is a good thing this is in no way a political issue.... http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01/20/all-references-to-climate-change-deleted-from-white-house-website-at-noon-today/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 20, 2017, 04:07:13 pm
Why don't you flail at this legally Addled Teaching Assistant


http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2016/apr/04/don-beyer/don-beyer-says-97-percent-scientists-believe-human/ (http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2016/apr/04/don-beyer/don-beyer-says-97-percent-scientists-believe-human/)


Try to focus on the fact that Polifact can source three peer reviewed surveys citing the 97% figure before you foolishly claim the Pulitizer pricing organization is part of a vast left wing conspiracy.



Crap your pants if you have to.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 20, 2017, 04:39:37 pm
Also legally Addled Teaching Assistant


The Obama White House would have archived the records rather  than a scrubbing. The Orangefurher will deal with climate change denial in the coming weeks as he tries to pronounce China better.

You know this happens whenever administrations change.


Let's roll back the conspiracy load.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 20, 2017, 06:29:07 pm
Why don't you flail at this legally Addled Teaching Assistant
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2016/apr/04/don-beyer/don-beyer-says-97-percent-scientists-believe-human/ (http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2016/apr/04/don-beyer/don-beyer-says-97-percent-scientists-believe-human/)
Try to focus on the fact that Polifact can source three peer reviewed surveys citing the 97% figure before you foolishly claim the Pulitizer pricing organization is part of a vast left wing conspiracy.
Crap your pants if you have to.

I notice you are still unable to do as I asked.  For ease of reference, here it is again (at least the 5th time I have asked you for this):
If they have been presented, it certainly would not be to0 burdensome for you to do so again -- You could even cut and paste the last time you posted it, and really make me look bad.

I again urge you to cut and past the last time you posted the original source to the 97% nonsense claim.

As to your suggestion that I look at the politifact site, since politifact rathere clearly is not the original source, there is no reason for me to look there.  As whether "Polifact can source three peer reviewed surveys citing the 97% figure," if you can not distinguish between being the original SOURCE for the figure, and CITING the figure, there really is no hope for a meaningful conversation with you on this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 20, 2017, 06:30:28 pm
56% of all statistics are made up
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 20, 2017, 06:31:00 pm
The Obama White House would have archived the records rather  than a scrubbing.

"Archived the records"?

Archived WHAT records?  What are you talking about?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 21, 2017, 01:39:21 pm
Also legally Addled Teaching Assistant


The Obama White House would have archived the records rather  than a scrubbing.

Then the Obama White House is as good, on this issue, as the Trump White House, who also archived the records.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 21, 2017, 01:40:23 pm
56% of all statistics are made up

Do your homework.  It is 76%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 21, 2017, 08:24:22 pm
So we now have a president whose administration holds a press conference on his second day in office specifically to blatantly lie about the size of the crowds at the inauguration.  This is going to be a disaster.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 21, 2017, 08:44:02 pm
Just wait until his cabinet gets put in place and they really start making their mark.  The disaster potential is off the charts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 21, 2017, 08:51:01 pm
I'm just shocked.  No way to see this coming.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 21, 2017, 09:37:07 pm
I doubt the Trump crowd was as large as Obama, but the comparison shots on twitter seem to be a different time frame and the Trump crowd was larger than that picture.  Once the nominees were chosen we were screwed. Another fun shot was Bill fawning over Ivanka and Hillary catching him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 21, 2017, 10:17:50 pm
They were counting the 200,000 protesters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 21, 2017, 10:41:27 pm
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jan/21/sean-spicer/trump-had-biggest-inaugural-crowd-ever-metrics-don/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 21, 2017, 11:16:10 pm
I didn't realize President Obama had 1.8 million people, so there is no chance Trump matched that. Brit Hume, not a Trump fan, was in the building on the bottom right and tweeted that the crowd was larger at the time of the speech. I mean Spicer was claiming 750,000 and Trump was claiming 1.5 at least pick a number higher than Obama if you are going for a lie.  Tomorrow they will claim the ment the highest number for a Republican.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 21, 2017, 11:18:26 pm
Notice Democrats always have higher numbers since most of the East Coast is blue.  The key, I believe, is for the press AND US to ignore Trump when he's being childish like this.  Just because Trump is an egomaniac and an thin-skinned nincompoop doesn't mean we have to be.  We all know that the media will continue to prick him on things like this because they're guaranteed a Tweet and news.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 22, 2017, 08:15:18 am
So we now have a president whose administration holds a press conference on his second day in office specifically to blatantly lie about the size of the crowds at the inauguration.  This is going to be a disaster.

A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....

I believe the statement from the press secretary was not as to the "size of the crowds, but was instead about the number of people who WATCHED the inauguration.  I suspect that many here WATCHED it, though I also suspect that none were actually physically present in D.C. in the crowd.  And I would bet that Spicer was accurate in saying more people WATCHED this inauguration than any ever before.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 22, 2017, 06:41:48 pm
Notice Democrats always have higher numbers since most of the East Coast is blue.  The key, I believe, is for the press AND US to ignore Trump when he's being childish like this.  Just because Trump is an egomaniac and an thin-skinned nincompoop doesn't mean we have to be.  We all know that the media will continue to prick him on things like this because they're guaranteed a Tweet and news.

I'm not going to ignore liars. What the President of The United States of America says matters. I don't think the people or the press should ignore anything.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 22, 2017, 08:05:36 pm
Thanks kellyann


This whole miserable  administration will be based on alternative facts.


Legally Addled Teaching Assistant


What color lipstick are you applying to that pig?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 22, 2017, 08:08:02 pm
Ain't it great to know that America belongs to the working class again and not the LGBT community or people who want a free ride?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 22, 2017, 08:09:47 pm
In the end God always wins.

I heard President Trump reference the bible a few times Friday.

Hilary just thinks the bible is a book that degrades women.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 22, 2017, 08:10:07 pm
"Working class"

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRGb_YJqZ6pdDeKHG6xaka-IuyhMQQR5gcQbeKP6pskg0ye0dA)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 22, 2017, 09:49:39 pm
I'm no Trump supporter.

I didn't like either of our options.

I just found it extremely gratifying that I didn't have to hear Hilary's mouth yesterday.

OTOH I did see some people walking down the road with anti-Trump signs today.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 22, 2017, 10:09:56 pm
Notice Democrats always have higher numbers since most of the East Coast is blue.  The key, I believe, is for the press AND US to ignore Trump when he's being childish like this.  Just because Trump is an egomaniac and an thin-skinned nincompoop doesn't mean we have to be.  We all know that the media will continue to prick him on things like this because they're guaranteed a Tweet and news.

I'm not going to ignore liars. What the President of The United States of America says matters. I don't think the people or the press should ignore anything.
Let me clarify: what the President says IS important, but I will ignore this d'bag when he says trivial crap about the size of his crowds or his pecker.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 22, 2017, 10:14:21 pm
Ain't it great to know that America belongs to the working class again and not the LGBT community or people who want a free ride?

Gays, bi-sexuals and trannies don't work?  Or does "working class" mean something other than people who work for their living?

Is this one of those "dog whistle" phrases and no one told me about it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 22, 2017, 10:15:55 pm
In the end God always wins.

I heard President Trump reference the bible a few times Friday.

Hilary just thinks the bible is a book that degrades women.

And Trump thinks it is a book that lets him con folks.

Eh.... looks as if he is right for some folks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 22, 2017, 11:48:22 pm
Let me clarify: what the President says IS important, but I will ignore this d'bag when he says trivial crap about the size of his crowds or his pecker.

It is significant that the president chose to use his first official press interaction to lie, no matter how trivial the lie might be. It would be one thing if he didn't already have a track record. Somebody who is willing to lie about unimportant things is somebody who is willing to lie about ANYthing.

This isn't the silly season any longer. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 23, 2017, 06:12:53 am
Let me clarify: what the President says IS important, but I will ignore this d'bag when he says trivial crap about the size of his crowds or his pecker.

It is significant that the president chose to use his first official press interaction to lie, no matter how trivial the lie might be. It would be one thing if he didn't already have a track record. Somebody who is willing to lie about unimportant things is somebody who is willing to lie about ANYthing.

This isn't the silly season any longer. 

Can you offer a working definition of "lie," and then tell me just what the "lie" you reference was and explain also how whatever that "lie" was could not simply represent a difference of opinion?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 23, 2017, 08:31:32 am
Interesting that there are some pundits who are postulating that this is a deliberate ploy on the part of the Trump team.  They know they can't deliver on much of the stuff they've spouted so build in a ready-made excuse.  The lying media stopped us from fulfilling the people's agenda.  Get people to turn on the media.  Dangerous.  On Face the Nation yesterday, a panel said that we are polarizing more due to social media and kids on both sides being taught to hate.  They didn't see a solution.   How long before this becomes violent confrontations?

By the way, interesting also is that even though Trump may have ego exaggerated size of crowds, Spicer may have been right.   http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/how-many-people-watched-trump-inauguration-vs-obama-comparisons-tv-streaming-online-viewing-web-traffic-numbers-ratings/

Spicer said "watched around the world."  Obama's is still thought to be bigger audience, but it's hard to measure all who may have been streaming. 

As far as lying is concerned, the Nazi tactic of telling a lie often enough, loud enough, so it becomes the truth, alarms me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 23, 2017, 08:53:44 am
This URL says it all

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/wh-spokesman-gave-alternative-facts-inauguration-crowd-n710466 (http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/wh-spokesman-gave-alternative-facts-inauguration-crowd-n710466)

Moderator Chuck Todd rather strongly disliked the term "alternate facts"


(http://media4.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2017_04/1872966/170120-trump-obama-inauguration-mn-1315_06a10a678ca44a14b92ee05f347fc69a.nbcnews-ux-600-480.jpg)

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 23, 2017, 09:02:19 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C21MZaKWEAA3kjC.jpg:small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 23, 2017, 01:06:00 pm
Alternate facts.

The trick will be to have enough stomach to keep an eye on these bastards.  I already get nauseated whenever I see Kellyanne Conway, to say nothing of the Big Orange Troll himself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 23, 2017, 01:12:18 pm
Big Orange?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 23, 2017, 01:51:14 pm
Alternate facts.

The trick will be to have enough stomach to keep an eye on these bastards.  I already get nauseated whenever I see Kellyanne Conway, to say nothing of the Big Orange Troll himself.
I became very tired of all the Trump coverage on CNN long before the election but did catch one panel discussion Conway was part of.

Jake Tapper went around the table asking questions about foreign policy.  When he came to her she said "Let's talk about Hillary's emails" and started into one of her standard spiels.  Tapper cut her off and said "When our producers called and arranged for you to be here tonight, you were told the subject was foreign policy.  Please limit your comments to that."  For once, she was speechless.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 23, 2017, 03:12:48 pm
By the way, interesting also is that even though Trump may have ego exaggerated size of crowds, Spicer may have been right.   http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/how-many-people-watched-trump-inauguration-vs-obama-comparisons-tv-streaming-online-viewing-web-traffic-numbers-ratings/

Spicer said "watched around the world."  Obama's is still thought to be bigger audience, but it's hard to measure all who may have been streaming.

I think I heard something like that before....
A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....

I believe the statement from the press secretary was not as to the "size of the crowds, but was instead about the number of people who WATCHED the inauguration.  I suspect that many here WATCHED it, though I also suspect that none were actually physically present in D.C. in the crowd.  And I would bet that Spicer was accurate in saying more people WATCHED this inauguration than any ever before.

Yeah.... I did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 23, 2017, 03:17:45 pm
This URL says it all

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/wh-spokesman-gave-alternative-facts-inauguration-crowd-n710466 (http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/wh-spokesman-gave-alternative-facts-inauguration-crowd-n710466)

Moderator Chuck Todd rather strongly disliked the term "alternate facts"

That interview was painfully bad on both sides, but "alternate facts" and "untruths" or "lies" are very different things.  "Alternate facts," if they are "facts," are merely other facts to consider or look at, and there is nothing at all wrong in presenting them or considering them.... so long as they are actually "facts."

Todd, and many other mainstream journalists dislike the idea of "alternative facts," because implicit in the very phrase is the idea that  mainstream journalists are deciding what the public should and should not know AND are doing a rather poor and biased job of it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 23, 2017, 04:01:43 pm
Spicer: "I will never intentionally lie to you."

*ten minutes later*

"YES IT WAS THE LARGEST CROWD. YES THE CIA LOVED TRUMP"

(Cut and pasted from a random tweet, randomly quoted in one of about 10,000 random  Internet news articles pertaining to random alternative facts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 23, 2017, 04:19:27 pm
dan haren ‏@ithrow88  Jan 21
More
 Dan Haren pitched well at Coors Field, period!

Dan Haren is very good at Twitter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 23, 2017, 04:40:49 pm
Well I had to look it up, and Haren had a 5.56 career ERA at Coors Field in his career over 11 starts. 

Hopefully baseball-reference is into real facts and not alternative ones.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 23, 2017, 04:52:46 pm
Baseball-reference is clearly fake baseball stats and can not be trusted. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 23, 2017, 04:59:27 pm
Spicer: "I will never intentionally lie to you."

*ten minutes later*

"YES IT WAS THE LARGEST CROWD. YES THE CIA LOVED TRUMP"

(Cut and pasted from a random tweet, randomly quoted in one of about 10,000 random  Internet news articles pertaining to random alternative facts.

I take it from your post that you are suggesting the two comments in quotation marks and boldface are from Spicer, and that each of them constitutes a lie.

Without debating whether he did actually make such statements (I don't know whether he did or not make them, and am not suggesting either that I believe he did or did not), could you tell me what would cause either of them to be a "lie?"

Now, I understand "lie" to be a false statement which a person makes and knows to be false at the time the statement is made.  I also understand matters of opinion to be outside the scope of being either a lie or not a lie, since opinion, such as whether the CIA "loved" or "hated" anyone, by definition can not be either the truth or a lie.

If, of course, you have some alternate facts, by all means share them, by whether you do or do not have any alternate facts, could you please tell me what would cause either the two sentences you put in all caps and boldface to be a "lie?"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 23, 2017, 05:32:37 pm
huh, didn't know China wasn't in the TPP.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 23, 2017, 05:36:53 pm
huh, didn't know China wasn't in the TPP.

That was kind of the point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 23, 2017, 05:49:56 pm
Baseball-reference is clearly fake baseball stats and can not be trusted. 
Vladimir Putin uses it for all of his baseball research so it must be alright.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 23, 2017, 06:10:34 pm
Everybody in the world loves Trump but the people here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 23, 2017, 06:17:12 pm
FYI - your backwards hilljack town is not representative of the world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 23, 2017, 06:41:19 pm
I work in the hotel business.

I'm not normally around a lot of people from here.

I do know I was here during the debates and on election night and people were cussing Hillary like she was Hitler.

I even heard several guests get madder than hell because the TV was on CNN and they were saying it was the Clinton News Network.

I've not seen one person yet admit they voted for Hillary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 23, 2017, 06:49:51 pm
You must not be looking very hard because Hillary received 3 million more votes than Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 23, 2017, 07:02:25 pm
I don't look very hard. Politics aren't my thing and I don't think I'm a big enough fish that who the president is will even effect me.

The things that I've seen and heard are just that. Things that I've seen and heard. Not things I asked or conversations that I was a part of.

I've said it several times that I didn't like either one of them.

I do think we got the least corrupt of the two though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 23, 2017, 08:40:11 pm
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/01/_alternative_facts_is_the_perfect_euphemism_for_the_age_of_trump.html


#SeanSpicerSays that the lying media does not mention the 1,000,000 invisibility cloaks issued to the crowd on inauguration day
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 23, 2017, 08:53:10 pm
Baseball-reference is clearly fake baseball stats and can not be trusted. 

Sad!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 23, 2017, 10:55:11 pm
You must not be looking very hard because Hillary received 3 million more votes than Trump.

I actually wouldn't be too surprised, since Trump carried Tennessee with over 60% of the vote and carried East Tennessee pretty handily.

In Nashville, it's kind of the opposite.  Hillary took a shade over 60% of the vote in Davidson County, and I live in a condo where I'm pretty sure Hillary took 2 out of every 3 voters I know here and probably more than that. 

All depends on where you live I think.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 23, 2017, 11:41:30 pm
And this is the man with his finger on the button....

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/23/us/politics/donald-trump-congress-democrats.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 24, 2017, 12:12:14 am
I didn't vote for Trump but I sure as hell didn't want Clinton either.  As it is he was the lesser of two evils for me.  Hopefully he will follow through on replacing Obamacare.  If he can manage that and not letting his ego send us to war I'll be pleasantly surprised.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 24, 2017, 12:20:38 am
https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-falsely-claims-recent-dramatic-expansion-of-the-federal-workforce-192109239.html

Oops!  Minutes after saying he would fib no longer.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 24, 2017, 12:51:02 am
I almost have to think at some level, Trump knows what he's doing when he keeps harping on the size of his inauguration crowd or that millions of illegal immigrants voted against him.  I can't think it's completely about him being such an egomaniac and having a reality distortion field.  At least at some level, I have to think it's almost as much about getting in the heads of the media and getting in the heads of the Democrats, and trying to get his Fox News/Sean Hannity/Breitbart base to rally around him even more than they already are. 

Pretty much for the last 2-3 days, the media has talked about nothing but the crowd size at his inauguration.  They're not talking anything about policy or his cabinet picks or that he's signed several executive orders already.  It's basically about crowd sizes, how many people really did watch the inauguration, and about "alternative facts", etc.

It just plays right in to Trump shoring up his base and having his opponents continue to underestimate him.  If the media is going to be so fixated on crowd sizes and his embellishments about the popular vote, it's pretty easy for him to go straight back to his base and tell them how the media has it in for him, how biased and unfair they are and that the media is irrelevant and not really worth paying attention to and that you should be listening to Sean Hannity and believe the "alternative facts" he puts out on Twitter instead.  And quite frankly, in some ways he would have some points . . . he is making the media look foolish and petty and fixated on some irrelevant things right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: rjzebra on January 24, 2017, 10:00:52 am
I don't view this topic very often and now I know why.  Isn't it funny, yes funny, how the lefties point to  what they believe are lies by the Conservatives but cannot see the outrageous lying by the bastards they support? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 24, 2017, 10:03:07 am
I almost have to think at some level, Trump knows what he's doing when he keeps harping on the size of his inauguration crowd or that millions of illegal immigrants voted against him.  I can't think it's completely about him being such an egomaniac and having a reality distortion field.  At least at some level, I have to think it's almost as much about getting in the heads of the media and getting in the heads of the Democrats, and trying to get his Fox News/Sean Hannity/Breitbart base to rally around him even more than they already are. 

Pretty much for the last 2-3 days, the media has talked about nothing but the crowd size at his inauguration.  They're not talking anything about policy or his cabinet picks or that he's signed several executive orders already.  It's basically about crowd sizes, how many people really did watch the inauguration, and about "alternative facts", etc.

It just plays right in to Trump shoring up his base and having his opponents continue to underestimate him.  If the media is going to be so fixated on crowd sizes and his embellishments about the popular vote, it's pretty easy for him to go straight back to his base and tell them how the media has it in for him, how biased and unfair they are and that the media is irrelevant and not really worth paying attention to and that you should be listening to Sean Hannity and believe the "alternative facts" he puts out on Twitter instead.  And quite frankly, in some ways he would have some points . . . he is making the media look foolish and petty and fixated on some irrelevant things right now.

Because something works, does not mean it is the result of any particular brilliance.  It just means that it works.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 24, 2017, 10:04:22 am
I don't view this topic very often and now I know why.  Isn't it funny, yes funny, how the lefties point to  what they believe are lies by the Conservatives but cannot see the outrageous lying by the bastards they support? 

C'mon.... FDISK is no lefty.  Just ask him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 24, 2017, 10:13:27 am
https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-falsely-claims-recent-dramatic-expansion-of-the-federal-workforce-192109239.html

Oops!  Minutes after saying he would fib no longer.

I notice that instead of offering a working definition for "lie," as you were using it, you have instead opted to use the term "fib."

Probably a good choice not to bother defining the word "lie" when you were using it regarding matters of opinion, or matters which were not actually known by the speaker to have been untrue at the time of the statement, but since you are now moving on to "fib," would you care to offer a working definition for it?  And at the same time, could you offer the definition of "dramatic expansion" and of "recent years" as used by Spicer, not as YOU or yahoo would use them, but as HE used them, since you appear to be claiming that what he said was a "fib"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 24, 2017, 10:30:33 am
George Washington never told an alternate fact.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 24, 2017, 10:33:41 am
That (the fact China was not in the TPP) was kind of the point.

The point of passing TPP or opposing TPP?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 24, 2017, 10:44:10 am
Because something works, does not mean it is the result of any particular brilliance.  It just means that it works.

Valid enough point, and it probably isn't brilliance on the part of Trump per se.  I think someone like Steve Bannon is plenty enough smart to understand how Trump's antics can manipulate the media, though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 24, 2017, 11:57:30 am
And this is the man with his finger on the button....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/category/the-daily-202/?utm_term=.fedc0a3ef91a&wpisrc=nl_daily202&wpmm=1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 24, 2017, 11:58:48 am
I can't think it's completely about him being such an egomaniac and having a reality distortion field...

Or...maybe it just is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 24, 2017, 12:01:03 pm
Why Trump prevaricates.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-23/why-trump-s-staff-is-lying
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 24, 2017, 12:04:42 pm
Because Trump's fabrications work.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/24/opinions/why-trump-lies-dantonio-opinion/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 24, 2017, 12:08:15 pm
Trump tergiversation.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 24, 2017, 03:09:18 pm
Quote
people were cussing Hillary like she was Hitler.

Rubes.  It's why the lying works.  A big chunk of his supporters are rubes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 24, 2017, 03:25:15 pm
DMF, isn't that the same mistake Hillary made?  I gotta stay out of this thread for awhile.  If I don't I could end up defending a moron who is too thin skinned and devious to be my President, but, as they said on Face the Nation, the hate on both sides has gotten to a point that it will be hard to undo.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 24, 2017, 03:37:42 pm
Not understanding that Trump's lies weren't going to matter to the electorate?  Yep, that was a mistake if that's the one you mean.

I try to stay out of here as well, but sometimes I have to blow off steam.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 24, 2017, 04:49:24 pm
the hate on both sides has gotten to a point that it will be hard to undo.

What "both sides"?  This isn't a binary problem. I distrust Trump because he's a liar. (Which is not the same thing as trusting Hillary Clinton or the Democrats...which...by the way... I don't).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 24, 2017, 04:50:08 pm
Rubes.  It's why the lying works.  A big chunk of his supporters are rubes.

I don't think this is a condition that afflicts just Trump supporters, it is a bipartisan issue.  I say this as someone who didn't vote for either Clinton or Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 24, 2017, 05:57:25 pm
Clinton (and the vast majority of other politicians) bend and stretch the truth when it's convenient, everyone knows that.  But for the most part, they're at least able to give some logic for the arguments they make.

Trump is on a different level.  He just flat out makes things up whenever it suits him.  It's a false equivalency to say both sides were similarly dishonest in 2016.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/lists/people/comparing-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-truth-o-met/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 24, 2017, 08:32:19 pm
I'm going to disagree.  There are zero national Democrats that are willing to admit the basic math that Medicare and to a lesser extent Social Security are going to crush the budget in a few years.  Clinton was pushing the autism/vaccine link back in 2008 after it had clearly been debunked. Both sides are good with the truth only when it fits them. President Trump is just does it about stupid stuff too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 24, 2017, 10:25:48 pm
There's a difference between being wrong and lying.  Clinton was open to listening to anti-vaxxers 8 years ago.  She took a very bad position.  But she apparently got better informed and campaigned for mandatory vaccines this time.  Meanwhile, Trump is considering a vocal anti-vaxxer to lead an administration-supported vaccine safety committee RIGHT NOW. 

Trump has doubled down on his ridiculous "3-5 million illegal votes" narrative in the last couple of days.  Can you show me any time Clinton (or any national Democrat, or any national Republican other than Trump) pushed a theory that false and wasn't completely ridiculed for it? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 24, 2017, 11:14:12 pm
You are way underselling Clinton's stance on vaccines from 2008. She was fully into we have to study this, when it had already throughly been studied. There was no link, none, nada, zip, zilch. Neither she or Obama were called out on this.

Sanders and Clinton both want GMO labeling. There is no science that shows these are dangerous to humans. The media hasn't called them out.

Democrats freak out when you mention nuclear power, but that would be the best option for climate change. Instead they go with inefficient power sources like solar and wind as the savior. They aren't, but no ridicule.

Where are the stories about President Obama's $7 billion spent on failing schools, that didn't improve test scores? I'm sure the ridicule is coming.

Both parties suck, don't pretend one is better than the other.

Edit: Damn how couldnI forget global warming causing insert X hurricane. The science is at best a maybe in the future, but anytime a hurricane hits global warming will be blamed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 25, 2017, 10:10:41 am
I don't think it's all rubes.  I have a CPA cousin I was talking to around Christmas, and he still thinks Hillary should be thrown in jail with the keys thrown away.  I have another friend of mine who was in investment banking for a while (pretty much he's an overgrown frat boy type who still loves talking about his high school quarterbacking days, but still not a rube), and we had a conversation that went along these lines a couple of weeks after the election.

Friend:  Are you still butt hurt over Hillary losing the election?  I know you're in love with Hillary and all and just wanted to make sure you were holding up OK.  I did shed a tear for ya, I really did.

Me:  Nah, I'm not butt hurt over it, and I really didn't even wanna vote for her anyway.  They both sucked, and I just thought Hillary was less bad.  And I'm certainly not in love with her.

Friend:  Riddick, I can't believe you're in love with someone who did all that stuff with her emails and Benghazi.  I know you want her to strip off her pantsuit in front of you and give you a lap dance, but I can't believe you're in love with someone like that.  Even you have to admit that she's so unethical, and I can't stand that she never faced any consequences for it.

Me:  Well she lost a Presidential election over those emails and her lack of ethics, so I think it's fair to say she did face the consequences for it.  And I'm not in love with her and don't want her stripping in front of me, I promise. 

Friend:  *15 seconds of blank stare*  Dude, she should be in prison for all of that stuff!!!!  Are you &#@&ing kidding me???  Lost a presidential election over it when she ought to be in jail . . . geez!

I've had a couple of other non-rubish Republican friends whose attitudes aren't much different (and thankfully have the idea that I voted for Gary Johnson so I can avoid any other visions of Hillary doing a strip tease for me).  I have another friend who's an engineer whose attitude was basically, "I voted for Trump . . . what choice did I have?"

The Republicans did a great job turning an ethically challenged candidate like Hillary into the spawn of Satan almost.  And while I don't think Hillary should be in jail over the emails (since James Comey didn't even think it was worth prosecuting her for it) and don't care to pin a tragedy like Benghazi on her (The real political scandal of Behghazi, if there was one, was Obama wanting to minimize terror as an issue late in the 2012 election against Romney.), she definitely opened herself up to attacks like that with her email server.  If Condaleeza Rice had handled her emails the same way and if there was any way for the Democrats and the media to tie Benghazi to her, she would have had to withdraw before the primaries were even over if she had been running for President, so I don't think it's a complete double standard. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 25, 2017, 10:22:49 am
One other observation I had.  When CNN was doing their day after the election analysis in Pennsylvania, they were talking to this house painter in some mid-sized city there.  They asked him why he voted for Trump, and he said he wasn't getting the hours painting he used to get and that Obamacare premiums were getting expensive for him. 

In Pennsylvania where they don't have early voting and had 2 hour long wait lines, I can just imagine that guy waiting the whole 2-3 hours to vote for Trump, while millennials who thought Hillary was a 99% favorite to win probably didn't even bother showing up. 

And that guy's reasons for being motivated to vote for Trump were certainly non-rubish.  He didn't talk about wanting to throw Hillary in jail and wasn't a Confederate flag waving type of guy.  Mostly, he just wanted to get back to painting more, and Trump just had a better message for that guy than Hillary did.  Green jobs, DREAMER's, climate change, etc. really didn't speak to that guy. 

Hillary was just a really bad candidate to be going against Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 10:44:49 am
the hate on both sides has gotten to a point that it will be hard to undo.

What "both sides"?  This isn't a binary problem. I distrust Trump because he's a liar. (Which is not the same thing as trusting Hillary Clinton or the Democrats...which...by the way... I don't).

So where were any corresponding posts from you regarding Obama?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 10:46:32 am
There's a difference between being wrong and lying.  Clinton was open to listening to anti-vaxxers 8 years ago.  She took a very bad position.  But she apparently got better informed and campaigned for mandatory vaccines this time.  Meanwhile, Trump is considering a vocal anti-vaxxer to lead an administration-supported vaccine safety committee RIGHT NOW. 

Trump has doubled down on his ridiculous "3-5 million illegal votes" narrative in the last couple of days.  Can you show me any time Clinton (or any national Democrat, or any national Republican other than Trump) pushed a theory that false and wasn't completely ridiculed for it?

Obama lied from the very start.  He lied when he claimed in Selma in 2007 that he owed his very birth to the Selma march.... even though he was born four years before it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 10:47:51 am
Hillary was just a really bad candidate to be going against Trump.

Or anyone else.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on January 25, 2017, 11:12:00 am
He lied when he said he was born in the USA:)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on January 25, 2017, 11:12:53 am
oh my bad that was Trump
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 12:30:51 pm
It actually was likely neither, since Obama was not conscious of anything at the time of his birth and could not know with certainty where he was born, but almost certainly believes he was born in Hawaii, and since Trump was not present at Obama's birth and may well have believed the bull being pushed in some circles that Obama was born in Kenya.

BOTH of them, however, played the issue for political gain, and the public meanwhile got lost on what the real issue was.

Even if Obama WAS born in Kenya, so long as his mother was a U.S. citizen (and I have seen virtually no one dispute that point), he obtained his citizenship from her at his birth and was a U.S. citizen by birth.  The real question was whether that constituted a "natural born citizen," as required under the Constitution, or whether the founders, and the people of the states which ratified the Constitution, meant that language to mean "someone who was a citizen by birth," or whether a somewhat more arcane definition was then understood, since that definition would have left Obama ineligible.  Of course one of the reasons Trump did not push that issue and the arcane definition (which required BOTH parents to have been citizens at their own births) is that it would have also left HIM ineligible.  (Trump's mother was born in Scotland, immigrated to the U.S. at age 18, and became a U.S. citizen 12 years later, four years before "The Donald" was born.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 25, 2017, 12:31:56 pm
I hear Kenya is real excited about getting a Presidential Library!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on January 25, 2017, 12:43:49 pm
LOL
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 25, 2017, 12:50:41 pm
I think the Constitutional requirement of "naturally born" should be changed anyhow.  The Founders didn't want some Englishman coming over, getting elected, and directing the country back to England.  I feel the current law is discriminatory.  Change it to "must be a Citizen of the United States for a minimum of 20 years" or something.  Then leave it up to the voters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 25, 2017, 01:21:38 pm
Quote
I don't think it's all rubes.

Clearly not all of them.

Mentally, I have several classifications of Trump voters, but one of them is the Not Hillary people--people too bought into the anti-Hillary/anti-Clinton rhetoric to ever take a close enough of look at what Trump really is.  I have family members I respect in this group.  Sounds like your friend is, too.  I predict that life will be hard for them as they realize what a whack job they put in office.

I think I would argue that the Pennsylvania Trump voter was rubish in thinking that Trump is going to help him more than Hillary would have.

Hillary was a lousy candidate for a lot of reasons.  She wasn't my first choice by any stretch of the imagination.  I'm not a flaming liberal of any sort.  Donald Trump is just a **** monster.  Insecure, narcissistic, lying, reality-impaired nutjob.  I would have taken Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, or even that Egg McMuffin guy in Utah over Trump.  Maybe even Sarah Palin.  It's a nightmare.

P.S.  Lots of talk about double standards.  Can you imagine if the congressional committees were to crawl up Trump's ass at Benghazi-levels?  Start with Trump University and the Trump Foundation.  Or ties to Russia and what they knew about the election tampering?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 25, 2017, 01:31:50 pm
Hey!  I voted for Egg McMuffin!  Was going to vote for Johnson, but he started acting wacky too.  Most of the people I know voted for Trump as what they saw as the lesser of two evils.  I believe in our country; I believe we have checks and balances to keep even a Trump in line.  These Executive Orders may go nowhere.  A reporter of ABC last night said that the first day in office, Obama signed an Executive Order to close Guantanamo; last I looked...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 25, 2017, 01:38:05 pm
Oh, yeah.  I meant to include Curt among the people I'd rather have as president than Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 25, 2017, 01:44:36 pm
Oh my, I just made goblue007 my favorite poster, now DMF says this.  What do I do?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 25, 2017, 01:45:50 pm
I remember when President Obama went around claiming proudly that he had a pen and phone for Executive Orders and people cheering him one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 01:47:19 pm
I think the Constitutional requirement of "naturally born" should be changed anyhow.  The Founders didn't want some Englishman coming over, getting elected, and directing the country back to England.  I feel the current law is discriminatory.  Change it to "must be a Citizen of the United States for a minimum of 20 years" or something.  Then leave it up to the voters.

That's fine.  Get Arnold to champion the cause and amend the Constitution.  I would have no problem with the change.  I also see no particular urgency in that change and would rank it somewhere outside of the top 1,000 most important things the nation needs to do and for which an actual national consensus is required.

One somewhat similar which to me would be far more important would be to entirely eliminate birthright citizenship, and to grant citizenship only to those who can prove actual residency and presence in the US for a set period of time, perhaps 18 years, and who would also meet other minimal threshold requirements (such as are now required for naturalization).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 01:48:29 pm
I remember when President Obama went around claiming proudly that he had a pen and phone for Executive Orders and people cheering him one.

SOME people cheered him on.  Others called for his impeachment, in part based on that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 25, 2017, 01:56:34 pm
I think the Constitutional requirement of "naturally born" should be changed anyhow.  The Founders didn't want some Englishman coming over, getting elected, and directing the country back to England.  I feel the current law is discriminatory.  Change it to "must be a Citizen of the United States for a minimum of 20 years" or something.  Then leave it up to the voters.

I have no problem with that.  I wouldn't even put a minimum time period for citizenship.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 01:59:25 pm
These Executive Orders may go nowhere.  A reporter of ABC last night said that the first day in office, Obama signed an Executive Order to close Guantanamo; last I looked...

He did, and it may have been his first lesson in how a President may order something, but ordering it and making it happen may be worlds apart.  It was his fourth executive order of the day and it ordered that Gitmo be closed "closed as soon as practicable, and no later than 1 year from the date of this order."  (For the full text -- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13492)

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 02:01:52 pm
One other note about Obama's executive orders, since many of his critics complained about what they described as his wildly excessive number of executive orders -- he issued fewer per year than any other president since Cleveland.  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/23/obama-executive-orders/

Facts are such pesky things.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 02:04:23 pm
I think I would argue that the Pennsylvania Trump voter was rubish in thinking that Trump is going to help him more than Hillary would have.

Many voters are not particularly interested in a president who "is going to help them."  That has never once been a criteria I have used in deciding who to support for president.  In fact I would argue that it is particularly "rubish" to support someone on that basis.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 25, 2017, 06:48:04 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/01/25/maybe-trump-isnt-lying/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 25, 2017, 07:14:01 pm
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000973
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 08:38:46 pm
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000973

The absence of documented cases is not the same as evidence something has not happened.  It is not even remotely close.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 25, 2017, 09:16:45 pm
The absence of documented cases is not the same as evidence something has not happened.  It is not even remotely close.

We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections. Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 25, 2017, 09:22:02 pm
We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections. Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.

I hope you realize we are not in any disagreement on this.  My comment was not to dispute the point of the link you posted, but to underscore it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 26, 2017, 10:17:20 am
I wasn't willing to spend $19.95 for the article. This guy was. And he wasn't impressed with the methodology. (BTW, you can find about a 100 additional articles on the Web equally unimpressed by that single article.  Some, I suspect would even use the term "alternative facts" to describe it).

http://civildiscoursenow.com/profiles/blogs/non-citizen-votes-in-u-s-elections-article-makes-claim-that-is-bu

What I find most interesting about Trump's ludicrous claim:
1. that besides his hatchetmen/women there is absolutely NOBODY else in government willing to agree. The Speaker of the House and every major Senator (I've seen) think the claim is bunk.
2.If the claim is the least bit valid then the the president (and Congress) are legally obligated to investigate. Congress wont because they think it's nonsense. The president NOW claims there will be an investigation (only after made to look silly by questions from the press).
3. IF..and this is a ridiculous IF, IF there was voter fraud it would be every bit as logical to assume that the fraud HELPED Trump.


Just like the global warming issue, grasping at straws.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 26, 2017, 10:20:39 am
I agree with Trump that this much voter fraud is an outrage and unacceptable.  I think an election with so many illegal voters can not be trusted. We should do it over for the good of the country.  I'd hope Trump, a paragon of ethical virtue (unlike that scoundral Clinton), would agree and would want a fair outcome.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 26, 2017, 02:40:22 pm
I wasn't willing to spend $19.95 for the article. This guy was. And he wasn't impressed with the methodology. (BTW, you can find about a 100 additional articles on the Web equally unimpressed by that single article.  Some, I suspect would even use the term "alternative facts" to describe it).

http://civildiscoursenow.com/profiles/blogs/non-citizen-votes-in-u-s-elections-article-makes-claim-that-is-bu

What I find most interesting about Trump's ludicrous claim:
1. that besides his hatchetmen/women there is absolutely NOBODY else in government willing to agree. The Speaker of the House and every major Senator (I've seen) think the claim is bunk.
2.If the claim is the least bit valid then the the president (and Congress) are legally obligated to investigate. Congress wont because they think it's nonsense. The president NOW claims there will be an investigation (only after made to look silly by questions from the press).
3. IF..and this is a ridiculous IF, IF there was voter fraud it would be every bit as logical to assume that the fraud HELPED Trump.


Just like the global warming issue, grasping at straws.

And, just like with Global Warming and the nonsense 97% claim, you will neither actually read the study yourself (in that case the original study by Cook, the one otto claimed to have posted the link to, but never actually did and he also never would repost it)  nor read any of the criticism of it.  The reason I know you did not actually read it is because I know you are too bright to actually buy that nonsense if you had yourself read it and done any reflecting on it.  In other words, despite your insistence that you like to think for yourself, on both the 97% claim and on the issue of voter fraud, you are simply running with the herd and not only offering absolutely no indication of independent thinking but demonstrating lots of earmarks of doing exactly the opposite.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 26, 2017, 05:21:26 pm
Legally Addled Teaching Assistant


The 97% figure is backed by more than just your repeatedly cited Cook study.


Grow up man-boy. Smell some coffee and stop being a dick.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 26, 2017, 08:07:12 pm
Legally Addled Teaching Assistant
The 97% figure is backed by more than just your repeatedly cited Cook study.
Grow up man-boy. Smell some coffee and stop being a dick.

And those original sources would be?

This is now at least the 7th time I have asked your for an original source of your nonsense 97% figure.

So far you have not produced such a source even once.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 01:04:09 am
http://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/more-trump-deception-on-voter-fraud/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 12:32:09 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/26/the-leaks-coming-out-the-trump-white-house-cast-the-boss-as-a-clueless-child/?utm_term=.8477f6d7ec56&wpisrc=nl_most-draw14&wpmm=1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 12:44:59 pm
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/donald-trump-voter-fraud-math-214695


"Given that the Trump campaign competed and won in more than half of the states, it seems too much then to assume that the 5 million illegal votes were cast in only half of America’s 100,000 precincts. Even 25,000 polling places—1 in 4—seems too high. But if 25,000 polling places were targeted" by illegal voters, that would be 200 illegal votes per voting location—17 illegal votes per hour, or one every 3.5 minutes
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 12:46:14 pm
"In reality, the number of targeted polling places would have to be much lower. If even 10,000 voting places were hit with fraudulent voting, that would mean 5,000 illegal votes per location, 417 per hour, seven per minute. That’s seven illegal votes per minute in 10,000 polling places across America, all to deny Trump a popular-vote victory."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 27, 2017, 02:20:26 pm
Trump has never gone through the military ranks, he's never risen through a company by merit, and he's never held a political office.  He's a businessman who has never had any consequences for making stupid comments.  He is clueless on how to protect himself politically, and the primaries and campaign didn't help him learn anything since he didn't suffer for the stupid crap.

At times, he says good stuff, but then he is unable to stop himself from putting his foot in his mouth up to his knee.   David Muir interview:  "My Secretary of Defense, General Mattis, does not want waterboarding.  My CIA Director doesn't want it, and it's against the law.  That's it."  Thrusts his hands apart in a motion that says, no more to be said, but then the jackass says, "I've talked with many in the intelligence committee to say it works.  It works.  And I hate to withhold a valuable weapon when ISIS is chopping off people's heads."

For the love of Pete, WHY?  WHY?  He had it right, just f#$king stop.  Shut up.

And he does this regularly.  His speech at the CIA headquarters was fine until he couldn't resist bringing up the crowd at the inauguration again.  Just shut up.

And, of course, the media jumps on the dumbshit stuff.  Why not?  It makes for great news.  A politician would know when to shut up.  Trump doesn't.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 02:35:49 pm
It's much more important than simply "great news". My personal opinion is that very few journalists are enjoying tearing Trump down. The man is dangerous.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 27, 2017, 02:43:34 pm
It's much more important than simply "great news". My personal opinion is that very few journalists are enjoying tearing Trump down. The man is dangerous.
I think very many journalists are enjoying tearing Trump apart. They despise the man and hate his policies. Why would they not enjoy it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 02:51:28 pm
How do you know they hate his policies? I mean...what makes you think most journalists think alike? Certainly that's the myth the Trumpsters want people to believe.

Instead of a grand conspiracy, perhaps it's far more simple. Maybe journalists, like most Americans, know a snake oil salesmen when they see one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 03:06:47 pm
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2017/01/26/trump-adviser-bashes-news-media-new-york-times-interview/QwXPpfKVdjSS4xIyN01BGP/story.html

Here is a Trump (and KKK approved) adviser claiming that the press should "keep its mouth shut", and that the entire press somehow represents the "opposition party".  Goebbelsesque.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 27, 2017, 03:32:57 pm
How do you know they hate his policies? I mean...what makes you think most journalists think alike? Certainly that's the myth the Trumpsters want people to believe.

Instead of a grand conspiracy, perhaps it's far more simple. Maybe journalists, like most Americans, know a snake oil salesmen when they see one.

There is definitely bias

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/sen-schumer-democratic-opposition-trump/

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/mcconnell-says-big-dem-majority-in-senate-forces-obstruction/

What would you rather be?  The opposition or obstruction?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 27, 2017, 03:41:31 pm
The opposition is noble, fighting against Trump.  The obstruction is evil, if those darn Republicans would just give in President Obama could do so much good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 04:03:10 pm
Yeah...I got it after a while.  You managed what few have...you left me speechless..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 27, 2017, 04:40:51 pm
Both sides are full of obnoxious behavior, but the GOP is much worse, at least right now.  Like, say,  Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Science committee, saying that everyone should get their news directly from Trump rather than the national media?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/01/25/house-science-committee-chairman-americans-should-get-news-from-trump-not-media/?utm_term=.cb08f07ace8f

The only justification for having someone like Lamar Smith as chairman of a science committee is if you want to subvert science.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 04:45:05 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/books/1984-george-orwell-donald-trump.html

Another press conspiracy...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 27, 2017, 04:55:13 pm
At times, he says good stuff...

Did he announce his resignation? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 27, 2017, 07:04:43 pm
If you don't think the press has a liberal bent then you aren't looking. Trump has and no doubt will continue to provide a target rich environment for criticism, but to suggest there are a wide variety of views across the press is ludicrous. MSNBC,CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and the place where they all get their news from, the NY Times, all have a decided liberal bent.  Hollywood and the entertainment industry are liberal, hell, even ESPN is liberal. Now accuse me of whatever you like, but to those with sympathetic views I'm sure they seem perfectly fair. Although that isn't the case for me. Fox is definitely biased towards the right, I see it every time I watch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 27, 2017, 07:11:33 pm
Both sides are full of obnoxious behavior, but the GOP is much worse, at least right now.  Like, say,  Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Science committee, saying that everyone should get their news directly from Trump rather than the national media?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/01/25/house-science-committee-chairman-americans-should-get-news-from-trump-not-media/?utm_term=.cb08f07ace8f

The only justification for having someone like Lamar Smith as chairman of a science committee is if you want to subvert science.

The GOP isn't any worse than Schumer and Pelosi. Schumer made a deal not to delay Mike Pompeo's nomination but when the time came he lied and allowed the liberal wing of the senate to delay it. Schumer justified his behavior by saying he doesn't have control over his caucus, although he is minority leader. Then there is the delaying of other members of Trump's cabinet just to delay.  I'm not talking about the controversial picks. They are delaying the people they have no problems with just to obstruct the new administration. Obama had 7 cabinet members confirmed the day of his inauguration. Trump 2. Do you think the Republicans were any more thrilled with Obama's picks? Were you on the boards then saying how fair the Republicans were for allowing the people's choice to govern? I didn't vote for Trump, I feel nauseous in any way defending him, but the double standard here is hilarious and yet, predictable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 27, 2017, 07:52:07 pm
Then there is the delaying of other members of Trump's cabinet just to delay.  I'm not talking about the controversial picks. They are delaying the people they have no problems with just to obstruct the new administration. Obama had 7 cabinet members confirmed the day of his inauguration.

HA!  Republicans complaining about the Democrats obstructing non-controversial picks?  Get over it.  Obama nominated Merrick Garland--a moderate judge with a history of bipartisan support--on March 16 last year.  And Senate Republicans decided to not even hold hearings for him.  Forget confirmation--they didn't even talk to him.  That was a completely unprecedented move, and Republicans deserve all the obstruction they get.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 27, 2017, 07:58:37 pm
http://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/more-trump-deception-on-voter-fraud/

From the link FDISK posted: The 2012 Pew report found that 2.75 million people were registered in more than one state... but there is no evidence that any of them voted twice. (Emphasis added.)

NO evidence.....
A Maryland Democratic candidate quit her congressional race Monday after her own party told state officials that she had committed fraud by voting in both Maryland and Florida in recent elections....  “The Maryland Democratic Party has discovered that Ms. Rosen has been registered to vote in both Florida and Maryland since at least 2006; that she in fact voted in the 2006 general election both in Florida and Maryland; and that she voted in the presidential preference primaries held in both Florida and Maryland in 2008,” wrote Yvette Lewis, the state party chair.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/maryland-politics/post/maryland-democrat-quits-congressional-race-amid-vote-fraud-allegations/2012/09/10/d0ff9b1e-fb73-11e1-b2af-1f7d12fe907a_blog.html?utm_term=.98082712e4b7

And after the allegations came formal charges and a guilty plea: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-wendy-rosen-plea-20130308-story.html  And in the Baltimore Sun story Ms. Rosen not only admitted voting in two states at the same time... she proudly described it as an "act of civil disobedience."  ("What I did wasn't right, it wasn't smart, but it was [an act] of civil disobedience, not arrogance")

And some pf those cases of which there "is no evidence" involve far greater acts of "civil disobedience."  Like this one -- http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/29/mississippi-naacp-leader-sent-to-prison-for-10-counts-of-voter-fraud/  a Tunica County, Miss., jury convicted NAACP official Lessadolla Sowers on 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots. Sowers is identified on an NAACP website as a member of the Tunica County NAACP Executive Committee.  Sowers received a five-year prison term for each of the 10 counts, but Circuit Court Judge Charles Webster permitted Sowers to serve those terms concurrently, according to the Tunica Times, the only media outlet to cover the sentencing.  Or this one -- http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article1956542.html  Jeffrey Garcia, the former chief of staff to Congressman Joe Garcia.... had directed the Miami Democratic congressman’s political campaign last year to request some 1,800 absentee ballots without voters’ permission, breaking Florida elections laws that require voters or their immediate family to ask for the ballots themselves.  “I should not have done it,” Garcia, 41, told Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Nushin Sayfie. “I’m sorry, and I accept responsibility for my actions.”  Then he pleaded guilty.

But according the the award winning, nonpartisan arbiters of the truth at factcheck.org, "there is no evidence of voter fraud.

None are so blind as those who will not see.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 27, 2017, 08:06:28 pm
Trump.... has never had any consequences for making stupid comments.  He is clueless on how to protect himself politically, and the primaries and campaign didn't help him learn anything since he didn't suffer for the stupid crap.

Didn't suffer for it?  At times it seemed he BENEFITED from it, but that may not be a realistic view.  Trump won less BECAUSE of himself than IN SPITE OF himself.  Trump won because Hillary ran for the Democrats.  There were many who would have supported Trump had he NOT so regularly spouted the kind of stupidity which regularly flowed from his mouth.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 27, 2017, 08:11:25 pm
If you don't think the press has a liberal bent then you aren't looking.

Robb, I think the press is generally liberal. I also happen to think Trump isn't generally conservative. (Massive spending and trade wars are not conservative cornerstones).  The problem the press has with Trump isn't that he's conservative, it's that he's a demagogue. Modern day Mussolini.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 27, 2017, 08:17:55 pm
How do you know they hate his policies? I mean...what makes you think most journalists think alike? Certainly that's the myth the Trumpsters want people to believe.

Instead of a grand conspiracy, perhaps it's far more simple. Maybe journalists, like most Americans, know a snake oil salesmen when they see one.

I worked in TV news for ten years, in five markets, interned in another, got my undergrad journalism degree from one of the top ten journalism schools in the country, and have remained in regular contact with many of my former classmates and colleagues, three times proposed to a fellow journalist, and for three years supervised a newsroom of about 35.  What makes ME think most journalists think alike?  Well, I don't think that is actually what was written (though it IS true), and what makes ME think this is that I dealt with them closely enough and long enough that the conclusion is inescapable, particularly when opinion surveys of those in the news media confirm my own observations.

This is not to say there is any "grand conspiracy," and I have never heard anyone outside of the supposedly brilliant Hillary Clinton ever make such a claim.  There is no need for a "grand conspiracy."  They simply view things from the same liberal perspective.  There is no need for any conspiring -- they often might as well be part of the borg collective.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 28, 2017, 02:41:04 pm
Yeah, Trump is terrifying to the press not because he's a conservative, but rather because he's an unqualified, unprincipled, impulsive, bigoted, mentally-ill individual who now has the nuclear football.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on January 28, 2017, 03:09:32 pm
For the first time in decades, the federal government has adopted a non-affirmative action measure that is explicitly discriminatory towards a disfavored group.  I'm referring of course to the President's executive order regarding immigration. The measure is at odds with federal statutory law, as well as the Establishment Clause and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. I expect that it will be quickly enjoined. But legality aside, are We the People truly down with abandoning the principle that individuals are to be treated as individuals and not burdened because they are members of disfavored groups? Lots of blood was spilled to establish that principle as a bedrock of American law.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 28, 2017, 03:25:34 pm
I'm not defending Trump's actions, but how exactly do citizens of a foreign country on foreign soil have constitutional rights?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 28, 2017, 03:30:48 pm
This is one of the most shameful moments in American history.  And, it's only the first week.  I can't imagine what other outrages we have in store.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on January 28, 2017, 04:02:09 pm
CBJ, very few constitutional rights are only held by American citizens. And if the government takes action that has effects overseas, the Constitution constrains that action just as surely as it limits regulation within the United States.

Beyond this, the EO does not merely have extra-territorial effect. All lawful permanent residents (green card holders) from the affected countries who were residing here and now happen to be abroad cannot return. For many students and workers, the US is their lawful domicile--the center of their lives--and we have just fenced them out.

Just profoundly shameful.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 04:20:46 pm
CBJ, very few constitutional rights are only held by American citizens. And if the government takes action that has effects overseas, the Constitution constrains that action just as surely as it limits regulation within the United States.

Beyond this, the EO does not merely have extra-territorial effect. All lawful permanent residents (green card holders) from the affected countries who were residing here and now happen to be abroad cannot return. For many students and workers, the US is their lawful domicile--the center of their lives--and we have just fenced them out.

Just profoundly shameful.

You appear to shame quite easily.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 04:22:09 pm
This is one of the most shameful moments in American history.  And, it's only the first week.  I can't imagine what other outrages we have in store.

How so?  What is the "this" which you find so shameful and outrageous?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 28, 2017, 04:31:23 pm
A number of Obama's Executive Orders went nowhere.  I believe most of Trump's won't go anywhere either.  I believe in our Constitution.  Article 4 looms.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 04:31:33 pm
I'm not defending Trump's actions, but how exactly do citizens of a foreign country on foreign soil have constitutional rights?

CUBluejays, if you look at the Bill of Rights, the Constitutional rights addressed in it are not grants of affirmative rights to anyone, citizens or non-citizens.

They are instead proscriptions on the exercise of government power.  Those limits on the exercise of government power apply to situations or on certain things, and it does not very depending on the citizenship or geographic location of a person.  Just take a look at how they are worded.  You will immediately be able to answer your own question simply on reading the language:
http://constitution.findlaw.com/bill-of-rights.html
Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment 2
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment 3
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment 4
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment 5
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment 6
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Amendment 7
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment 8
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment 10
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 28, 2017, 04:32:12 pm
CBJ, very few constitutional rights are only held by American citizens. And if the government takes action that has effects overseas, the Constitution constrains that action just as surely as it limits regulation within the United States.

Beyond this, the EO does not merely have extra-territorial effect. All lawful permanent residents (green card holders) from the affected countries who were residing here and now happen to be abroad cannot return. For many students and workers, the US is their lawful domicile--the center of their lives--and we have just fenced them out.

Just profoundly shameful.
I'm sure you were profoundly shamed when Jimmy Carter banned supporters of the Shiite Muslim regime in Iran from entering the country indefinitely.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 04:35:56 pm
For the first time in decades, the federal government has adopted a non-affirmative action measure that is explicitly discriminatory towards a disfavored group.  I'm referring of course to the President's executive order regarding immigration. The measure is at odds with federal statutory law, as well as the Establishment Clause and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. I expect that it will be quickly enjoined. But legality aside, are We the People truly down with abandoning the principle that individuals are to be treated as individuals and not burdened because they are members of disfavored groups? Lots of blood was spilled to establish that principle as a bedrock of American law.

What disfavored group are you talking about, and just how do you think the measure is either at odds with federal statutory law or any provision of the Constitution?

I am aware of nothing which would be likely to be enjoined.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 04:37:48 pm
Yeah, Trump is terrifying to the press not because he's a conservative, but rather because he's an unqualified, unprincipled, impulsive, bigoted, mentally-ill individual who now has the nuclear football.

"Terrifying to the press?"

Forget about what the reason might be, I don't accept the premise that they are at all "terrified" of him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 28, 2017, 04:41:54 pm
As far as these refugees, I am all for helping out other nations and especially refugees, but have you seen what is happening in Europe? http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2016/02/08/islamic-refugee-problem-terrifying-europeans-coming-to-us-next-n2116425 http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/01/heres-a-fine-example-of-the-trouble-our-continent-is-descending-into/ http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-germany-crime-idUSKCN0YT28V https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2016/08/02/england-and-wales-over-56-of-syrian-refugees-committed-severe-crimes-in-less-than-a-year/  Just to post a few. And you are all on board to bring them here? I don't care if it is inhumane or not, keep them the hell out of my country unless they can prove they are here for the right reasons.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 28, 2017, 05:03:40 pm
This is one of the most shameful moments in American history.  And, it's only the first week.  I can't imagine what other outrages we have in store.
Wow!  Sorry, I think the incarceration of American citizens of Japanese descent at the beginning of WWII as topping this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on January 28, 2017, 05:07:38 pm
Yes, what the President did last night is the equivalent of the US President canceling Iranian visas in 1980 (with exceptions for medical emergencies and those facing political persecution) following the takeover of the US embassy and Iranian hostage crisis.

Jes, you self identify as libertarian.  Here is an analysis of why the EO is against statutory law from an analyst at the Cato Institute:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?ref=opinion

As for the Constitution, the thinly disguised preference for Christians over Muslims in the EO violates the Establishment Clause and the equal protection component of the 5th Amendment's DPC.

This is shameful.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 28, 2017, 05:09:30 pm
What do you want refugees to do to "prove they are here for the right reasons?"  You realize the vetting process already takes 18 to 24 months, right?  Here's an infographic showing the process:

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

I don't know what more you want.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 28, 2017, 05:12:44 pm
What do you want refugees to do to "prove they are here for the right reasons?"  You realize the vetting process already takes 18 to 24 months, right?  Here's an infographic showing the process:

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

I don't know what more you want.

He wants then to be less Muslim and brown.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 28, 2017, 05:23:14 pm
Wow!  Sorry, I think the incarceration of American citizens of Japanese descent at the beginning of WWII as topping this.

And all this time I thought it was the widespread enslaving of human beings because they had a pigmentation problem. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 28, 2017, 05:38:08 pm
http://www.sltrib.com/news/4872517-155/utah-gov-herbert-not-on-board

Crackpot
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on January 28, 2017, 05:46:13 pm
Treating a person's race, religion (or absence of religious belief), ethnicity, gender or other immutable characteristics as giving rise to a presumption about a person's character or abilities has caused enough problems. There ought to be a consensus that it is wrong. There ought to be a consensus that it is unAmerican. It certainly is not necessary to combat radical extremism--Muslim or otherwise. In fact, it undermines the battle terribly.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 28, 2017, 05:46:25 pm
This is one of the most shameful moments in American history.  And, it's only the first week.  I can't imagine what other outrages we have in store.
The week as a whole, yes.  Or would hole be a better word.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 28, 2017, 06:15:07 pm
Wow!  Sorry, I think the incarceration of American citizens of Japanese descent at the beginning of WWII as topping this.

And all this time I thought it was the widespread enslaving of human beings because they had a pigmentation problem. 
I agree.  So was the treatment of the American Indian as we broke treaty after treaty.  So was dropping A-bomb number two on Nagasaki.  So was 300 years of racial discrimination.    Lots of stuff that I would rank ahead of this.  We aren't a perfect country.  We've screwed up.  A lot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on January 28, 2017, 06:19:19 pm
Well said, East.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 28, 2017, 06:22:37 pm
Thanks for the answers. I guess I'm still confused on how limiting immigration to specific countries violates the constitution.

I think it is worse if it continues on. If Trump thinks the screening procedures are deficient then he had plenty of time to come up with specific changes. If this is and other people hinge is the direction of the Republican Party I'm only staying registered to as a Republican to vote the local primaries.

Edit: The more I read about it, the worse this order gets, but America has done much worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 06:40:31 pm
Wow!  Sorry, I think the incarceration of American citizens of Japanese descent at the beginning of WWII as topping this.

Slavery and multiple instances of treatment of the Native Americans easily surpass both.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 06:56:56 pm
Yes, what the President did last night is the equivalent of the US President canceling Iranian visas in 1980 (with exceptions for medical emergencies and those facing political persecution) following the takeover of the US embassy and Iranian hostage crisis.

Jes, you self identify as libertarian.  Here is an analysis of why the EO is against statutory law from an analyst at the Cato Institute:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?ref=opinion

As for the Constitution, the thinly disguised preference for Christians over Muslims in the EO violates the Establishment Clause and the equal protection component of the 5th Amendment's DPC.

This is shameful.

I haven't read the executive order.  What "thinly disguised preference" are you talking about?  Additionally, where do you find an equal protection component to the 5th Amendment?  Elsewhere, sure, but the 5th?

The piece from the Cato analyst looking at possible statutory problems is interesting, but I don't care enough about the issue to bother to look at either of the referenced statutes or to check any of their annotations.  As a personal matter, I simply am not bothered by it, and believe it makes considerable logical sense.  If there are legitimate statutory problems with the law, if Trump has any sense he will push for legislation to take care of that, and if he doesn't he will lose in court.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 07:00:48 pm
What do you want refugees to do to "prove they are here for the right reasons?"  You realize the vetting process already takes 18 to 24 months, right?  Here's an infographic showing the process:

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

I don't know what more you want.

There are some things which are inherently so risky that there simply is no way to reduce the risk to acceptable levels, and in those circumstances it makes sense not to engage in those activities until and unless the risk can be reduced to acceptable levels.  Right now, immigration from countries where terrorism is a major problem would seem to fit that description, regardless how long the current vetting might be.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 07:09:51 pm
Treating a person's race, religion (or absence of religious belief), ethnicity, gender or other immutable characteristics as giving rise to a presumption about a person's character or abilities has caused enough problems. There ought to be a consensus that it is wrong. There ought to be a consensus that it is unAmerican. It certainly is not necessary to combat radical extremism--Muslim or otherwise. In fact, it undermines the battle terribly.

Once they are here I agree, but during periods when terrorism is at a high level in a given part of the world and we have found no clearly effective way to eliminate future terrorists from the pool of people from that country, presumptions related to where the person is coming from make a great deal of sense.... and, like religion, are not exactly immutable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 28, 2017, 07:12:57 pm
A fun fact I saw. Of the 7 countries banned, 0 citizens of those countries have been involved with terrorist attacks on the US. Saudi Arabi citizens, not on the list, has been involved in 2000+ attacks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 07:14:38 pm
As far as these refugees, I am all for helping out other nations and especially refugees, but have you seen what is happening in Europe? http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2016/02/08/islamic-refugee-problem-terrifying-europeans-coming-to-us-next-n2116425 http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/01/heres-a-fine-example-of-the-trouble-our-continent-is-descending-into/ http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-germany-crime-idUSKCN0YT28V https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2016/08/02/england-and-wales-over-56-of-syrian-refugees-committed-severe-crimes-in-less-than-a-year/  Just to post a few. And you are all on board to bring them here? I don't care if it is inhumane or not, keep them the hell out of my country unless they can prove they are here for the right reasons.

There is a big difference between what is happening in Europe where there often is absolutely no vetting of immigrants who simply walk across borders and the extended vetting in this country (other than the absence of vetting on our own borders.... only one of which anyone is talking about doing anything to seal -- walking across our northern border unchecked is no problem at all, though entering Canada from the rest of the world is).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 07:16:17 pm
A fun fact I saw. Of the 7 countries banned, 0 citizens of those countries have been involved with terrorist attacks on the US. Saudi Arabi citizens, not on the list, has been involved in 2000+ attacks.

Eh....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 28, 2017, 07:23:46 pm
Eh....

I am actually much more concerned about the Executive Order he issued this afternoon imposing a five year lobbying ban on administration officials.  I am unaware of what basis he would have to prohibit someone from engaging in Constitutionally protected activity (lobbying) for ANY period of time after than person would leave the administration.  If he wanted to enter into contracts with them agreeing to such a ban and having them agree to an ugly liquidated damages clause of they engaged in lobbying after they left, I can certainly see where he could do that... but that would be something quite different from an Executive Order.

A president can no more prohibit you from engaging in legal employment thru an Executive Order than he can require you to eat a daily quota of rutabaga.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 28, 2017, 07:34:10 pm
My understanding is that this applies only to his hires and not past administrations. Consider it a non-compete clause. My contract limits me from working within 50 miles of my clinic in the state of Iowa for 2 years if I leave.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 28, 2017, 07:53:32 pm
So was dropping A-bomb number two on Nagasaki.

Might as well count the firebombing of Dresden or Tokyo (or a couple of dozen other cities). Many more people died.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 28, 2017, 10:04:36 pm
So Steve Bannon is on the National Secruity Council and people like the Joint Chief and National Intelligence Director can only attend if their expertise is needed. This seems like a rather wise decision. 
I'm purple impaired.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 28, 2017, 10:07:22 pm
Any time you can get a Nazi blogger on the NSC, you've got to do it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 28, 2017, 11:11:38 pm
Trump has a Nazi on call, down the hall,  and a bestie in Vlad.  Ordinarily you would have to suspect there are photos involved...somewhere. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 28, 2017, 11:14:42 pm
Trump's wall I don't agree with but his treatment of Middle Easterners is 100% merited.

Most normal people who value their life and don't get caught up in looking for a reason to raise hell agree with me.

**** them.

You think they worry about us being treated fairly?

You think they'd shed the first tear if every one of our kids got beheaded?

You all go ahead and fret over their "rights".

Ill worry about my family.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 28, 2017, 11:19:36 pm
Well...there you have it.  Why Donald Trump is President of the United States of America.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 29, 2017, 01:05:07 am
My understanding is that this applies only to his hires and not past administrations. Consider it a non-compete clause. My contract limits me from working within 50 miles of my clinic in the state of Iowa for 2 years if I leave.

That is my point -- your CONTRACT limits you.  Trump is imposing it unilaterally, not in a contract, and he has no power to do it.  (You might also want to talk with a lawyer about your "non-compete clause" -- most of them are so poorly drafted as to have no value whatsoever in court.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 29, 2017, 01:07:57 am
Trump's wall I don't agree with but his treatment of Middle Easterners is 100% merited.
Most normal people who value their life and don't get caught up in looking for a reason to raise hell agree with me.
**** them.
You think they worry about us being treated fairly?
You think they'd shed the first tear if every one of our kids got beheaded?
You all go ahead and fret over their "rights".
Ill worry about my family.

Israeli's are "Middle Easterners."  Are you sure you wrote what you meant?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 29, 2017, 01:58:39 am
Eastcoastfan, as incensed as you are about Trump's announced temporary immigration ban from a short list of countries, were you equally upset in 2011?  http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/18/the-obama-administration-stopped-processing-iraq-refugee-requests-for-6-months-in-2011/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 29, 2017, 02:03:37 am
Sadly the NY Times is correct about many of its readers.  http://thefederalist.com/2017/01/27/new-york-times-our-readers-are-too-dumb-to-understand-numbers/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 29, 2017, 02:13:54 am
Israeli's don't count Jes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 29, 2017, 07:15:42 am
A fun fact I saw. Of the 7 countries banned, 0 citizens of those countries have been involved with terrorist attacks on the US. Saudi Arabi citizens, not on the list, has been involved in 2000+ attacks.

Meanwhile, other Muslim-majority countries in the Middle East in which Trump has business (like Saudi Arabia) were not part of the ban.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 29, 2017, 08:22:35 am
That is my point -- your CONTRACT limits you.  Trump is imposing it unilaterally, not in a contract, and he has no power to do it.  (You might also want to talk with a lawyer about your "non-compete clause" -- most of them are so poorly drafted as to have no value whatsoever in court.)

I believe it only applies to his political appointees so it is a condition of employment. My non-compete has held up twice in court and it would only limit me from practicing in towns with populations less than 5,000 people so I'm not really too concerned about it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on January 29, 2017, 09:02:41 am
This merits the time it takes to read it. From an expert who (like many of us who are appalled at the EO) is a strong supporter of robust counterterrorism efforts, surveillance, countering the threat posed by radical Islam, etc.

https://lawfareblog.com/malevolence-tempered-incompetence-trumps-horrifying-executive-order-refugees-and-visas
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 29, 2017, 12:27:29 pm
That might be the most important thing I've read since Trump was elected.

Perhaps it's time for some adults to get involved.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 29, 2017, 01:10:13 pm
For your reading enjoyment.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/nafeez-mosaddeq-ahmed/donald-trump-is-not-problem-he-s-symptom
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 29, 2017, 05:42:05 pm
The travel ban executive order just reeks of influence from the alt-right and seems almost as influenced by racial and cultural politics as much as security concerns.  There's no reason successful people like that Cleveland Clinic doctor should be kept out of the country.  We're going to be in a lot of trouble if stories like that become the norm under Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 30, 2017, 07:06:08 am
Israeli's don't count Jes.

In other words, you did NOT write what you meant.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 30, 2017, 07:10:39 am
I believe it only applies to his political appointees so it is a condition of employment. My non-compete has held up twice in court and it would only limit me from practicing in towns with populations less than 5,000 people so I'm not really too concerned about it.

I would need to see the non-compete AND the court cases to respond, but this is an issue I have researched quite well, and the vast majority of non compete clauses are unenforceable in most situations.  As to the ban applying only to his political appointees, he does not get to unilaterally alter an employment contract after someone is hired, and for future hires, unless it could be shown they were specifically shown the order, it would not apply to them.... and likely would be unenforceable.... but I'm sure it makes some of his supporters feel good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 30, 2017, 07:13:50 am
I was as big a critic of Trump as anyone before the election, and I simply am not particularly bothered by the immigration ban.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 30, 2017, 07:48:24 am
I was as big a critic of Trump as anyone before the election, and I simply am not particularly bothered by the immigration ban.

That's because you're a horrible person.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 30, 2017, 09:55:38 am
I think if Trump hadn't stated that he wanted to ban all Muslims in the primaries this wouldn't be blown up as much as it is. In effect it is a 120 moratorium on visas so they have time to evaluate how secure the process is. Probably not a horrible idea but in light of his earlier comments understandable his enemies would jump all over it and wonder if this is a precursor to more, then I am as troubled as anyone. But I want to make sure vetting is being done carefully and in as thorough manner as possible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 30, 2017, 10:11:03 am
Robb, the vetting is already done carefully. Anyone who tells you otherwise is simply misinformed. It often takes folks from Syria more than 2 years to clear current vetting. This "extreme vetting" is strawman horseshit, plain and simple.

And, it's thank to this careful vetting that there have been literally ZERO attacks by immigrants from the banned countries. (It's also thanks to the fact that most of these people are simply decent human beings, regardless of whatever narrative Trump wants to sell you on.) It's thanks to this careful vetting that you are FOUR TIMES more likely to die in the bathtub than you are to die of a terrorist attack on US soil. Ban all the tubs! They're 4x more dangerous than terrorists!!!

Other problems with Trumps Muslim ban include the fact that he apparently did not vet it through any of the relevant legal agencies, and that, very curiously, none of the Middle Eastern countries in which Trump has business interests (and from which terrorists have ACTUALLY come to the US) were included on the list. Conflict of interest much?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 30, 2017, 10:12:11 am
"Vetting" already exists.  This was pure optics and indicative of things to come.  I think the list of people "jumping all over this" is considerably larger than just Trump's enemies. I think the crowd also includes more than few people who just happen to like the Constitution more than the Donald.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 30, 2017, 10:14:56 am
For a very brief summary on what current vetting process looks like:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/29/us/refugee-vetting-process.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 30, 2017, 10:24:09 am
For a very brief summary on what current vetting process looks like:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/29/us/refugee-vetting-process.html

I didn't realize the vetting process for refugees was already that extensive.  Thanks for sharing that tico.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 30, 2017, 10:24:35 am
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/29/trump-asked-for-a-muslim-ban-giuliani-says-and-ordered-a-commission-to-do-it-legally/?utm_term=.eac6af64ecc3

Interesting reading for those who are convinced that this has nothing to do with banning Muslims.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 30, 2017, 10:32:04 am
Quote
Other problems with Trumps Muslim ban include the fact that he apparently did not vet it through any of the relevant legal agencies . . .

Apparently Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon were the two responsible for pushing that executive order themselves.  It just reeks more of alt-right nationalism than genuine national security concerns to me.

Those two guys were quite frankly the two reasons why I thought Hillary actually wasn't worse than Trump when it came down to it, as truly bad as she would have been. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 30, 2017, 10:47:50 am
Robb, the vetting is already done carefully. Anyone who tells you otherwise is simply misinformed. It often takes folks from Syria more than 2 years to clear current vetting. This "extreme vetting" is strawman horseshit, plain and simple.

And, it's thank to this careful vetting that there have been literally ZERO attacks by immigrants from the banned countries. (It's also thanks to the fact that most of these people are simply decent human beings, regardless of whatever narrative Trump wants to sell you on.) It's thanks to this careful vetting that you are FOUR TIMES more likely to die in the bathtub than you are to die of a terrorist attack on US soil. Ban all the tubs! They're 4x more dangerous than terrorists!!!

Other problems with Trumps Muslim ban include the fact that he apparently did not vet it through any of the relevant legal agencies, and that, very curiously, none of the Middle Eastern countries in which Trump has business interests (and from which terrorists have ACTUALLY come to the US) were included on the list. Conflict of interest much?

That very well may be Tico, but is it ridiculous for the new administration to want a moratorium on new immigrants from those countries while they make sure themselves that those procedures are being followed? When they get their own staff in there and can be sure of it the ban can be lifted. It that is what happens is it that big of a deal? Probably not. The real problem is Trump's statements in the primary saying he wanted to ban Muslims from coming into the country.  If the 120 period slips by and the ban is over nobody will remember it or care much, but if it leads to more permanent measures that target a religion, then it becomes a problem and I would not support such a measure. I happen to be a member of the only religion in this country to have had an extermination order taken out against it by a state government.  One that was still in place until 1976.  Yes, you could legally shoot a Mormon in Missouri until 1976. So I am sensitive to religious targeting. If that is what this becomes then I will lead the charge against it.  If it's just a 120 day catch-your-breath faze while his officers see if the measures in place are secure enough and working, like he promised in the primaries, then it's really no big deal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 30, 2017, 10:57:33 am
I'm sure Bannon has plans for the LDS.  But first things first.  Need to take care of those pesky Muslims and Mexicans.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 30, 2017, 11:18:07 am
That very well may be Tico, but is it ridiculous for the new administration to want a moratorium on new immigrants from those countries while they make sure themselves that those procedures are being followed? When they get their own staff in there and can be sure of it the ban can be lifted. It that is what happens is it that big of a deal? Probably not. The real problem is Trump's statements in the primary saying he wanted to ban Muslims from coming into the country.  If the 120 period slips by and the ban is over nobody will remember it or care much, but if it leads to more permanent measures that target a religion, then it becomes a problem and I would not support such a measure. I happen to be a member of the only religion in this country to have had an extermination order taken out against it by a state government.  One that was still in place until 1976.  Yes, you could legally shoot a Mormon in Missouri until 1976. So I am sensitive to religious targeting. If that is what this becomes then I will lead the charge against it.  If it's just a 120 day catch-your-breath faze while his officers see if the measures in place are secure enough and working, like he promised in the primaries, then it's really no big deal.

Robb, that's not what is happening. For starters, the procedures *ARE* being followed (I know people in the Middle East who work in these fields), but even if Trump doubted the process, it would be very easy to research and qualify all this long before being elected, especially given how high a priority immigration is for the administration. I would expect nothing less from a *serious* presidential candidate.

When they get their own staff in there? The entire departments of Homeland, etc., are not being turned over. Moreover, there are any number of other NGOs involved in the process that Trump has no say in their hiring/firing.

With regards to the idea that the ban will be lifted in 120, the group of refugees most in need of assistance right now, Syrians, are indefinitely banned. There is no 90- or 120-day window on those bans.

Given Trump's clear and consistent rhetoric about Muslims, about going after the familes of terrorists, about the great American carnage we face, about America first; given the stories about Trump, Giuliani, Banon, etc., working to put a "Muslim ban" in place, suggesting that this is a simple precautionary measure that will be allowed to lapse both ignores the immediate and terrible impact of the ban as well as Trump's consistent messaging and values. Trump has done absolutely nothing to merit ignoring his *actual* language and campaigning on the topic and instead assuming a best-of-intentions for him and his staff.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 30, 2017, 11:29:07 am
Here's Stephen Miller at a Trump rally back in June talking about Syrian refugee programs and what it's costing Americans, starting at 7:07.    I think you can see what his real motivations are for cutting the Syrian refugee program here, and it's not all about national security.  He's basically making the case for all the money we're spending on the Syrian refugee program and finding them jobs, giving them welfare, getting them settled, etc., we could be spending it on people in this country.  It's about as nativist as you can get.

This guy may very well be the #2 guy driving policy in the Trump administration, behind Bannon.  He co-wrote the executive order with Bannon and co-wrote Trump's inaugural address with Bannon as well.

https://youtu.be/05LujCtelSM?t=7m7s (https://youtu.be/05LujCtelSM?t=7m7s)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on January 30, 2017, 11:48:22 am
I don't know all the information pertaining to entry into the country.  I do know that my mom started and runs a Christian based school for children in a small community in western Kenya.  The local man that helps her run the school and get anything done there has never been granted a visa to come to the US in order to help raise funds for the school.  So to me the vetting seems more than adequate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on January 30, 2017, 11:53:19 am
On and additional note in regards to that - if you are looking for a charity to contribute, you can sponsor a child in that school for $20 a year or $40 for an elementary border student or $80 for a high school student.  If you want any additional information, I'd be happy to provide anything I know.  I can state that 100% of the contributions goes to the school/student.  My mom does not take any money for even her travel/expenses - she pays for that herself.  She spends 6 to 7 months in the village overseeing the school and work group visitors.

http://villageprojectafrica.org/ (http://villageprojectafrica.org/)

Or if you want, you can choose this charity on the smile.amazon.com site and anytime you buy from Amazon, a donation will be made to the charity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 30, 2017, 06:31:03 pm
Robb, the vetting is already done carefully. Anyone who tells you otherwise is simply misinformed. It often takes folks from Syria more than 2 years to clear current vetting. This "extreme vetting" is strawman horseshit, plain and simple.

And, it's thank to this careful vetting that there have been literally ZERO attacks by immigrants from the banned countries. (It's also thanks to the fact that most of these people are simply decent human beings, regardless of whatever narrative Trump wants to sell you on.) It's thanks to this careful vetting that you are FOUR TIMES more likely to die in the bathtub than you are to die of a terrorist attack on US soil. Ban all the tubs! They're 4x more dangerous than terrorists!!!

Other problems with Trumps Muslim ban include the fact that he apparently did not vet it through any of the relevant legal agencies, and that, very curiously, none of the Middle Eastern countries in which Trump has business interests (and from which terrorists have ACTUALLY come to the US) were included on the list. Conflict of interest much?


Two of the countries on the list are in civil war.  One of them, Iran, is a state sponsor of terror.  Two others have no functioning governments.  One of them (Iraq) has a huge chunk controlled by ISIS.  ALL of them had been identified by the Obama administration as nations where lack of government cooperation or lack of government records or the lack of effective governments have made it impossible to meaningfully vet those seeking to immigrate.

Saudi Arabia, which is not on the list and is a nation where Trump has business interests, is NOT a nation the sainted Obama administration identified as one where lack of government cooperation or lack of government records or the lack of effective governments have made it impossible to meaningfully vet those seeking to immigrate.

Yes, it may take two years to complete current vetting, but the length of time involved does not mean it was worth a damb.  If we can't get needed cooperation from the nation where the applicant has been, even those in the Obama administration responsible for the vetting acknowledged there were not able to perform needed background checks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 30, 2017, 06:33:42 pm
I didn't realize the vetting process for refugees was already that extensive.  Thanks for sharing that tico.

Did you realize the Obama administration itself had acknowledged regardless how long they took, under the current system, no matter how long they took, they could not really check backgrounds from some countries?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 30, 2017, 06:38:01 pm
if it leads to more permanent measures that target a religion, then it becomes a problem and I would not support such a measure.


It is not a Muslim ban.  There are forty nations with Muslim majority populations which are not on that list.  Religion was not a reason any of those nations are on the list.

Yes, you could legally shoot a Mormon in Missouri until 1976.

Bull.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 30, 2017, 07:22:36 pm

It is not a Muslim ban.  There are forty nations with Muslim majority populations which are not on that list.  Religion was not a reason any of those nations are on the list.

Bull.

This is Executive Order 44 by Governor Lilburn Boggs of Missouri:
Missouri Governor Lilburn W. Boggs' Order of Extermination, Missouri Executive Order Number 44, read as follows:

Headquarters of the Militia,
City of Jefferson, Oct. 27, 1838.

General John B. Clark:

Sir Since the order of this morning to you, directing you to cause four hundred mounted men to be raised within your division, I have received by Amos Reese, Esq., of Ray county, and Wiley C. Williams, Esq., one of my aids, information of the most appalling character, which entirely changes the face of things, and places the Mormons in the attitude of an open and avowed defiance of the laws, and of having made war upon the people of this state. Your orders are, therefore, to hasten your operation with all possible speed. The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the state if necessary for the public peace--their outrages are beyond all description. If you can increase your force, you are authorized to do so to any extent you may consider necessary. I have just issued orders to Maj. Gen. Willock, of Marion county, to raise five hundred men, and to march them to the northern part of Daviess, and there unite with Gen. Doniphan, of Clay, who has been ordered with five hundred men to proceed to the same point for the purpose of intercepting the retreat of the Mormons to the north. They have been directed to communicate with you by express, you can also communicate with them if you find it necessary. Instead therefore of proceeding as at first directed to reinstate the citizens of Daviess in their homes, you will proceed immediately to Richmond and then operate against the Mormons. Brig. Gen. Parks of Ray, has been ordered to have four hundred of his brigade in readiness to join you at Richmond. The whole force will be placed under your command.

I am very respectfully,
your ob't serv't, L. W. Boggs,
Commander-in-Chief.

Here is a link to the 1976 act by Kit Bond as Governor of MO rescinding the order to Exterminate Mormons or drive them from the state.  https://www.sos.mo.gov/cmsimages/archives/resources/findingaids/miscMormRecs/eo/19760625_RescisOrder.pdf  So sit on that bull and smoke it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 30, 2017, 07:38:58 pm
If you think anyone was able to legally commit murder in 1976,  you're really dumb even by Mormon standards.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 30, 2017, 07:48:00 pm
Legally one could have argued that they were following the governor's orders if they killed a Mormon or drove them from the state.  It would have been flimsy for sure, but name another religion in this country with anything like it on the books. And if you think Mormons are dumb, then you need to crack a book. Mormons per capita are some of the smartest, most well-educated people in this country. Maybe if Trump did a Mormon ban Cletus could finally find a policy he could get on board with.  Of course, it's only bad to be an anti-muslim bigot, isn't that correct Cletus? I find it laughable that you are on here so worried about the plight of refugees while you celebrated the death of Mormon leader President Hinckley a few years back. Look up hypocrite, you'll find a mirror.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 30, 2017, 07:51:24 pm
This is Executive Order 44 by Governor Lilburn Boggs of Missouri:
Missouri Governor Lilburn W. Boggs' Order of Extermination, Missouri Executive Order Number 44, read as follows:

Headquarters of the Militia,
City of Jefferson, Oct. 27, 1838.

General John B. Clark:

Sir Since the order of this morning to you, directing you to cause four hundred mounted men to be raised within your division, I have received by Amos Reese, Esq., of Ray county, and Wiley C. Williams, Esq., one of my aids, information of the most appalling character, which entirely changes the face of things, and places the Mormons in the attitude of an open and avowed defiance of the laws, and of having made war upon the people of this state. Your orders are, therefore, to hasten your operation with all possible speed. The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the state if necessary for the public peace--their outrages are beyond all description. If you can increase your force, you are authorized to do so to any extent you may consider necessary. I have just issued orders to Maj. Gen. Willock, of Marion county, to raise five hundred men, and to march them to the northern part of Daviess, and there unite with Gen. Doniphan, of Clay, who has been ordered with five hundred men to proceed to the same point for the purpose of intercepting the retreat of the Mormons to the north. They have been directed to communicate with you by express, you can also communicate with them if you find it necessary. Instead therefore of proceeding as at first directed to reinstate the citizens of Daviess in their homes, you will proceed immediately to Richmond and then operate against the Mormons. Brig. Gen. Parks of Ray, has been ordered to have four hundred of his brigade in readiness to join you at Richmond. The whole force will be placed under your command.

I am very respectfully,
your ob't serv't, L. W. Boggs,
Commander-in-Chief.

Here is a link to the 1976 act by Kit Bond as Governor of MO rescinding the order to Exterminate Mormons or drive them from the state.  https://www.sos.mo.gov/cmsimages/archives/resources/findingaids/miscMormRecs/eo/19760625_RescisOrder.pdf  So sit on that bull and smoke it.

Governors do not make law, nor can they repeal law.  The executive order you reference had NO force of law.  Bond may have rescinded the order as a political gesture, but his recision had no more meaning or significance under the law than what Boggs originally issued.

Donald Trump could sign an executive order tomorrow requiring that everyone in America eat rutabaga, and it would have n force or effect.  The same is true of what Boggs signed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 30, 2017, 07:54:30 pm
Two of the countries on the list are in civil war.  One of them, Iran, is a state sponsor of terror.  Two others have no functioning governments.  One of them (Iraq) has a huge chunk controlled by ISIS.  ALL of them had been identified by the Obama administration as nations where lack of government cooperation or lack of government records or the lack of effective governments have made it impossible to meaningfully vet those seeking to immigrate.

https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 30, 2017, 08:13:51 pm
Governors do not make law, nor can they repeal law.  The executive order you reference had NO force of law.  Bond may have rescinded the order as a political gesture, but his recision had no more meaning or significance under the law than what Boggs originally issued.

Donald Trump could sign an executive order tomorrow requiring that everyone in America eat rutabaga, and it would have n force or effect.  The same is true of what Boggs signed.
Yes, I'm sure Mormons said that very thing to the soldiers who were driving them from their homes, raping their wives and shooting them in cold blood.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 30, 2017, 08:14:09 pm
Robb, if they ever do come for you, remember, you can always hang out on my 'sanctuary houseboat' at Lake Powell.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 30, 2017, 08:23:46 pm
Quote
you can always hang out on my 'sanctuary houseboat' at Lake Powell.

No federal funds for you!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 30, 2017, 08:27:29 pm
Sounds like a plan FDISK! But no politics discussions. We can waste time with discussions of Cubs and border collies.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on January 30, 2017, 08:58:16 pm
Yes, I'm sure Mormons said that very thing to the soldiers who were driving them from their homes, raping their wives and shooting them in cold blood.   

Your claim, which I disputed, was not whether the event you describe here ever happened in Missouri, or even whether it happened with the approval of the governor at the time.  Your claim was that it was legal to do such things to Mormons until 1976.  THAT was bull.  Nothing you have posted indicates otherwise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on January 31, 2017, 09:02:09 am
https://youtu.be/Nfcl0w0vvXo
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2017, 09:48:01 am
This is unreal.  From an actual tv show from the 50's.  It doesn't actually seem to be dubbed in any way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1D2ynASqe4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1D2ynASqe4)

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2017, 09:56:54 am
Here's a 4 minute clip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs6UcgiDwg0&sns=em
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 01, 2017, 09:59:00 am
This is unreal.  From an actual tv show from the 50's.  It doesn't actually seem to be dubbed in any way.

Yep, it checks out.

http://www.snopes.com/trackdown-trump-character-wall/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2017, 10:49:07 am
I almost fell on the floor when he said, "I'll sue you."  And then, Build a Wall.  Holy crap.  Hilarious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 01, 2017, 01:25:15 pm
Assuming for the sake or argument that Global Warming is actually happening, this article illustrates one of the ways it is much more likely to be beneficial than harmful, particularly since most of the noticeable warming would take place on the colder parts of the globe: https://www.fastcoexist.com/3053147/climate-change-is-making-it-possible-to-farm-the-alaskan-tundra
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 01, 2017, 01:32:11 pm
last two paragraphs:



Even if it's helping his livelihood, Meyers is still concerned about climate change—including the effects that it will continue to have on other farmers elsewhere.

"I'm extremely worried," he says. "I don't know what everyone's going to do. Even though I'm taking advantage of the positive side, I'm not going to be able to deal with the negative side that everybody is faced with. It's going to be harder and harder to grow stuff outside—the droughts and severe weather. I grow a lot of food, but I sure can't replace all those guys."



LOL
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 01, 2017, 01:36:09 pm
Assuming for the sake or argument that Global Warming is actually happening, this article illustrates one of the ways it is much more likely to be beneficial than harmful, particularly since most of the noticeable warming would take place on the colder parts of the globe: https://www.fastcoexist.com/3053147/climate-change-is-making-it-possible-to-farm-the-alaskan-tundra

All 6 Alaskan farmers rejoice! This is pathetic, even by jestandards.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 01, 2017, 01:45:50 pm
Great sea side real estate opportunities!

https://www.climate.gov/maps-data/dataset/sea-level-rise-map-viewer
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on February 01, 2017, 01:49:29 pm
According to the Farm Service Agency, Alaska has gone from 5,843 cropped acres in 2012 to 5,842 cropped acres today.

#jesmath
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 01, 2017, 01:53:15 pm
Some crops such as tomatoes do exceptionally well in Alaska due to the extended daylight hours in the summer.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2017, 02:12:22 pm
Corn does well, too.   Okie, not sure what the Farm Agency is looking at, but Alaska has over 900,000 tillable acres.  I went to school in 1969 with a farmboy from Alaska whose family had a farm of 6000 acres all by itself.  Short growing season but with 20+ hours of sunlight, it grows like the Midwest.  Their plows, planters, and combines are HUGE.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on February 01, 2017, 02:42:53 pm
Corn does well, too.   Okie, not sure what the Farm Agency is looking at, but Alaska has over 900,000 tillable acres.  I went to school in 1969 with a farmboy from Alaska whose family had a farm of 6000 acres all by itself.  Short growing season but with 20+ hours of sunlight, it grows like the Midwest.  Their plows, planters, and combines are HUGE.

Tillable is not the same at tilled.  Nearly all of the tilled acreage occurs on Point MacKenzie, with a little bit more around Sterling..  I count ~14,000 acres, but not all of that may be in production on any given year.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2017, 02:49:46 pm
I agree that tillable is not the same is tilled, but I still think you're way short.  We have 14,000 acres in our Illinois county.  900,000 acres in Alaska is a postage stamp in a city block.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on February 01, 2017, 07:32:12 pm
(http://oi67.tinypic.com/1tt2r4.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on February 01, 2017, 07:42:35 pm
I don't really know why we're arguing about Alaska's crop production, but I've been looking intently at satellite and aerial photography of Alaska for the last year, and I'm here to tell you there's not anywhere close to 900,000 acres in tilled land.

https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/article/rare-successful-alaska-corn-harvest-gives-fairbanks-farmers-hope/2012/08/22/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 01, 2017, 09:53:30 pm
https://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012/Online_Resources/Congressional_District_Profiles/cd0201.pdf

According to the agricultural census of 2012, there are 833,861 acres of farmland in Alaska, producing $58,925,000 worth of agricultural products yearly.  If you can do that on 5,892 acres, that is (even without JesMath) one million dollars per acre.

It sounds as if the report you saw was giving the dollar value of the production, not the acres in production.  Actual production acres is over 833,000 acres for the entire state.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: OkieCubsFan on February 01, 2017, 11:05:12 pm
Literally go look at aerial photos of Alaska and tell me where 800k acres of cropland is.  Please, find them.

This whole discussion started with talk about planting crops on more land due to global warming.  From the link you just posted:

(http://oi63.tinypic.com/2dufq4i.jpg)

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2017, 11:36:06 pm
Okie, I agree, this isn't worth discussing, but Alaska is 424,491,520 acres. Using my figure of 900,000, that means .002 percent is farm land.  Like I said, postage stamp in national forest.  I totally believe you that you can't see much in aerial photographs.  I'm dropping it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 02, 2017, 06:46:16 am
last two paragraphs:

Even if it's helping his livelihood, Meyers is still concerned about climate change—including the effects that it will continue to have on other farmers elsewhere.

"I'm extremely worried," he says. "I don't know what everyone's going to do. Even though I'm taking advantage of the positive side, I'm not going to be able to deal with the negative side that everybody is faced with. It's going to be harder and harder to grow stuff outside—the droughts and severe weather. I grow a lot of food, but I sure can't replace all those guys."

LOL

Laughing like a madman giggling in a corner and having no understanding of what he is laughing at.

His worries and concerns do not alter the reality that even those pushing Global Warming nonsense generally acknowledge that any changes would be relatively minor the closer you are to the equator an greater nearer the poles, and warmer temperatures in the far north and south would be good for humans, with one of the biggest ways that would happen illustrated in the aarticle -- allowing crops to be grow in areas where they can not, just as roughly a thousand years ago the Vikings settling Greenland benefited from the warming of that period and were growing barely in Greenland, in areas now far too cold to do so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 02, 2017, 09:18:54 am
As the farmer in the article points out,  it hardly matters. 

http://www.stuffaboutstates.com/agriculture/

This is the most ridiculous conversation since Wyoming's school/grizzly bear discussion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 02, 2017, 09:59:36 am
His worries and concerns do not alter the reality that even those pushing Global Warming nonsense generally acknowledge that any changes would be relatively minor the closer you are to the equator an greater nearer the poles, and warmer temperatures in the far north and south would be good for humans,

Not so quick Strawman.  The temperature changes at the poles would be greater but the effects at the equator would be enormous and possibly much more important.

I would think, Jes, that if you want to continue to have ANYBODY to talk with on this site then you would at least TRY to be honest in your approach. In my opinion, all you want is an argument. I have better things to do...which is why I will join the vast majority of posters and block you. I feel guilty about it, because there are times when I think you need a friend.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 02, 2017, 10:04:15 am
His worries and concerns do not alter the reality that even those pushing Global Warming nonsense generally acknowledge that any changes would be relatively minor the closer you are to the equator an greater nearer the poles, and warmer temperatures in the far north and south would be good for humans,

Not so quick Strawman.  The temperature changes at the poles would be greater but the effects at the equator would be enormous and possibly much more important.

I would think, Jes, that if you want to continue to have ANYBODY to talk with on this site then you would at least TRY to be honest in your approach. In my opinion, all you want is an argument. I have better things to do...which is why I will join the vast majority of posters and block you. I feel guilty about it, because there are times when I think you need a friend.

It's not a lie if you believe it.

-- George Costanza
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 02, 2017, 12:59:59 pm
Sounds like a Kellyanne Conway line.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 02, 2017, 01:59:18 pm
When Obama said "if you like your insurance plan, you can keep your insurance plan, period"  it sounded like he believed it.  Yet, many people lost their insurance plan, and quite a few lost the doctor that they liked.  Did Obama lie?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 02, 2017, 03:26:40 pm
Lie denotes intention, which is the reason the media are reluctant to use the word, and instead they throw out more awkward words like "falsehoods."

No idea if Obama lied. Clearly he was wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 02, 2017, 03:34:36 pm
Obama said he was going to fundamentally transform America.  He didn't lie.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 02, 2017, 04:13:07 pm
When Obama said "if you like your insurance plan, you can keep your insurance plan, period"  it sounded like he believed it.  Yet, many people lost their insurance plan, and quite a few lost the doctor that they liked.  Did Obama lie?
On this particular issue, I think Obama was lied TO.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 02, 2017, 05:04:05 pm
So we agree that if you believe it when you say it, it isn't a lie?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 02, 2017, 05:14:35 pm
No, I don't think it is a lie, especially if you admit later that it was due to misinformation.

I don't believe Bush lied either with "weapons of mass destruction."  This is what he was told and unfortunately he believed it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 02, 2017, 05:33:19 pm
Bush lied, people died. It's a clever chant and it rhymes, so it must be true.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 02, 2017, 06:42:59 pm
I will... block you.

Boy, I'm gonna cry over that one.  Of course when you really can't defend your position, pretending opposing views don't exist can be quite comforting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 02, 2017, 06:45:04 pm
So we agree that if you believe it when you say it, it isn't a lie?

If he had believed it, it would not have been a lie.

Of course there is no reason whatsoever to think he did believe it, and considerable reason to think he knew that it was a crock.... which puts it back in the category of a lie.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 02, 2017, 07:00:40 pm
His worries and concerns do not alter the reality that even those pushing Global Warming nonsense generally acknowledge that any changes would be relatively minor the closer you are to the equator an greater nearer the poles, and warmer temperatures in the far north and south would be good for humans,

Not so quick Strawman.  The temperature changes at the poles would be greater but the effects at the equator would be enormous and possibly much more important.

This lends itself to something I was thinking about just a couple of nights ago.  If "the effects at the equator would be enormous," they why have they not happened yet?

If the effects around the world are going to be the calamaties Al Gore and his ilk warned, with drought and rising temperatures leaving highly productive farm ares less productive.... why have we not seen the reduced crop output which by now should have already seen starvation seriously on the rise?  Even a 2% drop in crop output in highly productive cropland worldwide would have caused problems it would be impossible to miss... and yet, despite, regional droughts and perfectly normal weather variations causing various regional problems (as mankind and the planet have always known) which end up widely and ominously reported, the kind of problems you should expect from an actual drop in food production simply have not happened.

I would wonder why if the reason were not obvious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 02, 2017, 07:04:48 pm
There are way too many alternative facts being tossed around here . . .
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 02, 2017, 07:05:18 pm
Lie denotes intention, which is the reason the media are reluctant to use the word, and instead they throw out more awkward words like "falsehoods."


The major networks, CNN and MSNBC have absolutely no such reservation regarding anything from Trump or his administration... even when there is no lie at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 02, 2017, 07:09:39 pm
There are way too many alternative facts being tossed around here . . .

"Alternative facts" are merely "other facts," facts or information which were not considered.  And I guess for those who like their "science" served with a claim of consensus and without either any conflicting views or facts, "alternative facts" are just too damb inconvenient or unsettling to consider.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 02, 2017, 07:41:44 pm
If he had believed it, it would not have been a lie.

Of course there is no reason whatsoever to think he did believe it, and considerable reason to think he knew that it was a crock.... which puts it back in the category of a lie.

So you can say that IN YOUR OPINION, it was a lie.  But that is quite a bit different than saying that you KNOW it is a lie.  Unless you are a mind reader and can determine another person's motivation through telepathy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 02, 2017, 07:43:15 pm
There are way too many alternative facts being tossed around here . . .

From both sides.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 02, 2017, 07:58:54 pm
Both sides lie, but the sheer amount of lying coming from the Trump administration is appalling.  It's unprecedented.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 02, 2017, 08:07:04 pm
So you can say that IN YOUR OPINION, it was a lie.  But that is quite a bit different than saying that you KNOW it is a lie.  Unless you are a mind reader and can determine another person's motivation through telepathy.

Considering what Obama knew was going to be central to the plan, it is incredible in the literal meaning of the word that Obama was anything less than completely aware a large percentage of those who were already insured were not going to be able to "keep their insurance" since "their insurance" was no longer going to be allowed to exist.

If I sell you a standard state monopoly lottery ticket and I promise you that it is going to be a winner, I am lying to you, even though in that situation the odds would be much higher you were going to win than ever were the odds ObamaCare was going to allow everyone who liked their insurance to keep their insurance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 02, 2017, 08:19:50 pm
How do you know what Obama knew about what would be central to the plan?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 02, 2017, 09:01:33 pm
Don't forget the non insurance penalty wasn't a tax, until it was going to be unconstitutional.

The massive amount of lies told to pass ObamaCare was staggering and most of the really crappy stuff won't affect consers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 02, 2017, 10:39:01 pm
I have the same insurance now that I had before the PPACA.


So legally Addled Teaching Assistant, did President Barack Hussein Obama lie to me?


BlueCUBby

What massive lies are you referring too?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 02, 2017, 10:54:43 pm
Minutia driven legally Addled Teaching Assistant


Can you provide the evidence which convinces anyone that a large majority of people where forced to lose their insurance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 02, 2017, 11:02:34 pm
Minutiae driven legally Addled Teaching Assistant

Climate change denial has no alternative facts. It just has a misguided ignorant political opinion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 03, 2017, 12:47:42 am
Minutia driven legally Addled Teaching Assistant


Can you provide the evidence which convinces anyone that a large majority of people where forced to lose their insurance.

i will try to do that as soon as you point to where I ever wrote that "a large majority of people where forced to lose their insurance."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 03, 2017, 12:49:37 am
How do you know what Obama knew about what would be central to the plan?

How do I know?  Because I am a sentient being.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 03, 2017, 11:03:02 am
Every president has resorted to lying. Occupational hazard.

But I'm not sure any president in history has made lying a standard operating procedure, or has had as many liars in employ.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/kellyanne-conway-cites-bowling-green-massacre-never-defend-133303438--abc-news-topstories.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 03, 2017, 11:07:59 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjPfljy0BzQ

Kellyanne before she was Trump's Liar for Hire.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 03, 2017, 11:19:35 am
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 03, 2017, 11:26:21 am
I'll have to say one thing for Kellyanne, being the spin master for Donald Trump can't be the easiest job in the world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 03, 2017, 11:38:52 am
Some of my favorites.  (And this is just from the first two (of 26) pages.

###########

DONALD TRUMP
"The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia."
— PolitiFact National on Thursday, February 2nd, 2017

Not thousands, not coming in illegally

###################

DONALD TRUMP
"My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months."
— PolitiFact National on Monday, January 30th, 2017

Obama's was more specific and narrower

####################

DONALD TRUMP
"If you were a Muslim, you could come in, if you were a Christian, it was impossible."
— PolitiFact National on Sunday, January 29th, 2017

Christian refugees have entered U.S.

####################

DONALD TRUMP
"Here in Philadelphia murder has been steady — I mean — just terribly increasing."
— PolitiFact Pennsylvania on Thursday, January 26th, 2017

They were the third-lowest last year since 1990

####################

DONALD TRUMP
"In our nation’s capital, killings have risen by 50 percent."
— PolitiFact National on Monday, January 23rd, 2017

Most recent data shows a decline

####################

DONALD TRUMP
"The media ... sort of made it sound like I had a feud with the intelligence community." 
— PolitiFact National on Sunday, January 22nd, 2017

Unprecedented tough words

##########

DONALD TRUMP
"That was the largest audience to witness an inauguration, period."
— PolitiFact National on Saturday, January 21st, 2017

Size matters

####################

DONALD TRUMP
"We've made other countries rich while the wealth ... of our country has dissipated over the horizon."
— PolitiFact National on Friday, January 20th, 2017

Not by the typical measures

####################

DONALD TRUMP
Americans don't "care at all" about Donald Trump's tax returns.
— PolitiFact National on Wednesday, January 11th, 2017

Polls show many Americans want to see them

###################

DONALD TRUMP
Activities by foreign governments had "absolutely no effect on the outcome of this election."
— PolitiFact National on Sunday, January 8th, 2017

No basis for claim in intelligence report

##################

DONALD TRUMP
"If Russia, or some other entity, was hacking, why did the White House wait so long to act? Why did they only complain after Hillary lost?"
— PolitiFact National on Thursday, December 15th, 2016

Accusations came a month before election

##################

DONALD TRUMP
"We had a massive landslide victory, as you know, in the Electoral College."
— PolitiFact National on Monday, December 12th, 2016

Historically, it's in the bottom quarter

##################

DONALD TRUMP
There was "serious voter fraud" in Virginia.
— PolitiFact Virginia on Tuesday, November 29th, 2016

No evidence

##################

DONALD TRUMP
There was "serious voter fraud" in New Hampshire.
— PolitiFact New Hampshire on Monday, November 28th, 2016

Zero complaints this election

##################

DONALD TRUMP
There was "serious voter fraud" in California.
— PolitiFact California on Monday, November 28th, 2016

Zero evidence for this conspiracy theory

#################

DONALD TRUMP
Says he "won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally."
— PolitiFact National on Monday, November 28th, 2016

################

DONALD TRUMP
"The @nytimes sent a letter to their subscribers apologizing for their BAD coverage of me."
— PolitiFact National on Tuesday, November 15th, 2016

That's not what it said

################

DONALD TRUMP
"The @nytimes states today that DJT believes ‘more countries should acquire nuclear weapons.’ How dishonest are they. I never said this!"
— PolitiFact National on Monday, November 14th, 2016

Read his New York Times interview

###############





Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 03, 2017, 11:39:26 am
I have the same insurance now that I had before the PPACA.


So legally Addled Teaching Assistant, did President Barack Hussein Obama lie to me?


BlueCUBby

What massive lies are you referring too?

I am a health insurance broker Otto. Only the grandfathered plans are unchanged under ACA and many of those have been put on notice that as of 2017, they are discontinued. The vast majority of my clients have lost their plans since ACA. Even those on grandfathered plans have lost their plans because their carriers have simply pulled out of the market. Aetna, Humana, Coventry and United Health have pulled out of most or all of the country's individual  markets. Whereas I used to quote 10-15 companies to find the best for my clients, in many counties I now have only 1 insurance company left offering coverage. The under 30 group that was going to sign up in droves never materialized. They simply paid the penalties and went on their merry way. Or they gamed the system, waited until they got sick and used the very loose SEP (Special Election Period) option to sign up the very month they needed the coverage. You want to know what that does to the actuarial tables of insurance companies? It destroys them. Which is why you see 40-60% premium hikes year after thanks to the "Affordable" Care Act. Health costs were going up before, something needed to be done, but this mess was about the worst thing that could have been conceived, and killing it is going to be hard and painful. Especially with the level of vitriol in this congress and this country. Sacrifices are going to have to be made to get a good working system, but we aren't a country of sacrifices any more. We are a country of hand-outs. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 03, 2017, 11:42:57 am
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/statements/byruling/false/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 03, 2017, 12:04:25 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/upshot/trump-said-unemployment-rate-wasnt-real-here-are-some-other-options.html

The Labor Department reports the unemployment rate as 4.8%.  Trump claimed before he took office that the the rate was actually 42%.  I wonder....now that he is President and therefor "responsible"...if Trump will continue to maintain that the unemployment rate is 37% higher than his own department reports?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 03, 2017, 12:07:43 pm
Maybe he didn't see the decimal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 03, 2017, 12:29:54 pm
This is strange and unexplained.  The Labor department's unemployment rate report is 42 pages long. Trump claims the actual unemployment figure is 42%.  The percentage of eligible voters who failed to vote in the last Presidential election is...you guessed it...42

The Jackie Robinson effect....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 03, 2017, 01:36:30 pm
Jackie Robinson has done a terrific job and is being recognized by more and more people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 03, 2017, 03:58:36 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/upshot/trump-said-unemployment-rate-wasnt-real-here-are-some-other-options.html

The Labor Department reports the unemployment rate as 4.8%.  Trump claimed before he took office that the the rate was actually 42%.  I wonder....now that he is President and therefor "responsible"...if Trump will continue to maintain that the unemployment rate is 37% higher than his own department reports?

Believe it or not, there are other ways of calculating the unemployment rate, and some of them, which economists still consider credible and reliable, would put the rate much closer to 42% than to 4.8%.

quote author=FDISK link=topic=96.msg302385#msg302385 date=1486143777]
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/statements/byruling/false/
[/quote]

politifact is so partisan it might as well be on the DNC payroll.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on February 03, 2017, 06:10:18 pm
Believe it or not, there are other ways of calculating the unemployment rate, and some of them, which economists still consider credible and reliable, would put the rate much closer to 42% than to 4.8%.

quote author=FDISK link=topic=96.msg302385#msg302385 date=1486143777]
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/statements/byruling/false/


politifact is so partisan it might as well be on the DNC payroll.



Except that every president until now would refer to the 4.8% number.  Who in there right mind would include working age people that are no longer looking for work or people that are retired?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 03, 2017, 06:28:55 pm
Except that every president until now would refer to the 4.8% number.

Give Trump just a little time.  He, too, will soon begin using the same way of calculating it (in other words, at the moment, the 4.8% figure).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 03, 2017, 06:54:53 pm
How do I know?  Because I am a sentient being.

Another post by you that many would find debatable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 03, 2017, 07:02:16 pm
Another post by you that many would find debatable.

Which only shows that telling Obama was in fact lying on that point did not require being very high up the ladder of sentience.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 04, 2017, 12:56:23 am
(http://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_148616695211591.jpg?crop=faces&dpr=2&fit=crop&ixjsv=2.2.3&q=50&w=320)


Draining what?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 04, 2017, 11:50:56 am
And clue on the law that the Bears are pushing and the Cubs apparently agree with about cutting off worker comp injuries for professional athletes at 35 vs 67. MLB Trade Rumors stated this was about worker comp health insurance, but someone in the comments mentioned there is pay involved as well. The NFL players union seems to think this could really affect the Bears and FA, but the Cubs, Bulls and White Sox aren't really an issue. The health insurance seems to be an issue for me, but if there is pay involved that would seem to be a bad deal for the teams.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 04, 2017, 11:59:45 am
And clue on the law that the Bears are pushing and the Cubs apparently agree with about cutting off worker comp injuries for professional athletes at 35 vs 67. MLB Trade Rumors stated this was about worker comp health insurance, but someone in the comments mentioned there is pay involved as well. The NFL players union seems to think this could really affect the Bears and FA, but the Cubs, Bulls and White Sox aren't really an issue. The health insurance seems to be an issue for me, but if there is pay involved that would seem to be a bad deal for the teams.

So an athlete playing beyond aged 35 would not be eligible for worker's comp for injuries not only resulting from the time he is playing, even if the injury became apparent when he was still on the field, in uniform?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 04, 2017, 12:16:20 pm
I have no clue. Worker comp laws vary a lot by state. Ohio had a state run workers comp insurance and that sounds like what Illinois has. Iowa and Nebraska have employers buying private insurance to cover it.

The Tribune is saying it is wage differential payments that players could get until age 67 and not insurance. So say Arrieta blows out his shoulder and can't pitch anymore. He could do a workers comp claim to get paid a fraction of his current salary until age 67.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 04, 2017, 12:38:58 pm
Ah, I think I understand -- disability payments under workers comp for athletes would only be paid until age 35 instead of until age 67 (which is decades after any of them would retire even without injury).

That makes sense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 04, 2017, 01:22:15 pm
I am not sure what this all means.  If a player with a three year contract blows out his arm in his second year, does he currently get paid until he is 67?  What fraction does he get paid during that time, and does it vary depending upon how large his contract was.

I realize that the laws vary from state to state, but is there any general answer to the above?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 04, 2017, 07:00:18 pm
I'm not really sure. I think if they could get a worker comp claim approved, then yes.

The reporting seems to be all over the place.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2017, 05:40:34 pm
I am not sure what this all means.  If a player with a three year contract blows out his arm in his second year, does he currently get paid until he is 67?  What fraction does he get paid during that time, and does it vary depending upon how large his contract was.

I realize that the laws vary from state to state, but is there any general answer to the above?

Here are the rules for federal employees.  https://www.dol.gov/owcp/dfec/regs/compliance/DFECfolio/CA-810.pdf

At 7.4(E)(1) -- "(1) Disability. Compensation for temporary total disability or
schedule awards may not exceed 75% of the basic monthly salary of an
employee at the highest step of the GS-15 level. For temporary total
disability it may not be less than 75% of the basic monthly salary of an
employee at the first step of the GS-2 level or actual pay, whichever is
less.

But the federal regulations at that link run 135 pages long, and then there are also the state regulations.

I always hated Workers Comp law because of the extensive role of regulations in it.  I never touched workers comp cases, and always referred them out -- I couldn't have answered your question with any certainty when I was practicing, and am even further away from being able to do so now.

That said, my understanding is that if an employee lost his entire arm (the whole thing is cut off), he would get something like 67% of 4 years worth of what he was earning at the time of injury.  Presumably, a torn labrum for a pitcher would not be worth quite as much as having your entire arm cut off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2017, 06:38:25 pm
Hopefully I get all of the images inserted properly.

https://realclimatescience.com/2017/02/nasa-noaa-climate-data-is-fake-data/
NASA / NOAA Climate Data Is Fake Data
Posted on February 4, 2017 by tonyheller

NOAA shows the Earth red hot in December, with record heat in central Africa.
(https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/201612-4.gif)

The map above is fake. NOAA has almost no temperature data from Africa, and none from central Africa. They simply made up the record temperatures.

(https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/201612-land-4.gif)

(https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/122016.gif)

Satellites show that NOAA’s” record hot regions in Africa were actually close to normal.

(https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ch_tlt_2016_12_anom_v03_3-1.gif)

Gavin Schmidt at NASA claims the imaginary NOAA data has been replicated by many other institutions.

(https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Screen-Shot-2017-02-04-at-11.15.59-AM.gif)

However, when Gavin is confronted about his obviously bogus temperature graphs, he defends by saying “it is not my data, I get it from NOAA.” In fact, all of the supposedly independent agencies get the lion’s share of their data from NOAA.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 05, 2017, 07:28:02 pm
Fatuously addled teaching assistant


Looks like you should contact

Kent Clizbe
Fraud Detection Services
kent@kentclizbe.com
www.credibilityassurance.com
571 217 0714


And report back to us.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 08:48:04 am
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/president-trump-had-very-rough-weekend-n717266

Some examples of Republican criticism of Obama:

Mitt Romney: "We have a president right now who thinks America's just another nation. America is an exceptional nation."

Sarah Palin: "When President Obama insists that all countries are exceptional, he's saying that none is, least of all the country he leads."

Newt Gingrich: "Exceptionalism for Americans is the belief that the United States is in some way more open, more vigorous, more optimistic than other nations are," he said. "Our best leaders have reminded us that we have a moral obligation to the cause of freedom and that the cause of freedom is the cause of all mankind."

Rick Perry: "[T]hose in the White House today don't believe—they don't believe in American exceptionalism. They'd rather emulate the failed policies of Europe."

Mike Pence: "Finally, to renew American exceptionalism, we must recognize that our present crisis is not merely economic but moral in nature. At the root of these times should be the realization that people in positions of authority from Washington to Wall Street have walked away from the timeless truths of honesty, integrity, an honest day's work for an honest day's pay and the simple notion that you ought to treat the other guy the way you want to be treated. As strongly as I believe in the economic policies in this address, I know we will not restore this nation with public policy alone. It will require public virtue."



And finally...our present President's opinion of America.

Trump appeared to equate Russia's political violence under Vladimir Putin to violence in the United States. "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 06, 2017, 09:32:25 am
He's just giving evidence to justify Article 4 when it comes down.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 06, 2017, 10:14:18 am
President Trump is wrong on this. The dangers of having a president who does not understand the language of diplomacy. He has street smarts, which helped him win, but his words are going to be a poison to his presidency if he can't learn to keep his mouth shut, and I hold out little hope of that.  Then we have Obama, who was very well spoken, chose his words carefully, was universally loved by all in the media except Fox, and enacted policies at home and abroad that were colossal failures for this nation.  As a conservative; what is worse? I asked myself this question over and over during the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 06, 2017, 10:19:49 am
As soon as the "ban" was announced, I laughed.  I was disappointed with some on here who are lawyers and Constitutional "experts."  Even I knew the courts and Congress weren't going to let it stand.  I believe in our Constitution and to see all the protests and angst...geez...just let the checks and balances work.

Like Robb, I'm conservative, and my fear is that this non-Republican President who hijacked the party is going to make it impossible for a real Republican to gain the White House for 20 years.

I reserve my anger for BOTH parties who couldn't nominate a decent candidate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 06, 2017, 10:31:28 am
http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/05/noaa-scientists-manipulated-temperature-data-to-make-global-warming-seem-worse/

A whistleblower says the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) rushed a landmark study claiming the planet was warming much faster than expected in order to influence international climate negotiations.

Dr. John Bates, the former principal scientist at the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., told the Daily Mail NOAA’s 2015 study was meant “to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus and rush to time the publication of the paper to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 06, 2017, 10:34:57 am
We have been heading in this direction for years though. There is no longer a need to study out positions, records, plans or even temperament when deciding on a President. Obama was the first celebrity President, making the position more about adoration than doing the job and thank goodness. When he did the job, he was a disaster.  With social media and the internet you would think the interplay and exchange of ideas would be greater, instead we are more entrenched. I'm sorry but I equate this to the global warming debate. I don't dispute that it is possible that man is having an effect on the climate. But there is enough doubt in my mind and in the minds of enough experts that I see the matter as far from settled and needing more study and conversation. Those who believe in it say it is settled and anyone who disagrees is an idiot. There isn't even an allowance that someone could THINK different than them. This is where we are as a country on every issue. Deeply divided doesn't come close to defining it. We are headed towards another civil war if this keeps up. That may sound extreme but tell me what will change it? We now have millions protesting simply that their side lost. This has never happened before. There was a lot of belly aching over Bush winning in 2000 but nothing this bad. We now have violent protests against someone speaking on a campus because he has opposing viewpoints. This country is tinder, all it will take is a match to set it ablaze. Extremes on both sides are calling for violence. How long before it isn't just the extremes? So what do we do? We nominate Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump. If anyone God-fearing ever wanted evidence he has turned from this country I don't know what more they could want.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on February 06, 2017, 10:36:01 am
I don't see how Obama's policies were colossal failures for this nation.  You may not agree with them - much like I didn't agree with Bush's policies, but I wouldn't say that even Bush's were colossal failures.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 06, 2017, 10:40:14 am
President Trump is wrong on this. The dangers of having a president who does not understand the language of diplomacy. He has street smarts, which helped him win, but his words are going to be a poison to his presidency if he can't learn to keep his mouth shut, and I hold out little hope of that.  Then we have Obama, who was very well spoken, chose his words carefully, was universally loved by all in the media except Fox, and enacted policies at home and abroad that were colossal failures for this nation.  As a conservative; what is worse? I asked myself this question over and over during the election.

Robb, the notion that Obama "enacted policies at home and abroad that were colossal failures" is entirely too simplistic, partisan, and broad-brushed. Equating Trump and Obama is laughable. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on February 06, 2017, 10:49:34 am
And Robb, I don't think God cares about our government as much as you seem to think.  I believe he cares much more for us individually and for our souls.  That's why Jesus came not as a political/government savior but as our personal savior who showed us the way morally and ethically.  Our government can't dictate that everyone believes in God. And personally I still see ways God is working in our country and through our country.  Do you really (personally and not what you see on TV) on a day to day level see our nation worse than before?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 10:52:25 am
As a conservative; what is worse? I asked myself this question over and over during the election.

I would say as conservative/liberal there is ONE thing worse than conservative/liberal colossal policy failures.  I believe all conservative/liberal agendas are secondary and tertiary concerns. The overwhelming and primary issue at hand is the peaceful preservation of a our constitutionally based republic.  I think our president is unhinged and as such represents the greatest DOMESTIC danger to the Constitution since...well...Jefferson Davis.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 11:03:02 am
https://skepticalscience.com/no-conspiracy-noaa-adjustments-closer-to-pristine.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 06, 2017, 11:03:55 am
We have been heading in this direction for years though. There is no longer a need to study out positions, records, plans or even temperament when deciding on a President. Obama was the first celebrity President, making the position more about adoration than doing the job and thank goodness. When he did the job, he was a disaster. 

???

As a constitutional lawyer, Obama had clear qualifications and positions. Just because you didn't agree with them doesn't mean they don't count. This is partisan nonsense. And are you questioning his temperament, too?

With social media and the internet you would think the interplay and exchange of ideas would be greater, instead we are more entrenched.

Yes, and blanket statements like "Obama's policies at home and abroad were a disaster" is a prime example of the kind of entrenchment you seem to object to.

We now have millions protesting simply that their side lost. This has never happened before. There was a lot of belly aching over Bush winning in 2000 but nothing this bad. We now have violent protests against someone speaking on a campus because he has opposing viewpoints. This country is tinder, all it will take is a match to set it ablaze. Extremes on both sides are calling for violence. How long before it isn't just the extremes? So what do we do? We nominate Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump. If anyone God-fearing ever wanted evidence he has turned from this country I don't know what more they could want.
Robb, have you really missed the point *this* much? Protesting simply that their side lost? I'll ignore the nearly 3M votes that Hillary beat Trump by in the popular (as if that weren't a valid reason to express frustration). Initially, people protested against Trump because his rhetoric and positions posed a threat to their way of life as Americans. People protested Trump because his platform gave a voice to some of the most hateful and shameful ideologies in America. Since that time, they have protested due to his seemingly unconstitutional EO on immigration, his continued elevation of questionable (at best) characters like Steve Bannon, his efforts to discredit any press institution that disagrees with him, etc. By and large, these protests have been enormously peaceful, so don't cherry pick the recent protest of (basically human scum) Milo over and against the much larger record to date.

Lastly as someone who considers himself "God-fearing," allow me to suggest the notion that God has "turned from this country" is a sad artifact of a stream of theology that should *never* have entered the church. I do not believe in American exceptionalism, at least not in the sense that God would somehow favor this country over and against others. I do not think that God has any concern for the artificial constructs of blood-and-borders that we draw around ourselves. The church that does not purge itself of this kind of divisive ideology damns itself to irrelevance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 11:14:57 am
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/06/report-trump-not-fully-briefed-on-exec-order-that-gave-bannon-seat-at-nsc-meetings.html

From Fox News...of all places.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 06, 2017, 11:23:57 am
So are Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller just handing executive orders to Trump, and he's just signing away not even bothering to consider what's in them?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 06, 2017, 11:26:52 am
So is Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller just handing executive orders to Trump, and he's just signing away not even bothering to consider what's in them?
Hope so.  Mo' ammo for Article 4.  Removing Trump used to worry me from the standpoint of creating riots by all those people who voted for him, but I think there's more buyer remorse than anyone expected and it may not be as hard as originally thought.  I'll give him to July.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 11:27:04 am
https://youtu.be/pZOF9q5fzfs?list=PLS_gQd8UB-hJ7QuactP--_Yc4KFWT5CBG
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 06, 2017, 12:27:28 pm
https://science.house.gov/news/press-releases/former-noaa-scientist-confirms-colleagues-manipulated-climate-records
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 06, 2017, 12:32:29 pm
Here are all the names of the people that perished in the Bowling Green Massacre. May they Rest In Peace

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3t52CtUYAAS6xY.jpg)



Please forward to kellyanne conway.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 06, 2017, 12:33:27 pm
https://youtu.be/pZOF9q5fzfs?list=PLS_gQd8UB-hJ7QuactP--_Yc4KFWT5CBG
Bannon isn't that good looking.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 06, 2017, 12:37:56 pm
https://youtu.be/UWuc18xISwI (https://youtu.be/UWuc18xISwI)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 01:52:04 pm
https://science.house.gov/news/press-releases/former-noaa-scientist-confirms-colleagues-manipulated-climate-records

https://skepticalscience.com/no-conspiracy-noaa-adjustments-closer-to-pristine.html

You will notice that Lamar Smith has been hawking this conspiracy theory for a couple of years.  Nothing new.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 06, 2017, 02:46:16 pm
Here's a rebuttal specific to the latest Lamar Smith/whistle blower claims:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/02/article-names-whistleblower-who-told-congress-that-noaa-manipulated-data/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 06, 2017, 03:50:30 pm
Fatuous teaching assistant


Who knew that president trump attempts to lie to us about his decision making being "largely based on an accumulation of data" and your sources of climate change denial would come from the same cesspool.

breitbart


But of course you share a lot of his least endearing traits. You don't trust news organizations. Don't trust the courts. Don't trust pollsters. Don't trust U.S. intelligence agencies. Don't trust unemployment numbers. Don't even trust election results. Don't trust science...etc.

Like trump, you think the only source of truth is you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 06, 2017, 04:52:00 pm
I don't see how Obama's policies were colossal failures for this nation.  You may not agree with them - much like I didn't agree with Bush's policies, but I wouldn't say that even Bush's were colossal failures.
I consider Obama's foreign policy to be every bit the disaster many thought Bush's to be, perhaps worse. Having dealt with ACA up close, the signature "achievement" of the Obama presidency, I can't call it anything but a colossal failure. Healthcare is 1/6th of the American economy, it effects everything else. So just on that basis alone I consider it him to be a failure. I also look at the state of our country. Did Obama bring us together like he said he would? No, he divided us along party lines, racial lines like no President before him. He DOUBLED the national debt in 8 years. He painted a line in Syria, then made us the laughingstock of the world and walked away when it was crossed. If a President set out to be more of a failure, trying to ruin this country in nearly every sphere, I don't know that he could have done as good a job of it as Barak Obama.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 06, 2017, 05:01:21 pm
???

As a constitutional lawyer, Obama had clear qualifications and positions. Just because you didn't agree with them doesn't mean they don't count. This is partisan nonsense. And are you questioning his temperament, too?

Yes, and blanket statements like "Obama's policies at home and abroad were a disaster" is a prime example of the kind of entrenchment you seem to object to.
Robb, have you really missed the point *this* much? Protesting simply that their side lost? I'll ignore the nearly 3M votes that Hillary beat Trump by in the popular (as if that weren't a valid reason to express frustration). Initially, people protested against Trump because his rhetoric and positions posed a threat to their way of life as Americans. People protested Trump because his platform gave a voice to some of the most hateful and shameful ideologies in America. Since that time, they have protested due to his seemingly unconstitutional EO on immigration, his continued elevation of questionable (at best) characters like Steve Bannon, his efforts to discredit any press institution that disagrees with him, etc. By and large, these protests have been enormously peaceful, so don't cherry pick the recent protest of (basically human scum) Milo over and against the much larger record to date.

Lastly as someone who considers himself "God-fearing," allow me to suggest the notion that God has "turned from this country" is a sad artifact of a stream of theology that should *never* have entered the church. I do not believe in American exceptionalism, at least not in the sense that God would somehow favor this country over and against others. I do not think that God has any concern for the artificial constructs of blood-and-borders that we draw around ourselves. The church that does not purge itself of this kind of divisive ideology damns itself to irrelevance.
I think God cares a great deal about how we govern ourselves, whether it is in our homes, our workplaces or our countries. He has made countless references in scripture about nations turning to and from him and the consequences of such. I know many on this board do not believe in God at all and that is their right. But judging by scripture I don't think it a sad artifact of some fringe group of believers that think God is concerned by the governance of nations. Regardless, if I am the only person on this planet that believes it I still do and see evidence every day that we have departed from the values espoused by the founders of this nation who were for the most part, believers in God. John Adams said,  “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people”. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 06, 2017, 05:18:13 pm
As a constitutional lawyer, Obama had clear qualifications and positions. Just because you didn't agree with them doesn't mean they don't count. This is partisan nonsense. And are you questioning his temperament, too?

I'm going to bite.  How does being a constitutional lawyer qualify on for being a President?

Yes, and blanket statements like "Obama's policies at home and abroad were a disaster" is a prime example of the kind of entrenchment you seem to object to.

The ACA has made a freaking mess of healthcare.  The ACA set up MCO's (think HMO's on steroids) as a way to save money.  This will effectively kill private practice for physicians and lead to all physicians eventually being an employee.  When MCO were studied at places like Mayo, that were far and away the best set up to deliver this type of care of the 10 or so organizations half lost money.  The ACA is destroying rural healthcare.  The next fun thing is pay for performance which will make me choose between getting destroyed caring for sick patients or firing them and treating healthy people so that my numbers look good.  There isn't any evidence that this or preventative care will actually decrease costs.  The high deductible plans that President Obama said wasn't really insurance is now the mainstay of the crappy website they set up, so my diabetics have to choose between seeing me and getting the blood work they need vs getting the medications that they need, because no everyone can afford $5000 deductibles before your insurance will pay for anything, but hey young healthy women can get free birth control because the $9/month pills at Walmart where too expensive.  I could go on, but I need to get home and see my kids.

Can someone say with a straight face that the Middle East is in better shape when President Obama took office vs when he left it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 05:35:34 pm
No, he divided us along party lines, racial lines like no President before him.

Okay...so this is SOOOO unimportant compared to the mess that is Donald Trump. But I don't agree with your statement.  The Republicans were every bit as responsible for dividing the nation.  The Tea Party movement's stated purpose was obstructionism, and their motives, in many cases, were racial. In my opinion, one of the main reasons Trump was elected was because there was(is) a racist core.  Obama didn't cause that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 05:38:42 pm
I think people should believe what they want.  As for me, and in this context, my religion is the US Constitution.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 05:41:47 pm
...And as long as people continue to argue over the petty partisan political points the longer you play into the hands of the people whose stated purpose in life is to destroy the state so that they can rebuild it in their image.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-bannon-profile-idUSKBN13A2R1?il=0
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 05:44:33 pm
Wake up!!!  This isn't politics as usual....

Carry on....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 06, 2017, 06:14:20 pm
Today's Trump nonsense: he is now claiming the media is covering up terrorist attacks. That's right out of the Infowars playbook.

(Speaking of covering up terrorist attacks, this is the guy who made a huge deal over a knife attack that injured 1 person in France last week, but still hasn't mentioned the Quebec mosque attack where an alt-righter in his 20s killed 6 people.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 06, 2017, 06:55:03 pm
As soon as the "ban" was announced, I laughed.  I was disappointed with some on here who are lawyers and Constitutional "experts."  Even I knew the courts and Congress weren't going to let it stand.  I believe in our Constitution and to see all the protests and angst...geez...just let the checks and balances work.

There were multiple challenges filed (I believe at least nine).  Most of the district court judges saw no problem and let it stand.  Two did not.

Ultimately the matter will end up being decided by the Supreme Court, and I suspect that the Trump administration will get an approval there not only by a majority of the Court, but even by a majority of the four liberal justices (Kagen, Sotomayor, Ginsberg and Breyer) and Kennedy.  This really is not even close.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 06, 2017, 06:59:46 pm
We have been heading in this direction for years though. There is no longer a need to study out positions, records, plans or even temperament when deciding on a President. Obama was the first celebrity President, making the position more about adoration than doing the job and thank goodness. When he did the job, he was a disaster.  With social media and the internet you would think the interplay and exchange of ideas would be greater, instead we are more entrenched. I'm sorry but I equate this to the global warming debate. I don't dispute that it is possible that man is having an effect on the climate. But there is enough doubt in my mind and in the minds of enough experts that I see the matter as far from settled and needing more study and conversation. Those who believe in it say it is settled and anyone who disagrees is an idiot. There isn't even an allowance that someone could THINK different than them. This is where we are as a country on every issue. Deeply divided doesn't come close to defining it. We are headed towards another civil war if this keeps up. That may sound extreme but tell me what will change it? We now have millions protesting simply that their side lost. This has never happened before.

Are you old enough to have real memories of the late 60's to early 70's?

If so, have you forgotten that the division then was far greater than it is now?  That the action in the streets then, the civil disobedience, the riots, the unrest, and the rhetoric were all more heated than today?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 06, 2017, 07:15:57 pm
I don't see how Obama's policies were colossal failures for this nation.  You may not agree with them - much like I didn't agree with Bush's policies, but I wouldn't say that even Bush's were colossal failures.

How about we go at it the other direction -- which Obama policies were successes? 

His increased use of an extra-judicial kill list?  While he did succeed there in killing more people, most of those killed were not even suspected of being terrorists, the blowback from those killings is considerable, and by killing them instead of capturing them the U.S. gave up any chance for getting intell from the suspected terrorists.

His shutdown of Gitmo?

His subsidizing "green energy??

Fast and Furious?

The Fast and Furious coverup?

Targeting conservative groups for harrassment by the IRS?

Pushing Global Warming?

Efforts to heal the racial divide?

ObamaCare?

Dodd-Frank?

Shovel-ready "stimulus" jobs?

TPP?

Leading from behind in the Middle-East?

His containment of the Soviet expansion?

His containment of Chinese expansion?

His control of the border, or perhaps his unilateral imposition of what was essentially the Dreamer's plan?

Immigration reform?

Returning the nation to a robust economy?

The Iran nuclear agreement?

Controlling the national debt?

Pulling completely out of Iraq, just as he had promised in his campaign and allowing ISIS to emerge to fill the power vacuum?

Or perhaps his support of Michelle's school lunch initiatives?

I genuinely can't think of a single meaningful policy success for him.  Don't get me wrong.  He got some things thru, like ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank, but the things he got passed or which he did by executive order, were things far more harmful for the nation than helpful.

Referring to him has having had colossal policy failures seems quite reasonable to me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 06, 2017, 07:25:58 pm
Robb, the notion that Obama "enacted policies at home and abroad that were colossal failures" is entirely too simplistic, partisan, and broad-brushed. Equating Trump and Obama is laughable.

Could you perhaps point to the language where Robb equated Trump and Obama?

He referred to both of them in the same paragraph, but that is not the same as equating them.

For ease of reference, here is his post:
President Trump is wrong on this. The dangers of having a president who does not understand the language of diplomacy. He has street smarts, which helped him win, but his words are going to be a poison to his presidency if he can't learn to keep his mouth shut, and I hold out little hope of that.  Then we have Obama, who was very well spoken, chose his words carefully, was universally loved by all in the media except Fox, and enacted policies at home and abroad that were colossal failures for this nation.  As a conservative; what is worse? I asked myself this question over and over during the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 06, 2017, 07:38:05 pm
Hope so.  Mo' ammo for Article 4.  Removing Trump used to worry me from the standpoint of creating riots by all those people who voted for him, but I think there's more buyer remorse than anyone expected and it may not be as hard as originally thought.  I'll give him to July.

I'll give him to July.

That sounds remarkably like my predictions with Obama 8 years ago, right down to the same timetable.

And your reference to Article 4 would seem to be even more misplaced, since Article 4 of the Constitution deals with the relation of states to each other: http://constitutionus.com/
Article IV (Article 4 - States' Relations)
Section 1
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

Section 2
1: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

2: A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

3: No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.11

Section 3
1: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

2: The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.


I think you are actually referencing SECTION 4 of the 25th Amendment, and having THAT used to remove Trump simply because is an undiplomatic, crass, b@stard who many in Congress disagree with politically would cause Constitutional problems far greater than Trump himself is likely to inflict.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 06, 2017, 08:06:52 pm
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/6/noaa-agrees-review-claim-data-manipulation-climate/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 06, 2017, 08:12:04 pm
Good, I assume you'll follow this story and post again when NOAA's investigation reveals no wrongdoing. 

It'll be just like the seven investigations into so-called Climategate where the scientists were cleared.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 06, 2017, 08:18:45 pm
Quote
The ACA has made a freaking mess of healthcare.

Then why didn't the GOP propose something to try to improve it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 06, 2017, 08:20:40 pm
Good, I assume you'll follow this story and post again when NOAA's investigation reveals no wrongdoing. 

It'll be just like the seven investigations into so-called Climategate where the scientists were cleared.

No they'll acknowledge the results but then dismiss them as biased.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 06, 2017, 09:25:22 pm
Then why didn't the GOP propose something to try to improve it?

Because of their rhetoric they are really limited. They want to keep some of the more expensive parts, but get rid of the ability to pay for it. So far the GOP plans have. Even less than impressive.

My solution
1) Drastically increase the penalty for not having insurance. Make it something like 120% of not having insurance with mechanisms to actually get the money.
2.) Insurance companies offer a catastrophic plan at cost and this qualifies you for having insurance. It will pay for 1 physical (babies will get their well checks), vaccines, mammogram, pelvic, colon cancer screening. States will be unable to require additional coverages.
3.) Employer funded health insurance ends. Tax credits and subsidies will be used to help people afford insurance. Employers can set up robust HSA with matching contributions to help with the high dectubile plans.
4.) Insurance companies make money by selling added on coverage. If you want a lower deductible, free birth control, maternity coverage you pay for it.
5.) Medicaid takes care of the poor. Medicare the elderly, but since Medicare is the real driver of our debt crisis changes will need to be made.  If Democrats can't get on board with changes then Paul Ryan gets his block grants and tough luck. The US performs well with the cost of health care around the world until you get to the people in their 60's and the. America's spending almost goes up in a straight line while the rest of the countries have just a gradual increase. It might be because that is the point that Americans lose the effect of their healthcare spending. An all too common response, I'm going to put that off until I hit Medicare because it will be free.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 06, 2017, 09:49:21 pm
Then why didn't the GOP propose something to try to improve it?

Were you living in a cave at the time?

The GOP proposed numerous alternatives.

As for KEEPING the core elements of the monstrosity while making it better, that is about like thinking a woman should a rapist what her favorite positions are in order to try to improve it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 06, 2017, 09:53:07 pm
Good, I assume you'll follow this story and post again when NOAA's investigation reveals no wrongdoing. 

It'll be just like the seven investigations into so-called Climategate where the scientists were cleared.

I haven't been following this particular story all that closely, but wouldn't the investigation you mention be one in which NOAA would be investigating itself?

You are already confidently predicting that NOAA will clear anyone of wrongdoing.... and you wonder why some might dismiss the results of a NOAA investigation?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 06, 2017, 10:01:23 pm
5.) Medicaid takes care of the poor. Medicare the elderly, but since Medicare is the real driver of our debt crisis changes will need to be made.  If Democrats can't get on board with changes then Paul Ryan gets his block grants and tough luck. The US performs well with the cost of health care around the world until you get to the people in their 60's and the. America's spending almost goes up in a straight line

So costs go up sharply for the age group which almost universally relies on government paid care.... and you don't see why that is?

If you want to improve health care, SCRAP ObamaCare.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 06, 2017, 10:15:57 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/06/opinion/president-trumps-real-fear-the-courts.html

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 06, 2017, 10:20:24 pm
Quote
Drastically increase the penalty for not having insurance. Make it something like 120% of not having insurance with mechanisms to actually get the money.

Very admirable of you CBJ, but your chances of being elected to any elective office, including dog catcher, are next to zero with that position.  Republicans don't want any mandate, and Democrats don't want entitled millennials to get a real punishment for not taking part in the system.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 06, 2017, 10:28:30 pm
Quote
The US performs well with the cost of health care around the world until you get to the people in their 60's and the. America's spending almost goes up in a straight line while the rest of the countries have just a gradual increase. It might be because that is the point that Americans lose the effect of their healthcare spending. An all too common response, I'm going to put that off until I hit Medicare because it will be free.

By the way, the part about the US performing well in health care costs before age 60 is something I didn't know.  Thanks for passing that one along.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 07, 2017, 12:34:59 am
By the way, the part about the US performing well in health care costs before age 60 is something I didn't know.  Thanks for passing that one along.

Yeah, the reason you didn't know it is because it isn't true.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 07, 2017, 08:22:34 am
In the earliest edition of the Boston Globe, the headlines were of Super Bowl defeat, much like "Dewey Wins."  Brady plans to call a news conference in which he will rail against false news, declare the Super Bowl attendance was in the millions and that he would have won the MVP unanimously if some illegals hadn't voted for Ryan.


Okay, only the first sentence is true.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 08:31:46 am
I consider Obama's foreign policy to be every bit the disaster many thought Bush's to be, perhaps worse. Having dealt with ACA up close, the signature "achievement" of the Obama presidency, I can't call it anything but a colossal failure. Healthcare is 1/6th of the American economy, it effects everything else. So just on that basis alone I consider it him to be a failure. I also look at the state of our country. Did Obama bring us together like he said he would? No, he divided us along party lines, racial lines like no President before him. He DOUBLED the national debt in 8 years. He painted a line in Syria, then made us the laughingstock of the world and walked away when it was crossed. If a President set out to be more of a failure, trying to ruin this country in nearly every sphere, I don't know that he could have done as good a job of it as Barak Obama.

Robb, this is so much reflective of a conservative bubble, sorry. Obama made us the laughingstock of the world? Really??? This has no basis in reality.

What about Obama's foreign policy do you consider so disastrous, and what positives do you see that were outweighed by the negatives? (If you can't point to any positives, you're perspective probably needs a bit of a shift.)

I understand that your role as an insurance broker gives you closer contact to the ACA than others might have, and having managed a small business that had to establish a new medical group in compliance with ACA standards while the law was in the process of being rolled out, I empathize with your frustration over the legislation. But there is something to be said for the fact that 20 million Americans now have insurance that previously did not, and coming out of the hospitality industry, I personally know *many* people whose lives were *very* positively impacted by the law. Simply saying "EVERYTHING WAS DISASTROUS!" is not a position. It's partisan hyperbole, and I believe you can do better than that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 08:36:54 am
I think God cares a great deal about how we govern ourselves, whether it is in our homes, our workplaces or our countries. He has made countless references in scripture about nations turning to and from him and the consequences of such. I know many on this board do not believe in God at all and that is their right. But judging by scripture I don't think it a sad artifact of some fringe group of believers that think God is concerned by the governance of nations. Regardless, if I am the only person on this planet that believes it I still do and see evidence every day that we have departed from the values espoused by the founders of this nation who were for the most part, believers in God. John Adams said,  “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people”. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” 

Nowhere did I say that I think God is not concerned with the governance of nations. What I said was that God does not care for our national constructs. God doesn't see any American any differently than he does a Somalian, Russian, Brazilian, or Indian. There is no special favor doled out on any particular group of individuals because of the borders they defend with violence. Sure, there was a lot of language in the OT about nations, but the NT presents a clear point of departure both in the life and ministry of Jesus, and in the writings of his disciples that followed him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 08:41:51 am
I'm going to bite.  How does being a constitutional lawyer qualify on for being a President?


His experience and expertise as a constitutional lawyer certainly gave him a level of understanding of our laws that greatly exceeds the idiot that is currently running the country. Beyond this, his time in government, his community work, his obvious leadership skills - all of these things make him infinitely more qualified than the dumpster fire that is Donald Trump. Robb's original post set up the contrast between the two ("as a conservative, I asked myself which was better" or something like that) to which I was responding.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 08:43:22 am
There were multiple challenges filed (I believe at least nine).  Most of the district court judges saw no problem and let it stand.  Two did not.

Ultimately the matter will end up being decided by the Supreme Court, and I suspect that the Trump administration will get an approval there not only by a majority of the Court, but even by a majority of the four liberal justices (Kagen, Sotomayor, Ginsberg and Breyer) and Kennedy.  This really is not even close.

Also, Obama is toast!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 08:44:56 am
Could you perhaps point to the language where Robb equated Trump and Obama?

He referred to both of them in the same paragraph, but that is not the same as equating them.

For ease of reference, here is his post:

Yeah, that post is exactly where he equated them, asking which one is worse, and then being unable to give an answer.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2017, 09:53:53 am
Yeah, the reason you didn't know it is because it isn't true.

Medicare and medicaid account for 48% of US healthcare dollars spent and insure 34% of the population.  Most of that expenditure is from Medicare.  Another dirty secret people with private insurance pay more at the hospital level to make up for the loss that hospitals experience on most medicare admissions and all medicaid patients.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1361028/

Principal Findings


Per capita lifetime expenditure is $316,600, a third higher for females ($361,200) than males ($268,700). Two-fifths of this difference owes to women's longer life expectancy. Nearly one-third of lifetime expenditures is incurred during middle age, and nearly half during the senior years. For survivors to age 85, more than one-third of their lifetime expenditures will accrue in their remaining years.


https://archive.ahrq.gov/research/findings/factsheets/costs/expriach/

This has the graph of US healthcare spending by decade of life.  It doesn't include the rest of the world in comparison, but where the US goes up in almost a straight line, other countries rise at a much lower level.

https://ourworldindata.org/financing-healthcare/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 07, 2017, 10:20:22 am
Robb, this is so much reflective of a conservative bubble, sorry. Obama made us the laughingstock of the world? Really??? This has no basis in reality.

What about Obama's foreign policy do you consider so disastrous, and what positives do you see that were outweighed by the negatives? (If you can't point to any positives, you're perspective probably needs a bit of a shift.)

I understand that your role as an insurance broker gives you closer contact to the ACA than others might have, and having managed a small business that had to establish a new medical group in compliance with ACA standards while the law was in the process of being rolled out, I empathize with your frustration over the legislation. But there is something to be said for the fact that 20 million Americans now have insurance that previously did not, and coming out of the hospitality industry, I personally know *many* people whose lives were *very* positively impacted by the law. Simply saying "EVERYTHING WAS DISASTROUS!" is not a position. It's partisan hyperbole, and I believe you can do better than that.
Tico, I honestly contemplated this question for quite some time before answering. And truthfully, in foreign policy I cannot find a success of Obama's. Pushing the Arab spring and the ouster of a friendly regime in Egypt led to the Muslim brotherhood seizing control. Ousting Gaddafi in Libya seemed like a good thing to do. But it has lead to a power vacuum that has allowed ISIS and Al Queada to to take over vast amounts of the country, including an embarrassing attack on our embassy in Benghazi. The Russian reset with Putin has certainly been a disaster and Obama's dovish nature emboldened Putin enough to invade a country that gave up its nukes in exchange for express promises from us and NATO that they would be protected in case of just such a thing. What did we do? We gave Russia a very stern warning and backed down. I've already mentioned the disastrous Syrian red line that wasn't a red line that was a red line. The Iran deal was so good that they test ICBM's to get ready for their nuclear capabilities they can now have legally under the treaty in 10 short years. In the meantime, they continue to sponsor terrorism and harass their neighbors and us while we send them billions of dollars. Don't forget Obama's perplexing treatment of our one true ally in the middle east, Israel, who he thumbed his nose at enough times to again embolden her enemies and cause her PM to come to our congress and plead not to approve a deal that the President never brought before congress anyway.  China continues to steal our intellectual property, encroach in international waters and build up her military while Obama appeared to ignore them. I am trying to be objective here Tico, not snarky, but what successes am I missing? Perhaps all of the failures are so blinding I have missed them. Please list a few for me and I will readily acknowledge them. And I mean that sincerely.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2017, 10:29:56 am
Very admirable of you CBJ, but your chances of being elected to any elective office, including dog catcher, are next to zero with that position.  Republicans don't want any mandate, and Democrats don't want entitled millennials to get a real punishment for not taking part in the system.

I hopeful that somebody like Ryan will realize the math doesn't work anyway if you want to keep insurance companies from not being able to charge more for health conditions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 11:48:08 am
Robb, I'll admit it feels like the problem with pointing to any successes in Obama's foreign policy legacy is that you preemptively write them off due to a difference in worldview. Believers in global warming would point to the international treaties the US helped to broker under his tenure, but it seems that you believe more that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by self interested climate scientists. There are many, many individuals far more informed you or me on both the Middle East in general and the Iran deal in particular that hail it as a landmark treaty, whatever its warts, but you already dismiss it, though I am skeptical you are familiar with any of its details. The TPP was the result of a monumental series of multi-national discussions aimed at increasing free trade throughout Asia and the US and decreasing our trade reliance on China (a legitimate strategic concern), but world's-best-dealmaker Trump has torn it up.

Obama's foreign policy was largely a reaction to the over-extension of the Bush administration. Some people are of the belief that a more restrained course of action is in both America's and the world's best interest. People who disagree with that worldview are simply predisposed to a negative view of Obama's foreign policy. In a political climate so polarized, sincere, thinking people need to get out from behind their worldview if we're have any hope of a better political discourse.

On the whole, I will note that I think the early results on Obama's foreign policy are indeed weak. But I also think these matters are far to complex to boil down to 4-year increments of time, and that any binary evaluation of any presidents' foreign policy is inherently flawed due to its simplicity.

I think the following articles outline, in an informed and balanced manner from both the left and the right, the strengths and weaknesses of Obama's actions overseas:

https://www.brookings.edu/research/obama-the-carpenter-the-presidents-national-security-legacy/

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443941/obama-foreign-policy-legacy-limits-american-restraint

http://www.npr.org/2016/09/20/494625983/patient-diplomacy-and-a-reluctance-to-act-obamas-mark-on-foreign-policy

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/01/obama-foreign-policy/513380/




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 07, 2017, 11:57:59 am
No preexisting conditions is the killer. It will be interesting to see if they include that in the replacement bill. If they do, bringing down costs of insurance will be nearly impossible.  Add in no lifetime caps and the insurance companies simply have no out, so everyone pays.  The 3 to 1 age band rating is also garbage that kept many millennials from entering the system. In the past the age band was typically 6 to 1 which meant a 64 year old male would pay 6 times the amount of an 18 year old male in the same zip code. ACA stipulated a 3 to 1 age band, so 18 year-olds would be subsidizing the 64 year-olds at a much higher rate. But that drove prices for younger people so high it made sense for them to pay the penalty rather than buy a plan. Couple that with the very loose SEP (Special Election Period) standards and you had kids with no insurance, waiting until they needed major surgery to go buy it and being able to. Their penalty the first year was a few hundred dollars. This year, it's still $695 for most if they don't get a waiver. 

Tico mentioned the 20 million more Americans with coverage and that is true, but the dirty little secret is the system is collapsing. It isn't sustainable. They taxed for 4 years until they implemented, then ran the numbers for 6 years and said, "Hey look! It's revenue neutral!" I used to be worried about what would happen after those first ten years. Now, without a major gutting, I don't think it lasts another 3. There are some counties in this country with only 1 carrier willing to offer coverage there. Those crappy high deductible plans Obama lamented when ACA was signed now cost my older clients $1300 a month and cover nothing until they have shelled out a whopping $6500 per person in deductible to say nothing of their $15,000+ premiums.  Yet according to ACA their plan must have maternity coverage they're way past needing as well as birth control.  With all the other throw-ins ACA included that make it the equivalent of a 2008 Cadillac plan I use to sell, no wonder costs are through the roof. All of these issues are chicken feed compared to the job killing measures on large and small business alike. I can't tell you how many employers have cut hours and cut staff or curtailed hiring because of ACA. Crossing the 50 person threshold can be anathema to a small business today so most don't even try.

Don't even get me started on the billions being taken from Medicare to fund ACA. Look it up, that actually happened/happens as well. By the end of this decade, under Obamacare, Medicare reimbursement rates are set to fall below those of Medicaid. Think about that for a moment. If you have ever tried to find care for a child on Medicaid with the low reimbursement rates they offer. Just wait until the government pays less for Medicare. You'll have far less doctors are willing to take it and less options means not as good care all while our nation's population grows older.  Another terrible idea attached to this law. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 11:58:31 am
For those lamenting the horrible ACA, here's a great article on the likely effect of its repeal without a serious replacement (which the Republicans obviously don't have right now):

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/7/14500430/repealing-affordable-care-act-death-mortality
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 07, 2017, 12:09:34 pm
Now who's being dishonest Tico? The Republicans have said all along that they are going to repeal and replace the law with something else. Most everyone, including Trump has said it will take time to do this the right way so there is a smooth transition. I'm sure once the new plan is in place the Democrats will trot out a poor single mother with her kids to show how losing ACA killed her baby but in reality the law is poison, it is going to collapse all on its own if it isn't fixed anyway, so articles like that are just hogwash.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 12:29:59 pm
Republicans have talked an awful lot about repealing Obamacare, yes, but have presented no credible replacement that I can think of. There's been a lot of bluster, but very little substance. That's not dishonest in the least.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/behind-closed-doors-republican-lawmakers-fret-about-how-to-repeal-obamacare/2017/01/27/deabdafa-e491-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html?pushid=breaking-news_1485542333&tid=notifi_push_breaking-news&utm_term=.20735e9e9ace
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 07, 2017, 12:38:34 pm
You're right Tico, if they haven't announced their plan to replace it then they certainly never will. You don't really believe that? Do you?  You haven't addressed the gorilla in the room anyway.  That is, without the Republicans doing anything, ACA is going to crash all on its own.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 07, 2017, 12:46:59 pm
Quote
without the Republicans doing anything

You mean like working toward making it better?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 12:56:31 pm
Where did I say they would never have a plan to replace? My language very clearly was "which the Republicans obviously don't have right now."

Regarding the so called elephant in the room, again, there are plenty of reports that disagree with your opinion. For a report quoting more than the Republican talking points:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obamacare-donald-trump-paul-ryan_us_588a6a55e4b0303c0752b0d1

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 07, 2017, 01:01:08 pm
Biggest issue before, after, and currently is the bit about not being able to deny insurance because of a pre-existing condition.  That has to be in.

The second biggest was the age 26 coverage.  For many years if your son (notice the male preference) was going to be a pastor, doctor, dentist, or veterinarian, people could keep kids on their policies, but most had to have specialized insurance or pay extra for the coverage.  Later it changed to both sexes.  NOW, the Millennials are staying in school longer for Masters, doctorates, and mooching off mom and dad until "they find themselves," so it is almost mandatory.  What they need to do is remove under 26's who are able to provide or already do provide their own insurance.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 01:17:54 pm
...meanwhile...grizzly bear futures just tanked....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2017, 01:20:25 pm
Where did I say they would never have a plan to replace? My language very clearly was "which the Republicans obviously don't have right now."

Regarding the so called elephant in the room, again, there are plenty of reports that disagree with your opinion. For a report quoting more than the Republican talking points:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obamacare-donald-trump-paul-ryan_us_588a6a55e4b0303c0752b0d1

That article takes the most optimistic presentation of the facts and tries really hard to spin it in a positive direction.  It is mostly complete BS.  After the Supreme Court ruled that medicaid expansion wasn't mandatory the CBO projected 22 million people would be enrolled in the exchanges by 2016.  They were only off by 12 million.  This article refutes many of the Huffington Posts presentation of the facts with actual numbers.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2017/01/02/learning-from-cbos-history-of-incorrect-obamacare-projections/#79be98d975e3

If you really want to get into the weeds with what is wrong/potential fixes here is a great blog.  The guy has been nailing what was going to happen since Obamacare was passed.

http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2017, 01:24:40 pm
Biggest issue before, after, and currently is the bit about not being able to deny insurance because of a pre-existing condition.  That has to be in.

The second biggest was the age 26 coverage.  For many years if your son (notice the male preference) was going to be a pastor, doctor, dentist, or veterinarian, people could keep kids on their policies, but most had to have specialized insurance or pay extra for the coverage.  Later it changed to both sexes.  NOW, the Millennials are staying in school longer for Masters, doctorates, and mooching off mom and dad until "they find themselves," so it is almost mandatory.  What they need to do is remove under 26's who are able to provide or already do provide their own insurance.

The 26 year old thing in peanuts and does very little to effect pricing, that could be left in any replacement plan and it won't move the cost enough to justify the backlash. 

The first part is what is boxing Republicans in.  If you keep that you have to get healthy people to sign up for coverage in much greater numbers than what has happened.  The only way to due that is to force them with penalties, big expensive penalties that can be enforced. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 01:29:44 pm
It does seem kind of strange that the Republicans have been howling for years about repealing Obamacare and yet don't have an immediate replacement. You would think that with all the effort they have expended over the years denouncing it, that they would have had an immediate idea of how to replace it.

Or...maybe it was just stupid partisan politics all along.


In the mean time...while we fiddle...Rome burns.

https://youtu.be/pZOF9q5fzfs

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 07, 2017, 01:44:21 pm
Where did I say they would never have a plan to replace? My language very clearly was "which the Republicans obviously don't have right now."

Regarding the so called elephant in the room, again, there are plenty of reports that disagree with your opinion. For a report quoting more than the Republican talking points:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obamacare-donald-trump-paul-ryan_us_588a6a55e4b0303c0752b0d1


Tico, I don't need Republican talking points. I live it every day, all day long with my clients who are Medicare recipients, small and large group employers and individuals seeking coverage. I assist them with plan options, changes, benefits and claims. I am neck deep in this every day and I can tell you first hand it is failing. By the way, those words echo the feelings of the very liberal managers of many of the insurance companies who signed up to make this thing work. Guys who love Obama and thought ACA would be terrific. When those guys and gals start running for the exits you know the place is burning down.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 07, 2017, 01:53:24 pm
They stood on the sidelines for eight years doing everything they could to make sure it wouldn't work.  There are no easy answers to any of this stuff, but they acted like there were.  Now they own it.  Good luck.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 07, 2017, 02:14:47 pm
Enjoy the trumpcare.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 02:21:57 pm
On a different note, for just a moment, can we reflect on the fact that our President is now suggesting that the media is engaged in covering up terrorist attacks???
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 07, 2017, 02:24:35 pm
Quote
And truthfully, in foreign policy I cannot find a success of Obama's. Pushing the Arab spring and the ouster of a friendly regime in Egypt led to the Muslim brotherhood seizing control. Ousting Gaddafi in Libya seemed like a good thing to do. But it has lead to a power vacuum that has allowed ISIS and Al Queada to to take over vast amounts of the country, including an embarrassing attack on our embassy in Benghazi.

GWb's pushing of Palestine elections (which Hamas promptly won) and the invasion of Iraq led to the movement known as the Arab Spring. Your mention of "leading while behind" makes your criticism of the events in Egypt laughable. Conservatives alternated faster between regime change and non-involvement than weather in the Midwest in spring.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 07, 2017, 02:30:47 pm
Quote
The Russian reset with Putin has certainly been a disaster and Obama's dovish nature emboldened Putin enough to invade a country that gave up its nukes in exchange for express promises from us and NATO that they would be protected in case of just such a thing. What did we do? We gave Russia a very stern warning and backed down.


JesusFingChrist, we are dating a shirtless Russian bear now. The Ukraine gave up nukes for NATO under Obama??? You have a clear problem with history and nuclear weapons with regard to the Ukraine. You better read up before posting more alternative facts. Additionally, Obama lead the world community to impose sanctions on the Russian Oligarchy which our current president clueless child wants to remove.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 07, 2017, 02:34:08 pm
Quote
I've already mentioned the disastrous Syrian red line that wasn't a red line that was a red line.


President Barack Hussein Obama removed chemical weapons from Syria as a foreign policy success in area. Also, there is no good red line in country. Just the one president clueless child will strike with his Russian bear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 07, 2017, 02:37:57 pm
Quote
The Iran deal was so good that they test ICBM's to get ready for their nuclear capabilities they can now have legally under the treaty in 10 short years. In the meantime, they continue to sponsor terrorism and harass their neighbors and us while we send them billions of dollars


First the missile test was not ICBM level and yes we now have a 10-15 year nuclear breakout (with international monitoring) instead of the 1-2 year one we had under conservative US leadership. They can sponsor terrorism do to the advantages handed them by the leadership of conservative GWB. The money we sent them was from our taking back of a deal made in the 1970's for arms. You understand that, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 07, 2017, 02:41:56 pm
Quote
Don't forget Obama's perplexing treatment of our one true ally in the middle east, Israel, who he thumbed his nose at enough times to again embolden her enemies and cause her PM to come to our congress and plead not to approve a deal that the President never brought before congress anyway.

Perplexing behavior in the Middle East would be our Israeli tail waging the US dog again. The emboldened conservatives in Israel now claiming land and moving closer to war in the Middle East again. Question for you conservative Robb, what happens when the clueless child removes the US from deal.

I'm sure you haven't thought one bit on that. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 07, 2017, 02:43:07 pm
Quote
China continues to steal our intellectual property, encroach in international waters and build up her military while Obama appeared to ignore them. I am trying to be objective here Tico, not snarky, but what successes am I missing?

Short answer, everything.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 07, 2017, 02:44:12 pm
Quote
Perhaps all of the failures are so blinding I have missed them. Please list a few for me and I will readily acknowledge them. And I mean that sincerely.


We have a better chance of jes beard acknowledging an error first.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 02:44:45 pm
On a different note, for just a moment, can we reflect on the fact that our President is now suggesting that the media is engaged in covering up terrorist attacks???

Positioning.  He now has courts and the press to blame for the next terrorist attack.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 07, 2017, 02:48:52 pm
Wow, there are rose-colored lenses and then there is otto.  If you think I am here to defend GWB then you are sadly mistaken. He was anything but a conservative President and made several major mistakes I disagreed with at the time. Which Obama decision did you disagree with otto? Or are you capable of such a thing?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 03:06:12 pm
I can't believe people are still arguing about Obama. 

The Senate just confirmed an ignoramus for Secretary of Education.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 03:07:39 pm
Wake up, people!!!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 03:11:29 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/02/07/trump-makes-false-statement-about-u-s-murder-rate-to-sheriffs-group/?utm_term=.0f6d42d2a1dd


“At one point POTUS said the country’s murder rate is highest it’s been in 45-47 years..."


When actually....


The country’s murder rate is not the highest it’s been in 40 years. It is almost at its lowest point, actually, according to the FBI, which gathers up statistics every year from police departments around the country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 07, 2017, 03:15:00 pm
I agree she's not that credible, FD, but the whole Dept of Ed is a lost cause.  Trying to make every community and every state fit into a mold was a stupid idea in the first place years ago.  Most of our troubles emanate from the desire to make us one borg.  Obama's Sec of Ed was a brilliant guy...who couldn't straighten out the problems.  This DeVos won't help or hurt it any more.  Abolish the Dept, return all Education policy to the local school boards.  Keeping up with all the regs is one reason education is suffering.  Common Core, otherwise known as Harrison Bergeron, was a glorious but horrible idea that needs to die.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 03:18:31 pm
Nowhere did I say that I think God is not concerned with the governance of nations. What I said was that God does not care for our national constructs. God doesn't see any American any differently than he does a Somalian, Russian, Brazilian, or Indian.

You would know that.... how?

If a person believes in the existence of a creator god who is eternal, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent, and that such a god created a son thru a virgin birth so that son could be the whipping boy for the sins of all of mankind.... but only so long as that son was embraced as the personal savior for the person being examined (in other words, standard New Testament Christian dogma), then I don't see where it would be hard to also believe such a god picks national winners and losers based on the behavior of its people, or even on what you refer to as its "national construct".... just as it says happened multiple times in the Old Testament.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 03:30:00 pm

We have a better chance of jes beard acknowledging an error first.

I have acknowledged many.  Now, any chance you could post the original source of the 97% consensus nonsense?

You know, the source you keep claiming you have posted but never have?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 03:30:26 pm
Biggest issue before, after, and currently is the bit about not being able to deny insurance because of a pre-existing condition.  That has to be in.

Has to be in?

Why?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 03:33:00 pm
Yeah, that post is exactly where he equated them, asking which one is worse, and then being unable to give an answer.

What I asked you to do was to quote the language SHOWING that he alleged they were the same.... I trust even you will notice that you did not do so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 03:36:00 pm
Also, Obama is toast!

Would you like to bet a steak dinner on it?

Or tickets to a Cubs game?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 07, 2017, 04:04:37 pm
You would know that.... how?

If a person believes in the existence of a creator god who is eternal, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent, and that such a god created a son thru a virgin birth so that son could be the whipping boy for the sins of all of mankind.... but only so long as that son was embraced as the personal savior for the person being examined (in other words, standard New Testament Christian dogma), then I don't see where it would be hard to also believe such a god picks national winners and losers based on the behavior of its people, or even on what you refer to as its "national construct".... just as it says happened multiple times in the Old Testament.

That's actually not the "standard New Testament Christian dogma." That's the current American Evangelical dogma, which has been a dominant strain of theology for the past few hundred years or so, and which I don't really agree with.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 07, 2017, 04:17:02 pm
Quote
Trying to make every community and every state fit into a mold

I don't disagree but don't follow the education back and forth much.  How much of the federal make everything the same/Common Core stuff is to prevent local school boards from deciding to teach creationism in science class?  Or that the earth was created in seven days?  Local control is okay, I guess, unless the local people are idiots.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 07, 2017, 04:44:08 pm
I don't disagree but don't follow the education back and forth much.  How much of the federal make everything the same/Common Core stuff is to prevent local school boards from deciding to teach creationism in science class?  Or that the earth was created in seven days?  Local control is okay, I guess, unless the local people are idiots.
I was in Christian schools, and we didn't see Common Core as a threat to our religious liberties.  We would have been free to teach either world view or both.  As a matter of fact, we did teach both.  Our resistance to Common Core was the establishment of standards which would have been horrific.  Here's how we saw it.  I'm sure the government didn't see it this way, but our experience over the past 50 years with the government involvement in education hasn't been thrilling.  Common Core would establish a level of excellence that all schools should aspire to.  What happens when many podunk and inner city schools begin failing to reach these goals?  They already are failing in graduation rates and attendance rates.  What will happen is what always happens in our politically correct society, the standard will be dropped to a level that those schools can achieve.  So what?  So, many other schools will be tempted to ease up their standards because being below average is suddenly acceptable.  The concept of teaching certain curriculum so that kids graduating from every school was on somewhat an equal footing was good; setting artificial standards as to when that was achieved was crappy.

What is needed is a recommended curriculum for all schools, but let the local school boards and accreditation agencies deal with setting standards.  BTW: the better public schools and most private schools already met or surpassed most Common Core levels.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 07, 2017, 04:47:25 pm
BTW:  I mentioned Harrison Bergeron.  In 1961 Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., foresaw the eventual foolishness of political correctness and trying to make everyone equal.

http://www.tnellen.com/westside/harrison.pdf
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 04:51:19 pm
That's actually not the "standard New Testament Christian dogma." That's the current American Evangelical dogma, which has been a dominant strain of theology for the past few hundred years or so, and which I don't really agree with.

Which part of it is not also part of Catholic dogma?  Which part would Martin Luther or John Calvin have disagreed with?

Which part would the apostle Peter have disagreed with?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 04:54:49 pm
I was in Christian schools, and we didn't see Common Core as a threat to our religious liberties.  We would have been free to teach either world view or both.  As a matter of fact, we did teach both.  Our resistance to Common Core was the establishment of standards which would have been horrific.  Here's how we saw it.  I'm sure the government didn't see it this way, but our experience over the past 50 years with the government involvement in education hasn't been thrilling.  Common Core would establish a level of excellence that all schools should aspire to.  What happens when many podunk and inner city schools begin failing to reach these goals?  They already are failing in graduation rates and attendance rates.  What will happen is what always happens in our politically correct society, the standard will be dropped to a level that those schools can achieve.  So what?  So, many other schools will be tempted to ease up their standards because being below average is suddenly acceptable.  The concept of teaching certain curriculum so that kids graduating from every school was on somewhat an equal footing was good; setting artificial standards as to when that was achieved was crappy.

What is needed is a recommended curriculum for all schools, but let the local school boards and accreditation agencies deal with setting standards.  BTW: the better public schools and most private schools already met or surpassed most Common Core levels.

What Common Core "standards" are you talking about "which would have been horrific" if used?  Concrete examples please.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 04:57:30 pm
BTW:  I mentioned Harrison Bergeron.  In 1961 Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., foresaw the eventual foolishness of political correctness and trying to make everyone equal.

http://www.tnellen.com/westside/harrison.pdf

That is one of Vonnegut's best pieces of writing, and I have mentioned it here a few times, but it is much less (if at all) about political correctness than it is about government imposed equality of outcome.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 04:59:57 pm
How much of the federal make everything the same/Common Core stuff is to prevent local school boards from deciding to teach creationism in science class?  Or that the earth was created in seven days?

Not at all, and a number of states have either refused to adopt Common Core, have amended what they did adopt, or have abandoned it after having adopted it.  Additionally, it is NOT imposed on the states by the federal government (which should be fairly clear from the fact a number of states do not use it).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 05:02:10 pm
What in the hell does Kurt Vonnegut, Jr have to do with a woman who thinks we need guns in schools to shoot grizzly bears?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 05:03:28 pm
What in the hell does Kurt Vonnegut, Jr have to do with a woman who thinks we need guns in schools to shoot grizzly bears?

Who, other than you, suggested that he did?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 07, 2017, 05:05:36 pm
What in the hell does Kurt Vonnegut, Jr have to do with a woman who thinks we need guns in schools to shoot grizzly bears?
Boy, did you jump the rails.  LOL.   You went somewhere I wasn't going.  DMF asked why I didn't like Common Core and among educators, Vonnegut's short story has relevance.  LOL  DeVos is a disaster, but I doubt if grizzlies are that worrisome.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2017, 05:11:36 pm
They stood on the sidelines for eight years doing everything they could to make sure it wouldn't work.  There are no easy answers to any of this stuff, but they acted like there were.  Now they own it.  Good luck.

Can you give 1 example of where President Obama reached out to republicans in the health care debate? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 05:21:50 pm
Oh for Pete's sake...are we still arguing about Obama? 

Here...try this....google

"one example of obama reaching out to republicans over health"

Got 4,756 hits. What that means...by the way...isn't that there are 4,756 examples of Obama reaching out to the Republicans.  What it means is that a simpleton could perpetuate this argument with ease.

Yo, Obama lovers, yo Obama haters, yo in between-ers....been there, done that.  PLEASE...this constant partisan political harping is how we got into the present mess. A mess, the consequences of which, are far greater than anything Obamacare did or didn't do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 05:25:56 pm
Present issue:

https://youtu.be/pZOF9q5fzfs
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 05:29:26 pm
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/07/513976112/trump-jokes-of-state-senator-well-destroy-his-career
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2017, 06:15:25 pm
Yo, Obama lovers, yo Obama haters, yo in between-ers....been there, done that.  PLEASE...this constant partisan political harping is how we got into the present mess. A mess, the consequences of which, are far greater than anything Obamacare did or didn't do.

Bush brought about Obama. Obama brought about Trump, so I guess it is all Bush's fault after all. The history of why we got to this point is important and if behaviors aren't changed then there will be a worse lefty version of Trump in 4-8 years.

Writing a crappy bill that effects a large majority of the US economy is pretty damn important.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 06:21:57 pm
Still trying to find blame, are we?  That will certainly help going forward.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 06:24:38 pm
By the way, just did a Google search:
"so I guess it is all Bush's fault after all"

over 10,000 hits!  Winner!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 07, 2017, 06:34:54 pm
https://youtu.be/ELD2AwFN9Nc (https://youtu.be/ELD2AwFN9Nc)


LMAO!


Only two weeks in and we are a laughingstock
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 07, 2017, 07:04:01 pm
The New York Times shows Trump is just making stuff up again.  It looks like they ran coverage on about 90% of the terrorist attacks he says were not reported, and they ran AP or Reuters articles that have since been removed from the website for about half of the remaining attacks.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/us/politics/the-white-house-list-of-terror-attacks-underreported-by-media.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 07:46:17 pm
Can you give 1 example of where President Obama reached out to republicans in the health care debate? 

Please look at the video, note who is in the meeting and where the meeting was held. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xKetnhmH3Y

Wouldn't inviting the Republican congressional leadership to meet with him at the White House, where he sort of controls who is allowed to enter, to discuss ObamaCare before passage of the bill count?

Please don't get me wrong.  On the basic point, that Obama did far too little to include Republicans in the process, there is no question you are right, but you set the bar so low it is not at all hard to meet your challenge.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 07, 2017, 07:47:26 pm
Thanks, Curt.  I appreciate your perspective on the Common Core thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 07, 2017, 07:49:26 pm
Quote
then there will be a worse lefty version of Trump in 4-8 years.

Olbermann for president!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 07, 2017, 07:54:16 pm
Quote
The New York Times shows Trump is just making stuff up again.  It looks like they ran coverage on about 90% of the terrorist attacks he says were not reported

You're more likely to be hit by lightning than be the victim of a terrorist attack, but that would make people realize that the ban is really about keeping out Muslims (for cultural reasons) rather than being about safety, so gotta keep people scared of terrorists.  Personally, I would much rather have Syrian refugees living next to me than Steve Bannon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2017, 08:06:28 pm
Please look at the video, note who is in the meeting and where the meeting was held. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xKetnhmH3Y

Wouldn't inviting the Republican congressional leadership to meet with him at the White House, where he sort of controls who is allowed to enter, to discuss ObamaCare before passage of the bill count?

Please don't get me wrong.  On the basic point, that Obama did far too little to include Republicans in the process, there is no question you are right, but you set the bar so low it is not at all hard to meet your challenge.

And what from that meeting ended up changing a single line in the final bill?  Not a single line, it was a completely for show.

I watched it live, my favorite line is too McCain "We aren't having an election anymore."  This is of course after President Obama famous line "Elections have consequences and I won" from the stimulus debate.  As Trump is proving he has a pen, phone and whiteout. My point is simply they all suck. There is a middle ground to be had, but the extremes in each party keep that from happening.

Devos might be a horrible Secretary of Education. Can she really be worse than Arnie Duncan?  He wasted $7 billion trying to fix failing schools and nothing got better at those schools.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 07, 2017, 08:25:42 pm
And what from that meeting ended up changing a single line in the final bill?  Not a single line, it was a completely for show.


Not surprisingly, you are now moving the goalposts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 07, 2017, 08:41:02 pm
You're more likely to be hit by lightning than be the victim of a terrorist attack, but that would make people realize that the ban is really about keeping out Muslims (for cultural reasons) rather than being about safety, so gotta keep people scared of terrorists.

It's about how one man convinced enough voters in enough states to irrationally fear 1.7 billion innocent people. Sort of how Hitler started.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 08, 2017, 07:38:45 am
Which part of it is not also part of Catholic dogma?  Which part would Martin Luther or John Calvin have disagreed with?

Which part would the apostle Peter have disagreed with?

I'll try and deconstruct your original statement as succinctly as possible.

Your opening lists of "omni's" over-simplifies or takes for granted a certain view of divine sovereignty that is simply not universally agreed on. Regardless of whatever watered-down theology is taught from the pulpits of American churches, there is actually a wonderful diversity of opinion among theologians (both present and historic) on this matter.

Every one of the individuals and institutions you named would have taken issue with your statement  "God created a son" as it is plainly non-Trinitarian and subverts the person of Jesus in a manner that is widely categorized as heretical.

"To be the whipping boy" reflects, in theological terms, the penal substitutionary view of the atonement popularized during the Reformation and especially by Calvin, among other theologians of his day. Luther's view of the atonement evolved - some would argue that he supported this view, others would object. As with Luther, so the Catholic church's view of the atonement: it has changed over time. If Peter had a specific theological perspective on the atonement, it is likely that he subscribed to some variant of the Christus Victor model, which was the dominant theology of the early church. It is just as likely that Peter did not have a robust theological interpretation of the atonement in an academic way. His personal experience of Jesus and the cross likely led to something far more visceral than what the scholars debate. His dear friend, a man that Peter came to believe was somehow the promised messiah of Jewish tradition, was brutalized and killed on a cross, buried, and then somehow appeared three days later, seemingly possessing a glorious new kind of body that still bore the scars of his torture. After fourty days, this friend of Peter's then ascended into heaven - a departure as mysterious as his death. Being so close to these circumstances, the means and mechanism of the atonement likely mattered very little to Peter. Instead, he shared the same news that Jesus did, one that sounds strange to our ears today: the Kingdom of God is at hand, and this dear friend of Peter's, the crucified and risen Jesus, is the king.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 08, 2017, 10:27:40 am
Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 
My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person -- always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible!


Hasn't he assured us that he has no conflicts of interest?  Scolding a company about their business relationship with his daughter seems inappropriate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 08, 2017, 12:39:56 pm
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/elizabeth-warren-silenced/

Incredibly the Republicans are pushing the confirmation of a man with a dubious record of defending citizen's rights to be the chief protector of citizen's rights. (Same old, same old).

BUT...

Senator Warren, seemingly ignoring the lessons of eight years of Republican obstructionism, has now assumed the role of Chief Obstructionist for the Democrats. (Same old, same old).

And...

In an astronomical move of stupidity the Senate Republicans have elevated the story from late night CSPAN to headline news.  (Not quite same old, same old....significantly more idiotic than same old, same old).

In the mean time, while the Senate fiddles....

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 08, 2017, 01:14:53 pm
Yes, but the media is peddling that she was stiffled because she's a woman and was merely reading a letter, which isn't true.  The letter was read by other Democrats...who OBEYED the rules.  It's bad enough that we have a jackass in the White House who lies, the opposition needs to rise above that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 08, 2017, 01:22:45 pm
Quote
The letter was read by other Democrats...who OBEYED the rules.

Where are you seeing that, Curt?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 08, 2017, 01:47:41 pm
CNN I can get you the link later
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 08, 2017, 02:48:17 pm
DMF, here's the link.  http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/08/politics/jeff-merkley-mark-udall-elizabeth-warren/index.html

"To my knowledge, the other Dem speeches were not preceded by a prolonged disparagement of a colleague followed by warnings from the chair alerting the Senate to the ongoing disparagement so that an objection could be raised," Popp said in a statement. "Last night, Sen. Warren had been warned by the chair and continued to violate the rule anyway. I have not seen the others, but I understand that wasn't the case with their remarks."

In my OPINION: the headline subtly implies that since male Senators were allowed to read the letter, it was because she was a woman.  The first couple of paragraphs imply that all she was doing was reading the letter which if you read on, wasn't true.

I'm concerned that both sides are lying and the media is exploiting it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 08, 2017, 03:52:10 pm
I think all Elizabeth Warren accomplished is to get Trump's base fired up.  Guarantee you there will be a Pocahontas tweet coming soon, after he's done trashing Nordstrom.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 08, 2017, 03:53:56 pm
I think all Elizabeth Warren accomplished is to get Trump's base fired up.  Guarantee you there will be a Pocahontas tweet coming soon, after he's done trashing Nordstrom.
heh, I've already seen some references to her Native American background.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 08, 2017, 04:21:04 pm
Betsy DeVos Teaches the Value of Ignorance


By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
FEB. 7, 2017


“Government really sucks.” This belief, expressed by the just-confirmed education secretary, Betsy DeVos, in a 2015 speech to educators, may be the only qualification she needed for President Trump.

Ms. DeVos is the perfect cabinet member for a president determined to appoint officials eager to destroy the agencies they run and weigh the fate of policies and programs based on ideological considerations.

She has never run, taught in, attended or sent a child to an American public school, and her confirmation hearings laid bare her ignorance of education policy and scorn for public education itself. She has donated millions to, and helped direct, groups that want to replace traditional public schools with charter schools and convert taxpayer dollars into vouchers to help parents send children to private and religious schools.

While her nomination gave exposure to an honest and passionate debate about charter schools as an alternative to traditional public schools, her hard-line opposition to any real accountability for these publicly funded, privately run schools undermined their founding principle as well as her support. Even champions of charters, like the philanthropist Eli Broad and the Massachusetts Charter Public School Association, opposed her nomination.

In Ms. DeVos, the decades-long struggle to improve public education gains no visionary leadership and no fresh ideas. Her appointment squanders an opportunity to advance public education research, experimentation and standards, to objectively compare traditional public school, charter school and voucher models in search of better options for public school students.

The charter school movement started in the United States two decades ago with the promise that independently run, publicly funded schools would outperform traditional public schools if they were exempted from some state regulations. Charter pioneers also promised that, unlike traditional schools, which they said were allowed to perform disastrously without consequence, charters would be held accountable for improving student performance, and shut down if they failed.

Ms. DeVos has spent tens of millions and many years in a single-minded effort to force her home state, Michigan, to replace public schools with privately run charters and to use vouchers to move talented students out of failing public schools. She has consistently fought legislation to stop failing charters from expanding, and lobbied to shut down the troubled Detroit public school system and channel the money to charter, private or religious schools, regardless of their performance. She also favors online private schools, an alternative that most leading educators reject as destructive to younger children’s need to develop peer relationships, and an industry prone to scams.

In her Senate hearing, Ms. DeVos appeared largely ignorant of challenges facing college students, as well. She indicated that she was skeptical of Education Department policies to prevent fraud by for-profit colleges — a position favored, no doubt, by Mr. Trump, who just settled a fraud case against his so-called Trump University for $25 million. It was not clear that she understood how various student loan and aid programs worked, or could distinguish between them.

In the end, only two Senate Republicans, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, opposed Ms. DeVos, leaving Vice President Mike Pence to cast the tiebreaking vote. Maybe the others figured it wasn’t worth risking Mr. Trump’s wrath by rejecting his selection to lead a department that accounts for only about 3 percent of the federal budget. Maybe they couldn’t ignore the $200 million the DeVos family has funneled to Republicans, including campaigns of 10 of the 12 Republican senators on the committee that vetted her.

The tens of thousands of parents and students who called, emailed and signed petitions opposing Ms. DeVos’s confirmation refused to surrender to Mr. Trump. They couldn’t afford to have a billionaire hostile to government run public schools that already underperform the rest of the developed world.

Did anyone who backed this shameful appointment think about them?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 08, 2017, 04:29:57 pm
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/16/donald-trump-changed-political-parties-at-least-fi/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 08, 2017, 05:38:42 pm
Not that it matters one iota...but I haven't read anything that suggests that Udall did anything different than Warren.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/318466-sen-udall-reads-coretta-scott-king-letter-on-senate-floor-after-warren

In fact, his "tweets" seem to indicate that there was a double standard. More likely just indifference.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 08, 2017, 05:42:27 pm
I think all Elizabeth Warren accomplished is to get Trump's base fired up.  Guarantee you there will be a Pocahontas tweet coming soon, after he's done trashing Nordstrom.

I didn't realize they needed any help hyperventilating.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 08, 2017, 05:45:20 pm
I suspect this is more likely to get the Trumpsters aroused.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-nominee-gorsuch-says-trumps-attacks-on-judiciary-are-demoralizing/2017/02/08/64e03fe2-ee3f-11e6-9662-6eedf1627882_story.html?utm_term=.67406efdb137
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 08, 2017, 06:59:56 pm
I think all Elizabeth Warren accomplished is to get Trump's base fired up.  Guarantee you there will be a Pocahontas tweet coming soon, after he's done trashing Nordstrom.

I didn't realize they needed any help hyperventilating.

Honestly I don't think the far ends of either political spectrum needs any help hyperventilating at this point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 08, 2017, 09:36:23 pm
You're more likely to be hit by lightning than be the victim of a terrorist attack, but that would make people realize that the ban is really about keeping out Muslims (for cultural reasons) rather than being about safety, so gotta keep people scared of terrorists.

It's about how one man convinced enough voters in enough states to irrationally fear 1.7 billion innocent people. Sort of how Hitler started.

Except that the quote regarding the odds is simply not true.  I was going to use the same point a few days ago and then did the math, realized you are actually far more likely to be killed in the U.S. by  terrorist attack than by lightening.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 08, 2017, 09:41:06 pm
I'll try and deconstruct your original statement as succinctly as possible.

Your opening lists of "omni's" over-simplifies or takes for granted a certain view of divine sovereignty that is simply not universally agreed on. Regardless of whatever watered-down theology is taught from the pulpits of American churches, there is actually a wonderful diversity of opinion among theologians (both present and historic) on this matter.

Every one of the individuals and institutions you named would have taken issue with your statement  "God created a son" as it is plainly non-Trinitarian and subverts the person of Jesus in a manner that is widely categorized as heretical.

"To be the whipping boy" reflects, in theological terms, the penal substitutionary view of the atonement popularized during the Reformation and especially by Calvin, among other theologians of his day. Luther's view of the atonement evolved - some would argue that he supported this view, others would object. As with Luther, so the Catholic church's view of the atonement: it has changed over time. If Peter had a specific theological perspective on the atonement, it is likely that he subscribed to some variant of the Christus Victor model, which was the dominant theology of the early church. It is just as likely that Peter did not have a robust theological interpretation of the atonement in an academic way. His personal experience of Jesus and the cross likely led to something far more visceral than what the scholars debate. His dear friend, a man that Peter came to believe was somehow the promised messiah of Jewish tradition, was brutalized and killed on a cross, buried, and then somehow appeared three days later, seemingly possessing a glorious new kind of body that still bore the scars of his torture. After fourty days, this friend of Peter's then ascended into heaven - a departure as mysterious as his death. Being so close to these circumstances, the means and mechanism of the atonement likely mattered very little to Peter. Instead, he shared the same news that Jesus did, one that sounds strange to our ears today: the Kingdom of God is at hand, and this dear friend of Peter's, the crucified and risen Jesus, is the king.

You are clamoring over distinctions without a difference.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 08, 2017, 09:50:15 pm
Honestly I don't think the far ends of either political spectrum needs any help hyperventilating at this point.

The problem is that neither Warren nor Trump are the "far ends of either political spectrum."

Warren represents the position and voice of at least 40% of the Democratic party, and likely closer to 60%.  Trump represents the position and voice of more than 40% of the Republican party.  That number of voters on EITHER side is not the far end of the political spectrum.

As much as either Warren and her supporters, or Trump and his supporters, may be out of step with, unable to communicate well with, and unable to understand, the political middle of this country, to whatever extent you reflect the political middle, it would appear the problems run both ways -- the mere fact that you view either of them as the far side of the political spectrum indicates you are out of step with, are unable to communicate with, and unable to understand either of them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 09, 2017, 09:13:52 am
You are clamoring over distinctions without a difference.

No, I'm answering your question. If you don't want an answer, don't ask in the first place.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 09, 2017, 10:31:23 am
...and so it begins...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-schlarmann/betsy-devos-orders-immediate-flattening-of-all-school-globes_b_14639376.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 09, 2017, 01:37:26 pm
I'm sure the earth-is-rounders are also the global-warmers.  This is a great solution to both problems.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 09, 2017, 01:54:28 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/conway-may-have-broken-key-ethics-rule-by-touting-ivanka-trumps-products-experts-say/2017/02/09/fd1cc64a-eeda-11e6-b4ff-ac2cf509efe5_story.html?utm_term=.05928d6296fe

Kellyanne got counseled.  I wonder how that went?

Counseler:  "Kellyanne, you can't endorse Ivanka."

Kelleyanne: "Why not?"

Counseler:  "It's unethical."

Kellayanee: "What should I say, then?"

Counseler: "I don't know, try lying."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 09, 2017, 02:49:52 pm
...and so it begins...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-schlarmann/betsy-devos-orders-immediate-flattening-of-all-school-globes_b_14639376.html

And FDISK likely believes it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 09, 2017, 02:52:24 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/conway-may-have-broken-key-ethics-rule-by-touting-ivanka-trumps-products-experts-say/2017/02/09/fd1cc64a-eeda-11e6-b4ff-ac2cf509efe5_story.html?utm_term=.05928d6296fe

From the article: Don W. Fox, former general counsel and former acting director of OGE, told The Washington Post.... “This is jaw-dropping to me. This rule has been promulgated by the federal Office of Government Ethics as part of the Standards of Conduct for all executive branch employees and it applies to all members of the armed forces as well.”

The guy's jaw obviously drops rather easily.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 09, 2017, 03:23:02 pm
https://sierra.secure.force.com/actions/National?actionId=AR0049496&id=70131000001SSYEAA4&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=emacq&utm_content=griz_lookmob

Yellowstone Grizzly in danger!  Open season from school house windows!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 09, 2017, 04:00:15 pm
In all fairness to Devoss, the story is not as ridiculous as it sounds. She was referring to a Wyoming school close to Yellowstone with a fence set up to keep out Grizzly bears. There were 16 bears captured within 4 miles of there between 1990 and 2000. She was asked whether there would be a use for guns in school. She was giving an off-the-cuff example that isn't outrageous or even stupid even if it is inaccurate. The school in question does not have guns because of district policy. I will say this. If my kids were locked away in that library in Columbine I sure would have wanted the teachers to have the ability to have conceal carry.

But of course it is a subject of ridicule because context is needed and it is too easy to be lazy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 09, 2017, 04:02:29 pm
The real reason the unions don't like Devoss is because she likes vouchers and charters schools and school choice, which could hurt the union and union jobs and lower their wages, even though it very well could help inner city youth get a better education.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 09, 2017, 04:10:46 pm
Many of my friends and siblings are teachers. All of them are horrified by the DeVos nomination. Literally none of them have the concerns you suggest.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 09, 2017, 04:23:11 pm
Quote
The real reason the unions don't like Devoss is because she likes vouchers and charters schools and school choice, which could hurt the union and union jobs and lower their wages, even though it very well could help inner city youth get a better education.


The reason why people disagree with DeVos is that she pushes an unaccountable system of private schools (vouchers) and for profit charter schools. It's merely standard republic pol union bashing while providing no information that it actually helps those inner city youth that you cite.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 09, 2017, 04:26:02 pm
In all fairness to Devoss, the story is not as ridiculous as it sounds. She was referring to a Wyoming school close to Yellowstone with a fence set up to keep out Grizzly bears. There were 16 bears captured within 4 miles of there between 1990 and 2000. She was asked whether there would be a use for guns in school. She was giving an off-the-cuff example that isn't outrageous or even stupid even if it is inaccurate. The school in question does not have guns because of district policy. I will say this. If my kids were locked away in that library in Columbine I sure would have wanted the teachers to have the ability to have conceal carry.

But of course it is a subject of ridicule because context is needed and it is too easy to be lazy.

The context here is that DeVos is seeking nomination to lead the Department of Education. One of the issues that will require her leadership is that of violence and guns in school. That this topic would come up during her hearings is painfully obvious. That she basically said, "grizzly bears" when asked why guns should be allowed in schools suggests one of two things:

First: DeVos was adequately prepared for an obvious topic of questioning and the best reason she could come up with as to why guns might be permitted is the danger posed to remote schools in Wyoming by grizzly bears. In case this needs exposition, this is not a good reason for guns to be allowed in schools, as is evidenced by the school's effective usage of fences and bear spray.

Second: DeVos was so woefully unprepared that she did not realize this question might come up. In case this needs exposition, such an oversight would be an embarrassment to her nomination, akin to not realizing a question of addition might come up on a 3rd grade math test.

Given that DeVos revealed herself to be ignorant of other normal topics of debate within education (growth vs proficiency, for example), the second reason given above seems the most likely: that she is ignorant and unprepared to address many of the most important issues in public education today.

THIS is why all the teachers I know (teachers that support unions, teachers that hate unions, conservative teachers, liberal teachers, special ed teachers, grade school teachers, college profs, ALL the teachers) are horrified by DeVos' confirmation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 09, 2017, 04:47:54 pm
Robb, it's a subject of ridicule because it's ridiculous.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 09, 2017, 04:50:32 pm
Robb, I suspect the unions have a whole list of reasons why they don't like Devoss.  At or near the top of the list is that she is obviously unqualified.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 09, 2017, 04:56:21 pm
But of course it is a subject of ridicule because context is needed and it is too easy to be lazy.

For some people it is also easy to be stupid.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 09, 2017, 04:58:29 pm
Many of my friends and siblings are teachers. All of them are horrified by the DeVos nomination. Literally none of them have the concerns you suggest.

Many of my friends are also teachers.  So far I have heard none of them express any concern.  I think she is one of the best nominees for any cabinet post in decades.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 09, 2017, 04:59:59 pm
Robb, I suspect the unions have a whole list of reasons why they don't like Devoss.  At or near the top of the list is that she is obviously unqualified.

Most unions do not care whether someone is or is not qualified.  In fact dismissing the important of actual qualifications is pretty much central to the very concept of unions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 09, 2017, 05:04:05 pm
THIS is why all the teachers I know (teachers that support unions, teachers that hate unions, conservative teachers, liberal teachers, special ed teachers, grade school teachers, college profs, ALL the teachers) are horrified by DeVos' confirmation.

You know me.  And I am not only not horrified by the confirmation, I applaud it.

You know Curt, and I believe his posts have indicated something short of horror.

And you know Craig, and so far I believe Craig has given no indication whatsoever how he feels.

So your knowledge of how educators you know feel might seem a bit wanting, though your knowledge of hyperbole would appear to be spot on.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 09, 2017, 05:07:43 pm

The reason why people disagree with DeVos is that she pushes an unaccountable system of private schools (vouchers) and for profit charter schools. It's merely standard republic pol union bashing while providing no information that it actually helps those inner city youth that you cite.

Charter schools are accountable to the school districts and the states they serve.  Contending otherwise makes clear you have no understanding of the charter school system and have been accepting at face value some of the loony-left crap you read.

PRIVATE schools are even more accountable because students or parents can withdraw at any time they conclude the schools are not meeting their needs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 09, 2017, 05:32:49 pm
Switching channels regularly, you see a pattern of the opposition digging deep to find stuff to ridicule or diminish anything Trump or Trump related.  DeVos is a good example.  I stated my opinion on her; she was a bad pick and it would have been reasonable to reject her.  But we had a very good Secretary of Education who achieved nothing.  DeVos will achieve less.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 09, 2017, 05:55:54 pm
Switching channels regularly, you see a pattern of the opposition digging deep to find stuff to ridicule or diminish anything Trump or Trump related.

Ya think? It's possible the press will quit ridiculing Trump when Trump stops being ridiculous. (A good start would be to start telling the truth...at least once in a while).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 09, 2017, 06:16:09 pm
You know me.  And I am not only not horrified by the confirmation, I applaud it.

Jes, I don't "know" you as anything but a blowhard troll on a message board.

Your opinion on the matter as a "teacher" means about as much as your opinion on the travel ban as a "lawyer."

Meanwhile, if you're going to cite craig's and Curt's opinions, you'll note that craig is too smart to stumble into this thread more than occasionally, and Curt has already expressed that DeVos was a poor choice and agreed with my posts.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 09, 2017, 06:19:46 pm
blowhard troll on a message board

Henceforth known as BTOAMB.

Tico, not to overstate the obvious, but there are cures for BTOAMB.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 09, 2017, 06:21:25 pm
I know. I cycle through putting him on and then taking him off ignore.

Every time I take him off I hope to find he's become a more reasonable person, and then he quickly dashes my hopes and ends up back on the ignore list.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 09, 2017, 06:27:29 pm
I have no idea who you are talking about.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 09, 2017, 06:35:24 pm
My next sentence was going to be...the same as what Republicans did to Obama.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 09, 2017, 07:43:24 pm
The 9th Circuit court refused to reinstate Trump's Executive Order today (it was unanimous, 3-0), and he had his typical childish reaction on Twitter:

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 
SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!


Hillary Clinton had a similarly childish reaction, but I found it to be pretty great trolling:

Hillary Clinton ‏@HillaryClinton 
3-0
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 09, 2017, 07:48:53 pm
I wouldn't be too giddy about the 9th Circuit ruling anything.  They are overturned something like 90% of the time they are referred to the Supreme Court.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 09, 2017, 08:05:15 pm
I think it's pretty doubtful the 9th Circuit gets overturned here.  The most likely scenario is a 4-4 result, and that would mean the lower court's ruling is upheld.  The second most likely is that Kennedy goes with the liberal justices and the 9th circuit ruling is held up 5-3.  No other combination is all that likely...but Roberts seems to be the next most likely to flip, and he'd also turn it in the liberal justices' favor.

Basically, as long as Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan agree--and I don't think there's a strong reason to believe they won't--the decision is held up.   If Gorsuch was already on the court, the result might be different...but he's not. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 09, 2017, 08:28:39 pm
I'm not giddy about anything. I think it's a damn shame anytime a Federal court has to defend the Constitution from the Chief Defender of the Constitution.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 09, 2017, 08:45:21 pm
Roberts has shown that he will stand by the rule of law vs partisan politics... i think it ends up 5-3 to up hold lower courts ruling.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 09, 2017, 09:29:36 pm
Quote
Henceforth known as BTOAMB.

Not to be confused with a BTITWH (Blowhard Troll In The White House).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 09, 2017, 11:11:26 pm
I'm not giddy about anything. I think it's a damn shame anytime a Federal court has to defend the Constitution from the Chief Defender of the Constitution.
I agree with the court decision, and don't doubt it will be upheld, but, FD, are you saying Trump is the first President to be rebuffed by the courts?  Might come as a surprise to the other 44.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 09, 2017, 11:37:21 pm
This lead me to read about Japanese internment during WWII and how the Supreme Court upheld FDR's executive order to do this. Surprisingly this decision has never been overturned. So Trump could detain every Muslim in the US and only the Supreme Court would be able to set them free. I am in no way endorsing this or the Muslim ban. I'm not a fan of Trump at all. It is just that history thing again.

BTW how can Trump be worth a billion dollars and have a daughter with a fashion line, but be unable to tie a tie correctly?  This is going to be like Lackey's freakishly white teeth for me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 12:52:16 am
I wouldn't be too giddy about the 9th Circuit ruling anything.  They are overturned something like 90% of the time they are referred to the Supreme Court.

Four judges have so far unanimously held that the Muslim ban is unconstitutional - two Bush appointees and two Democratic appointees.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 10, 2017, 05:50:01 am
Actually, a Boston judge ruled to uphold the ban so it's not 4-0. But counting the 3 9th circuit judges is laughable. The 9th circuit is laughable and everything a court should not be. Their finding that Washington has standing is laughable. But most importantly, when one reads the statute, I don't see how the President loses. Here it is. "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."  Now, you or I may not like the statute, but that is the law and i don't know how anyone, including 4 judges, could read it any differently unless they aren't interested in what the law states and are looking to impose their own will on the matter, which is precisely what judges are not supposed to do. You are correct in stating that the 4 most liberal justices on the Supreme court may also decided to ignore the statute, but that doesn't mean the President doesn't have the authority here.  And to call his order a Muslim ban is laughable. I saw it reported as such and was very concerned because of his rhetoric in the campaign and Guiliani's remarks as well. But when I read the order, it is anything but a muslim ban. If some 85% of the muslims in the world are unaffected by it I could call it the most anemic "ban" in history.  Have any of you looked at the vetting of refugees coming into this country? Do you realize who porous it really is? Doesn't that concern you in the least? A 90 day or 120 slow down on bringing people in is hardly FDR throwing Japanese Americans into internment camps here. Again I feel slimy having to defend Donald Trump, but fair is fair.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 08:33:56 am
I agree with the court decision, and don't doubt it will be upheld, but, FD, are you saying Trump is the first President to be rebuffed by the courts?  Might come as a surprise to the other 44.

Of course not. I'm just not giddy about it.

I will say this though.  I don't think any President in my lifetime has represented a greater danger to the Constitution. This is whole new ballgame...and people need to wake up.  The same old petty partisan political nonsense is meaningless in comparison.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 10, 2017, 08:55:24 am
That very well could be FDISK, especially if it escalates from this order to an actual ban on muslims. But the order as written is nothing of the kind, and is clearly within the current rights of the President as designated in the statute. I think the real people to blame for this though is the administration. First, for Trump's campaign rhetoric, second for Guiliani going out and saying what Trump's true intentions were and third, for issuing this order without his AG confirmed or his Solicitor General in place. The guy arguing for the AG's office was pathetic and unprepared as was the rollout of the order. If this had been done with more thought, I doubt it would be in trouble now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 09:00:30 am
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trump-react-9th-circuit-ruling-travel-ban-234892
"
The author of the Lawfare post, Benjamin Wittes, a senior fellow in governance studies at Brookings and the co-founder of the blog, later Friday morning tweeted a link to the post with a note that he backs the court's ruling.

"You decide whether the POTUS is quoting me in context. Here's the article. For the record, I support the decision," he writes.
"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 09:03:03 am
Robb, characterizing the Federal court system and it's decisions as "laughable" usually isn't a good way to start a serious conversation. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2017, 09:03:39 am
Actually, a Boston judge ruled to uphold the ban so it's not 4-0. But counting the 3 9th circuit judges is laughable. The 9th circuit is laughable and everything a court should not be. Their finding that Washington has standing is laughable. But most importantly, when one reads the statute, I don't see how the President loses. Here it is. "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."  Now, you or I may not like the statute, but that is the law and i don't know how anyone, including 4 judges, could read it any differently unless they aren't interested in what the law states and are looking to impose their own will on the matter, which is precisely what judges are not supposed to do. You are correct in stating that the 4 most liberal justices on the Supreme court may also decided to ignore the statute, but that doesn't mean the President doesn't have the authority here.  And to call his order a Muslim ban is laughable. I saw it reported as such and was very concerned because of his rhetoric in the campaign and Guiliani's remarks as well. But when I read the order, it is anything but a muslim ban. If some 85% of the muslims in the world are unaffected by it I could call it the most anemic "ban" in history.  Have any of you looked at the vetting of refugees coming into this country? Do you realize who porous it really is? Doesn't that concern you in the least? A 90 day or 120 slow down on bringing people in is hardly FDR throwing Japanese Americans into internment camps here. Again I feel slimy having to defend Donald Trump, but fair is fair.

1: Not sure you are in the position to so broadly smear the second highest court in the land. Perhaps a little humility would improve your argument.

2: The law is a complicated thing. If the interpretation of the law were as simple as reading a single text, we would not need lawyers, or at the very least they would not need advanced degrees. Simple middle school English would suffice. The truth of the law is that it is incredibly complicated, with all kinds of competing statues, clauses, amendments, etc. Suggesting that this argument is resolved by the simple reading of a text is a gross reduction of the complexities at hand. That is a grimy politician's trick, not a valid means of interpreting the law. Interpretation of the law is not a euphemism for overreaching judges "impos[ing] their own will on [a] matter." It is the fundamental purpose of the judiciary as outlined by the Constitution.

3: The courts don't submit to the subjective and arbitrary feelings of any President. Very simply stated, had the White House lawyers been able to objectively defend the President's "find[ing] that the entry of... aliens... [is] detrimental to [our] interests," the case might have gone very differently. But given that you are more likely to be killed by a bathtub, a lightning strike, or your clothes than an immigrant terrorist, the White House clearly has a hard time making the case that the entry of these aliens is *actually* detrimental.

4: I sympathize with your argument that calling the immigration ban a Muslim ban may not be entirely fair. But the administration brought that charge upon itself, given Trump's repeated rhetoric about doing the very thing throughout his campaign. When he says "Muslim ban" during the campaign, and then bans immigration from certain Muslim countries once he becomes President, it's not a far reach to connect those dots. And, unfortunately for the President's agenda, his previous statements on the matter have significant legal ramifications.

5: You are obviously entirely ignorant of the vetting process that refugees go through prior to entering the United States. That may sound offensive, but it isn't meant to be offensive. It is simply factual. "Porous" is about as far removed from the truth as possible. I have posted any number of articles from various sources that detail the vetting process that refugees must complete. Please actually look into this before regurtitating the lies - not "falsehoods," but LIES - spouted by the White House on this topic. It completely undermines your credibility.

6: Even if we take the immigration EO at face value, characterizing it as a "90 day or 120 slow down" is simply inaccurate. It is a full stop ban on immigration for either 90 or 120 days from certain countries, and an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees. We turned away green card holders who have peacefully lived in the US for years, we turned away Iraqi nationals that risked their lives aiding American troops, and we turned away women and children fleeing the destruction of Syria. Don't whitewash those things.

7: Holding up the internment of Japanese Americans as a standard by which to judge the travel ban is a horrible moral argument. "Hey we did something that was way worse!" is about as base a justification as can be made.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 09:25:04 am
https://www.wsj.com/articles/beijings-patience-pays-off-with-trumps-reaffirmation-of-one-china-policy-1486737397

Trump reverses course on China. 

Thoughts:
1. What advice was the President relying on when he called the Taiwanese President immediately after the inauguration?
2. What advice was the President relying on when he reversed his position yesterday?
3. Is "Amateur Hour" part of the "Make America Great Again" process? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 09:50:12 am
Robb, characterizing the Federal court system and it's decisions as "laughable" usually isn't a good way to start a serious conversation. 

But Robb's screed posts are always laughable in the sense of being good for a laugh, so it's all good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 10:04:15 am
We all get a little excitable. (Or in my case, as reliable sources inform me, sarcastic).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 10, 2017, 10:59:11 am
I'm more numb than excitable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 10, 2017, 11:22:14 am
“I don’t, obviously, put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees, so that’s a huge concern of ours,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said at a security industry conference in September, using another name for the Islamic State. He added that the government has “a pretty aggressive program” for screening refugees but that he is less confident about European nations.

FBI Director James Comey added in congressional testimony last month that “a number of people who were of serious concern” slipped through the screening of Iraq War refugees, including two arrested on terrorism-related charges. “There’s no doubt that was the product of a less than excellent vetting,” he said.

Although Comey said the process has since “improved dramatically,” Syrian refugees will be even harder to check because, unlike in Iraq, U.S. soldiers have not been on the ground collecting information on the local population. “If we don’t know much about somebody, there won’t be anything in our data,” he said. “I can’t sit here and offer anybody an absolute assurance that there’s no risk associated with this.”

Not sure why I would be concerned at all about the FBI director admitting this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 10, 2017, 11:26:29 am
1: Not sure you are in the position to so broadly smear the second highest court in the land. Perhaps a little humility would improve your argument.

2: The law is a complicated thing. If the interpretation of the law were as simple as reading a single text, we would not need lawyers, or at the very least they would not need advanced degrees. Simple middle school English would suffice. The truth of the law is that it is incredibly complicated, with all kinds of competing statues, clauses, amendments, etc. Suggesting that this argument is resolved by the simple reading of a text is a gross reduction of the complexities at hand. That is a grimy politician's trick, not a valid means of interpreting the law. Interpretation of the law is not a euphemism for overreaching judges "impos[ing] their own will on [a] matter." It is the fundamental purpose of the judiciary as outlined by the Constitution.

3: The courts don't submit to the subjective and arbitrary feelings of any President. Very simply stated, had the White House lawyers been able to objectively defend the President's "find[ing] that the entry of... aliens... [is] detrimental to [our] interests," the case might have gone very differently. But given that you are more likely to be killed by a bathtub, a lightning strike, or your clothes than an immigrant terrorist, the White House clearly has a hard time making the case that the entry of these aliens is *actually* detrimental.

4: I sympathize with your argument that calling the immigration ban a Muslim ban may not be entirely fair. But the administration brought that charge upon itself, given Trump's repeated rhetoric about doing the very thing throughout his campaign. When he says "Muslim ban" during the campaign, and then bans immigration from certain Muslim countries once he becomes President, it's not a far reach to connect those dots. And, unfortunately for the President's agenda, his previous statements on the matter have significant legal ramifications.

5: You are obviously entirely ignorant of the vetting process that refugees go through prior to entering the United States. That may sound offensive, but it isn't meant to be offensive. It is simply factual. "Porous" is about as far removed from the truth as possible. I have posted any number of articles from various sources that detail the vetting process that refugees must complete. Please actually look into this before regurtitating the lies - not "falsehoods," but LIES - spouted by the White House on this topic. It completely undermines your credibility.

6: Even if we take the immigration EO at face value, characterizing it as a "90 day or 120 slow down" is simply inaccurate. It is a full stop ban on immigration for either 90 or 120 days from certain countries, and an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees. We turned away green card holders who have peacefully lived in the US for years, we turned away Iraqi nationals that risked their lives aiding American troops, and we turned away women and children fleeing the destruction of Syria. Don't whitewash those things.

7: Holding up the internment of Japanese Americans as a standard by which to judge the travel ban is a horrible moral argument. "Hey we did something that was way worse!" is about as base a justification as can be made.

Tico, The 9th circuit is overturned so often they are simply a joke. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/liberal-ninth-circuit-court-overturned-average-80-time/ When your court has to be overturned nearly 8 in 10 times I would call it a joke, or laughable, or you can come up with a nicer term if you like.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 10, 2017, 11:39:18 am
Tico, Item number 4 on your list I pretty much agreed with in my post. Item number 5 we will agree to disagree on. I am not ignorant of the fact that there is simply no way for significant vetting to take place in war torn Syria because there is no database to run background checks against for many of these refugees. Comey himself said it is not illogical to assume that ISIS will try to infiltrate the refugees to sneak operatives inside the country. Others in the Obama administration expressed concerns that we could not fully vet those coming in.  If an area is unsafe, does not have adequate means to make sure individuals are safe coming into our country, then they should wait to come in until we can make sure of it. Those who have immigrant visas and green cards were not to be affected. Another mistake by the administration for rushing into this before ready. They said in a statement that it was not intended for those parties to be affected, but the 9th circuit sited that problem specifically when justifying upholding the ban. I think this will lead to a new Exec order specifying those with visas and green cards are exempt, which will start the whole matter all over again. We'll see.

And thanks Deeg, I'm glad I am good for some laughter in your life. It's crazy how much this part of the forum is becoming an echo chamber. Guess opinions other than your own are not welcome here. Perhaps you should light something on fire to get rid me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 10, 2017, 11:43:14 am
“I don’t, obviously, put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees, so that’s a huge concern of ours,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said at a security industry conference in September, using another name for the Islamic State. He added that the government has “a pretty aggressive program” for screening refugees but that he is less confident about European nations.
ISIL vs ISIS


I prefer Daesh


noun 1.a name used to refer to ISIS/ISIL, the radical Sunni Muslim organization: use of this name is said to delegitimize the group's claim to be an "Islamic state.".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 10, 2017, 11:51:18 am
Testifying before the Senate Homeland Security Committee on October 8, FBI Director James Comey explained of Syrian refugees: “There is risk associated with bringing anybody in from the outside, but especially from a conflict zone like that. My concern there is that there are certain gaps I don’t want to talk about publicly in the data available to us.” I guess Comey is ignorant as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 10, 2017, 01:08:54 pm
1: Not sure you are in the position to so broadly smear the second highest court in the land. Perhaps a little humility would improve your argument.

Robb is right about the 9th Circuit... (sorry about the bad format)


The reversal rates in Figure 2 range between 55% and
84%. Interestingly, this comparison of reversal rates reveals
that the Federal Circuit has the highest reversal rate at about
83.33%, and the Ninth Circuit has the second highest reversal
rate at 80%. The Seventh Circuit has the lowest reversal rate
at 55.26%. The median reversal rate is 68.29%.

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/intelprop/magazine/LandslideJan2010_Hofer.authcheckdam.pdf
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 10, 2017, 01:13:05 pm
Is the proper measure of the "correctness" of a Circuit Court decision the frequency with which a higher court agrees with the decision?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 10, 2017, 01:17:37 pm
When the higher court gets to determine what the Constitution means, then I would say yes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 03:57:15 pm
The "smear" had to do with referring to the Federal courts as "laughable", not as to their reversal rate.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 04:10:24 pm
Is the proper measure of the "correctness" of a Circuit Court decision the frequency with which a higher court agrees with the decision?
When the higher court gets to determine what the Constitution means, then I would say yes.
My understanding of how all this works, a federal judge rules that he or she suspects there are considerations to be made in some issue brought to the court.  Example I've been given is two brothers inherit a house.  One brother wants to tear it down, the other wants to live in it.  The judge rules that the house cannot be torn down without further study.

An appeals court then looks and sees if the first judge made a just ruling in holding the issue.  If they agree, it stands, if it doesn't, it removes the stay and things can proceed.  Either way, the issue then can be appealed to the higher court, in our case the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court can refuse to hear the case, in which the the Appeals Court ruling is upheld.  It can hear the case and still uphold it.  Or review it and vote the other way.

Appeals Court reversals are not necessarily indicators of poor scholarship, liberal or conservative leaning, or anything else, just kicking things up the ladder for clarification.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 04:11:59 pm
No no no Curt.  Those "so called judges" (sometimes "Mexican") are much more "laughable" than that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 04:15:10 pm
Unless, of course, they happen to rule in your favor.  Then they are honorable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 04:15:38 pm
Oh, didn't consider that.

Reversals are often made because a judge made a stay of execution or blocked something impending that can't be undone, like the travel ban or demolishing a house.  They are done often last minute and all they really do delay things.  Appeals courts just say that further delay is unwarranted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 10, 2017, 04:17:52 pm
Or in many cases the reversal is because the higher court recognizes that the ruling was incorrect, which is a common theme for the 9th circuit. But tell yourself whatever you need to.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 04:18:43 pm
It must be tough to be Trump.  I wonder how many people in his life have told him, "NO!"  He comes into an environment where he just can't do what he wants!  I see his tweet tantrums as stomping of the feet and holding his breath.  "I'm going to hold my breath until Congress passes this bill.  And if I die, you know who to blame."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 04:18:59 pm
Or in many cases the reversal is because the higher court recognizes that the ruling was incorrect, which is a common theme for the 9th circuit. But tell yourself whatever you need to.
True, I should have included that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 10, 2017, 04:21:23 pm
Is the proper measure of the "correctness" of a Circuit Court decision the frequency with which a higher court agrees with the decision?
Excellent question.  I would suggest that the rate of reversal has more to do with deeply ingrained disputes about how judicial power ought to be used than it does basic judicial competence.  The Ninth Circuit has a number of judges who favor broad judicial power; the SCOTUS is dominated by judges with a different perspective.  This leads to lots of reversals.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2017, 04:23:01 pm
No no, ecf. This is obviously an issue of competency, of which the 9th circuit's is best described as laughable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 04:27:34 pm
If the process is "laughable" then what difference does a reversal make? Somebody will just arbitrarily and unilaterally label the reversal "laughable". Why bother with a "so called" justice system?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 04:30:30 pm
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/politics/judges-threatened-immigration-order/

Incidentally, the word now is that Trump doesn't even plan to appeal this to the Supreme Court.  Do the math, the reason should be obvious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 04:34:35 pm
Why bother with how we refer to judges and courts? After all, we don't ever need anyone to respect their rulings.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 10, 2017, 04:37:41 pm
Future Trump tweet:

"The only honest sports are wrestling and roller derby."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 04:40:17 pm
Excellent question.  I would suggest that the rate of reversal has more to do with deeply ingrained disputes about how judicial power ought to be used than it does basic judicial competence.  The Ninth Circuit has a number of judges who favor broad judicial power; the SCOTUS is dominated by judges with a different perspective.  This leads to lots of reversals.

East, doesn't that court deal with a lot of new technology stuff, being the home of Microsoft and other computer and software firms?  Doesn't that lend itself to lots of new interpretations of old laws and stuff that can be overruled?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 04:41:24 pm
Future Trump tweet:

"The only honest sports are wrestling and roller derby."
Well, they are the only ones where the results are known ahead of time. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 10, 2017, 04:44:26 pm
An attack on a judge would be horrible.  I am quite happy that Trump may not appeal this, anything that will push Bannon to the sidelines is a good thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 04:44:55 pm
Well, they are the only ones where the results are known ahead of time. 


With Putin pulling the strings, the aim is certainly to add "elections" to that list.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 04:47:39 pm
Trump went into this knowing he wasn't going to get everything he wanted.  He has set up the media, the courts, and Congress to catch the heat for no ban, no wall, no tax cut, no, no, no.  And when things fall into his lap like companies staying in the US, he'll take credit. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 04:47:41 pm
An attack on a judge would be horrible.  I am quite happy that Trump may not appeal this, anything that will push Bannon to the sidelines is a good thing.

I don't see this as having anything to do with pushing Bannon to the sidelines - it's just an acknowledgement of the reality that they'd lose in the Supreme Court,  The current scenario is that Bannon is rewriting the ban to try and make it harder for the courts to stop it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 04:50:08 pm
Bannon can rewrite, but Trump's mouth will re-screw it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 04:59:38 pm
Switching channels regularly, you see a pattern of the opposition digging deep to find stuff to ridicule or diminish anything Trump or Trump related.

Ya think? It's possible the press will quit ridiculing Trump when Trump stops being ridiculous. (A good start would be to start telling the truth...at least once in a while).

You are dreaming if you think anything short of changing his positions would begin to have any effect on the media attacks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 05:10:13 pm
Jes, I don't "know" you as anything but a blowhard troll on a message board.

Your opinion on the matter as a "teacher" means about as much as your opinion on the travel ban as a "lawyer."

Meanwhile, if you're going to cite craig's and Curt's opinions, you'll note that craig is too smart to stumble into this thread more than occasionally, and Curt has already expressed that DeVos was a poor choice and agreed with my posts.

Knowing me in whatever terms you wish to describe is still knowing me, and I never wrote that Curt supported her.

I wrote,
You know Curt, and I believe his posts have indicated something short of horror. 

And it appears his post have been a bit short of "horror." 
DeVos.... I stated my opinion on her; she was a bad pick and it would have been reasonable to reject her.  But we had a very good Secretary of Education who achieved nothing.  DeVos will achieve less. 

As I wrote, that would seem short of "horror."

You also seem to acknowledge knowing Craig and NOT having seen him express any opinion here of DeVoss..... So what is it that you are disputing with my post disputing your claim that "ll the teachers I know (teachers that support unions, teachers that hate unions, conservative teachers, liberal teachers, special ed teachers, grade school teachers, college profs, ALL the teachers) are horrified by DeVos' confirmation"?

Or is even asking the question which points out your post was factually inaccurate hyperbole too "troll-like" for your taste?  You feel that absolutely bogus claims should be given a pass.... except, of course, for any from the Trump administration?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 05:15:11 pm
I agree with the court decision, and don't doubt it will be upheld, but, FD, are you saying Trump is the first President to be rebuffed by the courts?  Might come as a surprise to the other 44.

Have you read it?  The decision pays scant to no attention to the actual issues in the case.... much as was also true in the trial court.  The Court of Appeals also did something not appellate court is ever supposed to do.  It based its appellate decision based on ITS evaluation of the credibility of witnesses before the trial court.  That is perfectly appropriate for a trial court.  It is entirely inappropriate for an appellate court.  On that point I would be quite surprised to see even the Supreme Court's liberal wing agree.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 05:17:24 pm
This lead me to read about Japanese internment during WWII and how the Supreme Court upheld FDR's executive order to do this. Surprisingly this decision has never been overturned. So Trump could detain every Muslim in the US and only the Supreme Court would be able to set them free.

Unless the political climate were to change drastically, I suspect a move like that would result in a rather speedy impeachment and removal.  It would not have to wait for a court decision.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2017, 05:18:34 pm
Lol, now the White House is reversing itself and saying it may indeed take the fight to the Supreme Court.

Bannon must have pulled the old Wormtongue routine on Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 05:18:45 pm
Four judges have so far unanimously held that the Muslim ban is unconstitutional - two Bush appointees and two Democratic appointees.

.... except that there is NO Muslim ban, and multiple other courts have upheld the executive order as Constitutional.  So, other than having all of your facts wrong.....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 05:22:55 pm
I agree with the court decision, and don't doubt it will be upheld, but, FD, are you saying Trump is the first President to be rebuffed by the courts?  Might come as a surprise to the other 44.

Of course not. I'm just not giddy about it.

I will say this though. I don't think any President in my lifetime has represented a greater danger to the Constitution. This is whole new ballgame...and people need to wake up.  The same old petty partisan political nonsense is meaningless in comparison.

So far nothing Trump has done approaches Obama's open refusal to enforce immigration law (in direct defiance of his primary Constitutional duty) or his use of a non-reviewable extrajudicial kill list to order executions on named individuals by drone strikes without Congressional authority, and to even order them on U.S. citizens.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 05:30:47 pm
given that you are more likely to be killed by a bathtub, a lightning strike, or your clothes than an immigrant terrorist, the White House clearly has a hard time making the case that the entry of these aliens is *actually* detrimental

Instead of focusing on the numerous misstatements (such as the depth of vetting) in your post which involve opinion and which lend themselves to endless argument, let's focus on just one.  The number of lightening strike deaths (and I am also ignoring the fact that while people might drown in their bathtubs, that is not to say any are killed BY their bathtubs).  Let's focus on that.

Take the average number of lightening strike fatalities in the U.S.  Post the figure you want to use and the source of that figure.  Calculate the total number over the last 20 years.... or even the last 30 years, and then offer a figure for the number of immigrant terrorist fatalities in the US and get back to us.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 05:32:54 pm
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trump-react-9th-circuit-ruling-travel-ban-234892
"
The author of the Lawfare post, Benjamin Wittes, a senior fellow in governance studies at Brookings and the co-founder of the blog, later Friday morning tweeted a link to the post with a note that he backs the court's ruling.

"You decide whether the POTUS is quoting me in context. Here's the article. For the record, I support the decision," he writes.
"

I just did read it.  I also had read it last night.

Trump quoted him in context.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 05:33:40 pm
Lol, now the White House is reversing itself and saying it may indeed take the fight to the Supreme Court.

Bannon must have pulled the old Wormtongue routine on Trump.

ROFL.  If only Wormtongue had been serving Denethor the allusion would be perfect.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 05:41:01 pm
My understanding of how all this works....

Appeals Court reversals are not necessarily indicators of poor scholarship, liberal or conservative leaning, or anything else, just kicking things up the ladder for clarification.

You are misunderstanding, and one of the reasons is because most of the appellate court reversals are not on an issue of the appropriateness of a preliminary injunction, and another is because it is virtually always a mistake for an appellate court to even think that its decision is "just kinking things up the ladder."  Most appellate court decisions are never reviewed by the Supreme Court and the appellate court decisions need to be made with the presumption those orders will stand without Supreme Court review of "clarification."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2017, 05:41:11 pm
Yeah, were Bannon to be kicked out, Trump ain't turning into no Theoden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 05:43:13 pm
Yeah, were Bannon to be kicked out, Trump ain't turning into no Theoden.

Even Saruman is way, way too generous.

On the plus side, Trump is reportedly getting really pissed about the "President Bannon" meme.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 10, 2017, 05:45:51 pm
I don't see this as having anything to do with pushing Bannon to the sidelines - it's just an acknowledgement of the reality that they'd lose in the Supreme Court,  The current scenario is that Bannon is rewriting the ban to try and make it harder for the courts to stop it.

Watch the coming weeks.  I suspect it is much less a result of any concern about losing in the Supreme Court, OR with any desire to push Bannon to the sidelines (which would be a good idea.... if not pushing him off a cliff), than it is a result of a change in approach.

Trump can craft a number of smaller, more specific and targeted Executive Orders which accomplish the same thing, with most of them being entirely unreviewable, and with those subject to review being much narrower in scope.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2017, 05:46:05 pm
Yeah, closest fantasy character that I can think of is Prince Joffrey.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2017, 05:47:01 pm
Even Saruman is way, way too generous.

On the plus side, Trump is reportedly getting really pissed about the "President Bannon" meme.

Hopefully SNL takes Rosie O'Donnel up on her offer to play Bannon...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 05:48:08 pm
Yeah, closest fantasy character that I can think of is Prince Joffrey.

That would make Bannon Cersei, I guess.  That's not far off, apart from the pe nis and bad skin.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 05:52:42 pm
Wouldn't Bannon be Little Finger?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 10, 2017, 06:30:15 pm
Hopefully SNL takes Rosie O'Donnel up on her offer to play Bannon...

After his supposed reaction to a woman playing Spicer, I'm kind of hoping they'll pull a surprise and let her play Trump.  His Twitter reaction would be amazing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 06:37:04 pm
Wouldn't Bannon be Little Finger?

He looks more like Varys, but Varys actually seems to be working for good. The thing with Littlefinger is he didn't seem to influence Joffrey directly so much.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 06:39:34 pm

After his supposed reaction to a woman playing Spicer, I'm kind of hoping they'll pull a surprise and let her play Trump.  His Twitter reaction would be amazing.

Given Trump's directive about "women dressing like women", the fact that Bannon is a devotee of cosplay conventions is deliciously ironic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2017, 07:08:59 pm
Meanwhile...

http://theatln.tc/2ku3tWO
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 10, 2017, 07:10:47 pm
Trump at best can be said to have a healthy ego. He won't like having things blow up in his face, so Bannon screwing up the EO will be the start to pushing him to the sideline. One can only hope Ivanka/Kutschner can play more of a role I. Shaping policy, maybe the can be Varys to Brannon's Cersi. Only this time Joffrey realizes he is a twat and improves himself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 10, 2017, 07:12:42 pm
Flynn might be the scariest one of the lot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 10, 2017, 07:18:10 pm
Flynn might be the scariest one of the lot.

Well, his son is a flat-out American neo-Nazi.  If Trump hadn't basically blown any established standards for decency or integrity out of the water, Flynn would be a dead man walking for this.  As it stands, who the eff knows.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 10, 2017, 07:25:33 pm
Going back to the 80% reversal rate in the 9th Circuit...I'm sure everyone on this board realizes this, but the way it's being reported is extremely misleading.  Yes, 80% of their cases that go to the Supreme Court are reversed...and out of the 114,199 cases the 9th Circuit heard from 1999-2008, the Supreme Court reviewed 175 of them (these numbers come from the article CBJ linked earlier). 

Of those cases, 140 were reversed or vacated.  So of all the cases the 9th Circuit heard, 0.123% of them were reversed.  With the way it's being treated in the conservative talking heads on Fox News and conservative blogs/websites, you'd think 80% of all cases the 9th Circuit ever heard were reversed.

When such a small number of cases are even heard by the Supreme Court, I just don't think anyone has any grounds to make any kind of judgment of their effectiveness based solely on their reversal rate.  It's really just a silly non-story.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2017, 07:41:45 pm
The reason that more don't reach the Supreme Court to be upheld is the Supreme Court simply dismisses those cases that obviously do not merit its time, which is a defacto upholding of the 9th circuit's ruling.

But they're still completely incompetent.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 10, 2017, 07:50:02 pm
East, doesn't that court deal with a lot of new technology stuff, being the home of Microsoft and other computer and software firms?  Doesn't that lend itself to lots of new interpretations of old laws and stuff that can be overruled?

Curt, they probably have a higher percentage of "tech" cases (at least non-patent cases; all of those go the Federal Circuit) than most other circuits.  But my guess is that this probably has a negligible overall effect. My guess is that the percentage of this type of case is very small. But you are absolutely right that it has been very difficult to adapt old laws to new technologies.

Another factor is that, because certain western states (particularly CA) have very consumer/plaintiff friendly laws, more class actions and public reform litigation cases tend to get filed there than in other circuits.  And the Supreme Court tends to view these types of cases with more skepticism than the Ninth Circuit has viewed them.

Mostly, thought, I think that the Ninth Circuit just has had a far more liberal judicial culture than the Supreme Court or most other circuits.  So it tends to get zapped a lot by the Supremes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 10, 2017, 07:58:22 pm
Also, the Supreme Court only rarely takes cases to correct perceived errors by lower courts.  It usually takes cases to resolve splits of opinion on federal issues among lower federal courts or where the question presented is one of pressing importance.  And sometimes it "reverses" or "vacates" because it wishes to take its own law (which the lower court followed) in a new direction.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 10, 2017, 08:19:28 pm
Trump at best can be said to have a healthy ego. He won't like having things blow up in his face, so Bannon screwing up the EO will be the start to pushing him to the sideline. One can only hope Ivanka/Kutschner can play more of a role I. Shaping policy, maybe the can be Varys to Brannon's Cersi. Only this time Joffrey realizes he is a twat and improves himself.

How is this a good thing? what experience do Ivanka and Jared have in shaping policy?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2017, 08:20:45 pm
It's not so much that they have policy experience and more that they aren't white supremacists. Needless to say, the bar on improvement is very, very low.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 10, 2017, 08:24:47 pm
Eastcoast - perhaps you can provide an explanation of the procedure in cases like this.

As I understand it, there were several cases brought before various courts around the country adjudicating the same point.  I don't know how many or where, but let's assume there were only two - Seattle and Boston.  It has been reported that Seattle placed a stay, while Boston did not.  Then the Seattle court took control over all the similar cases, and in essence over ruled the Boston court.

What actually happens in a situation like this?  What gives one court the authority to supercede the ruling of another court?  Is it the first one to take the case?  The first one to decide the case?  The first one to call "dibs"? 

The only situation I know of similar to this was when the 9th circuit (I believe) ruled that the pledge of allegiance was unconstitutional, while others did not.  The Supreme court did not take up the case, and now it is prohibited on the west coast and not in other areas.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 10, 2017, 08:38:58 pm
It's not so much that they have policy experience and more that they aren't white supremacists. Needless to say, the bar on improvement is very, very low.

This is my real problem here... it seems the executive branch has been taken over by a bunch of amateurs... What the actual **** is occuring? we have a president that is turning down Elliot Abrams as deputy sec of state, when his own sec of state is stumping for the guy because he needs his experience... the reason? Elliot said something negative about trump during the campaign...

This Sunday, February 12th, will mark the 25th anniversary of me immigrating to the united states. I fear the beacon of hope that has changed my life and afforded me so many opportunities is being held hostage by the whims of someone that has no desire to uphold that beacon. It is now represented by someone that demands our obedience and not our contributions.

Are we really now left to hoping that Ivanka Trump is our savior?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 09:14:06 pm
"Are we really now left to hoping that Ivanka Trump is our savior? "

Better chance than Donald Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 09:14:35 pm
East, thank you very much for taking the time to answer my question.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 09:16:31 pm
Don't take my jabbing Trump to mean I agree with all other opinions on here.  I still respect the vote of 30 states.  I still trust in the Constitution and that good men and women will uphold it.  JMO
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 10:53:42 pm
Of those cases, 140 were reversed or vacated.  So of all the cases the 9th Circuit heard, 0.123% of them were reversed.

Yes...but that still means 0.123% of the verdicts are laughable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 10, 2017, 10:58:09 pm
Don't take my jabbing Trump to mean I agree with all other opinions on here.  I still respect the vote of 30 states

I think you could agree with EVERYTHING said about Trump and still respect the vote in 30 states. In fact, and as far as my jabs at Trump are concerned, THAT IS is the very point. Respect.  For the voters, for the institutions, and for the Constitution.  Something the President lacks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2017, 11:53:28 pm
I think Robb has been jabbed enough about the "laughable" comment.  By constant use, it bring the board to an Otto-like level.  We can keep the discourse at a higher level.  That doesn't mean we can't poke occasional fun.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 11, 2017, 03:04:41 am
When such a small number of cases are even heard by the Supreme Court, I just don't think anyone has any grounds to make any kind of judgment of their effectiveness based solely on their reversal rate.  It's really just a silly non-story.

It is a story in legal circles, and has been for some time because the high reversal rate for the 9th circuit is not new.  Suggesting that it is "just a silly non-story" represents either a lack of understanding or rank partisanship.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 11, 2017, 03:10:27 am
the 9th circuit (I believe) ruled that the pledge of allegiance was unconstitutional, while others did not.  The Supreme court did not take up the case, and now it is prohibited on the west coast and not in other areas.

Say what?

What case are you talking about?

is this like the non-existent ban on children praying in public schools?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 11, 2017, 03:20:37 am
This Sunday, February 12th, will mark the 25th anniversary of me immigrating to the united states. I fear the beacon of hope that has changed my life and afforded me so many opportunities is being held hostage by the whims of someone that has no desire to uphold that beacon.

The United States today has a higher percentage of immigrants than at any point in our nation's history, and Trump has not been proposing an end to immigration.  The idea that the United States is a meaningful "beacon of hope" for the people around the world is common, but misguided, as explained in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: FDISK on February 11, 2017, 08:39:55 am
I think Robb has been jabbed enough about the "laughable" comment.

I think his statement was a serious matter. It goes to the very heart of the problem. I have a right to be offended...or at least I think I still have that right...haven't checked Trumps Twitters this morning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 11, 2017, 09:43:24 am
I think Robb has been jabbed enough about the "laughable" comment.

I think his statement was a serious matter. It goes to the very heart of the problem. I have a right to be offended...or at least I think I still have that right...haven't checked Trumps Twitters this morning.
Yes, but there has been overkill.  Taunting does not contribute to the discussion.  You had a right to be offended.  Do you remember others on here taunted by others for days?  I do.   I remember Scotti doing that to FDISK.

I'll drop the subject.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 11, 2017, 10:39:47 am
I don't really care what anyone says here. If I was that worried about it, I wouldn't post in this part of the forum. I consider the 9th circuit laughable for a host of reasons. I don't care who is offended by that. As I have mentioned numerous times here, I was vehemently opposed to Trump in the primaries and did not vote for him as President. I have typically voted for Republicans for President because they more closely align with my conservative values. Not always. Trump as a human being is despicable. No less than Hilary Clinton, who is actually a better person than her predator husband by all accounts. The one saving grace to Trump's presidency so far is his nomination of Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. Replacing Scalia with a liberal justice would have been devastating for the country, in my opinion. I know those on the left feel the opposite. For that reason more than any other, I am glad Hilary lost.  I have no idea what will happen with ACA, but I am glad it is going to be removed. For that reason, I am glad Hilary lost. If it raised the ire of the lefties here, then that's just a little icing on the cake.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 11, 2017, 11:08:19 am
I think Robb has been jabbed enough about the "laughable" comment.

I think his statement was a serious matter. It goes to the very heart of the problem. I have a right to be offended...or at least I think I still have that right...haven't checked Trumps Twitters this morning.

Well fortunately, calling judges laughable and a disgrace in no way contributes to an environment where they need protection from death threats, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on February 11, 2017, 11:41:37 am
Yes, but there has been overkill.  Taunting does not contribute to the discussion.  You had a right to be offended.  Do you remember others on here taunted by others for days?  I do.   I remember Scotti doing that to FDISK.

I'll drop the subject.

Can we drop the topic? This board is a miserable place right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 11, 2017, 12:21:51 pm
What I find funny is that on another board I frequent I am berated by all the Trump lovers for daring to question him.  Sigh.  Opinions are not allowed in this country any longer.  You must choose your ideology and COMPLY!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 11, 2017, 02:05:46 pm
I consider the 9th circuit laughable for a host of reasons.

And it is.  Has been for several years.

Well fortunately, calling judges laughable and a disgrace in no way contributes to an environment where they need protection from death threats, right?

If judges observe their appropriate role, they will not suffer from such descriptions.  When they over-reach and ignore their appropriate role, even successful bullying of others so they do not use such descriptions will do nothing to save the courts.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 11, 2017, 02:58:01 pm
Yeah, no justification at all for Trump's temporary immigration ban -- http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/report-72-terrorists-came-from-7-muslim-countries-trump-targeted/article/2614582

Report: 72 convicted of terrorism from 'Trump 7' mostly Muslim countries

By PAUL BEDARD (@SECRETSBEDARD) • 2/11/17 10:13 AM

Since 9/11, 72 individuals from the seven mostly Muslim countries covered by President Trump's "extreme vetting" executive order have been convicted of terrorism, a finding that clashes sharply with claims from an appeals court that there is "no evidence" those countries have produced a terrorist.

According to a report out Saturday, at least 17 claimed to be refugees from those nations, three came in as "students," and 25 eventually became U.S. citizens.

The Center for Immigration Studies calculated the numbers of convicted terrorists from the Trump Seven:

— Somalia: 20

— Yemen: 19

— Iraq: 19

— Syria: 7

— Iran: 4

— Libya: 2

— Sudan: 1

The Center's director of policy studies, Jessica M. Vaughan, based her blockbuster report on a 2016 report from the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, then chaired by new Attorney General Jeff Sessions, that report found that 380 out of 580 people convicted in terror cases since 9/11 were foreign-born.

She received further information on many in the report to conclude that 72 of those convicted of terrorism come from the seven nations target by Trump.

From her report seen here:

These immigrant terrorists lived in at least 16 different states, with the largest number from the terror-associated countries living in New York (10), Minnesota (8), California (8), and Michigan (6). Ironically, Minnesota was one of the states suing to block Trump's order to pause entries from the terror-associated countries, claiming it harmed the state. At least two of the terrorists were living in Washington, which joined with Minnesota in the lawsuit to block the order.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 11, 2017, 04:20:34 pm
Eastcoast - perhaps you can provide an explanation of the procedure in cases like this.

As I understand it, there were several cases brought before various courts around the country adjudicating the same point.  I don't know how many or where, but let's assume there were only two - Seattle and Boston.  It has been reported that Seattle placed a stay, while Boston did not.  Then the Seattle court took control over all the similar cases, and in essence over ruled the Boston court.

What actually happens in a situation like this?  What gives one court the authority to supercede the ruling of another court?  Is it the first one to take the case?  The first one to decide the case?  The first one to call "dibs"? 

The only situation I know of similar to this was when the 9th circuit (I believe) ruled that the pledge of allegiance was unconstitutional, while others did not.  The Supreme court did not take up the case, and now it is prohibited on the west coast and not in other areas.

Dave, Each case is different in that it has different plaintiffs.  District courts can and do disagree on legal issues all the time.  It's not so much that the WA court overruled or superseded the MA court; it just reached a different conclusion and issued a nationwide injunction (which is a controversial but not uncommon practice).  All of these cases will continue to percolate up through the appeals courts towards the Supreme Court.

The Pledge case is just a little different than you remember it.  There, the Ninth Circuit did indeed hold that the inclusion of the words "under God" in the 1950s violated the Establishment Clause.  But the Supreme Court agreed to review the Ninth Circuit's ruling and then dismissed it because the plaintiff (the father of a school girl who did not want his daughter to be coerced into reciting the Pledge) lacked standing.  So the Ninth Circuit's decision was effectively erased without a Supreme Court ruling on the merits of the Ninth Circuit's decision.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 11, 2017, 05:06:18 pm
Say what?

What case are you talking about?

is this like the non-existent ban on children praying in public schools?

Sorry.  I meant to way "part" of the pledge of allegiance has been ruled unconstitutional on the west coast, specifically the part that says "under God".  I assumed most were familiar with the situation that a short cut would be permissible.  The fact remains that different parts of the country can end up with different current interpretations of the constitution.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 11, 2017, 05:12:58 pm
Dave, Each case is different in that it has different plaintiffs.  District courts can and do disagree on legal issues all the time.  It's not so much that the WA court overruled or superseded the MA court; it just reached a different conclusion and issued a nationwide injunction (which is a controversial but not uncommon practice).  All of these cases will continue to percolate up through the appeals courts towards the Supreme Court.

The Pledge case is just a little different than you remember it.  There, the Ninth Circuit did indeed hold that the inclusion of the words "under God" in the 1950s violated the Establishment Clause.  But the Supreme Court agreed to review the Ninth Circuit's ruling and then dismissed it because the plaintiff (the father of a school girl who did not want his daughter to be coerced into reciting the Pledge) lacked standing.  So the Ninth Circuit's decision was effectively erased without a Supreme Court ruling on the merits of the Ninth Circuit's decision.

Thanks, Eastcoast.  So that means that schools on the west coast can use the words "under God" in the pledge if they choose to do so?  Sorry I phrased it poorly.  I knew that the entire pledge had not been questioned.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 11, 2017, 06:19:08 pm
I saw this on another board and thought it would provide some context to the 9th Circuit. The last 88 times they were overturned it was 9-0 or 8-0 55 times. Only 16 times when they were overturned was there 3 or 4 distensters and it didn't always break on conservative/liberal lines.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 11, 2017, 09:23:02 pm
Thanks, Eastcoast.  So that means that schools on the west coast can use the words "under God" in the pledge if they choose to do so?  Sorry I phrased it poorly.  I knew that the entire pledge had not been questioned.

Yes, that's right.  There is no lack of uniformity at present.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 12, 2017, 04:34:23 pm
Yes, that's right.  There is no lack of uniformity at present.

I recite it at the start first period every day of class, and go silent for those two words.  I also have explained to my students why, and none have any problem with the silence.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 12, 2017, 04:35:12 pm
https://www.wsj.com/articles/sales-of-ivanka-trump-footwear-apparel-fell-32-at-nordstrom-last-year-1486814580

Considering that previously she benefited from the "success cachet" associated with his name before he became a presidential candidate, and that she undoubtedly both sold merchandise and got it placed in high end retail outlets more as a result of her name and all of the benefits of "growing up Trump" instead of from product quality or price, it is very hard for me to feel any sympathy for her now to lose retail outlets or for her sales to drop as a result of the "bigotry cachet" now associated with his name.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 13, 2017, 10:50:06 pm
Michael Flynn is already a former National Security Adviser.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 13, 2017, 11:04:24 pm
The JV team needs a new player....


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 13, 2017, 11:28:31 pm
The JV team needs a new player....

You mean he's going to ISIS?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 13, 2017, 11:43:19 pm
Well, both have image problems and losing players while seeming to move just have a presences on the internet.





Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 13, 2017, 11:51:40 pm
The Logan Act has not only never resulted in a conviction, it has never resulted in a prosecution.

Trump's critics are now orgasmic.  They see that despite his bluster Trump can not only be rolled, but that he can be rolled rather easily.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 14, 2017, 12:14:26 am
More proof we need government to protect us from the greed and incompetence of private business.  http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/02/12/oroville-dam-feds-and-state-officials-ignored-warnings-12-years-ago/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 14, 2017, 02:02:36 am
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/02/13/why-weather-forecasters-question-climate-science/h93iEPs3YSwxPLJ58gWCxJ/story.html

Many meteorologists question climate change science
By David Abel GLOBE STAFF  FEBRUARY 13, 2017

They observe changes in the atmosphere like astronomers study the stars, analyzing everything from air pressure to water vapor and poring over computer models to arrive at a forecast.

But for all their scrutiny of weather data, many meteorologists part ways with their colleagues — climate scientists who study longer atmospheric trends — in one crucial respect: whether human activity is causing climate change.

Meteorologists are more skeptical than climate scientists, and that division was underscored by the recent departure of Mish Michaels from WGBH News.

Michaels, a former meteorologist at WBZ-TV, lost her job as a science reporter at WGBH’s show “Greater Boston” last week after colleagues raised concerns about her views on vaccines and climate change. She had previously questioned the safety of vaccines and the evidence that human activity was causing global warming, both widely held views in the scientific community.

A national survey last year by researchers at George Mason University in Virginia found that just 46 percent of broadcast meteorologists said they believed that climate change over the past 50 years has been “primarily or entirely” the result of human activity. By contrast, surveys of climate scientists have found that 97 percent attribute warming to human activity.

 “Weather forecasters are people, too, and their political ideology plays a role in their views,” said Ed Maibach, who directs the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason and oversaw the study. “So conservative forecasters tend to be more skeptical than liberal forecasters.”

Among those skeptics is Tim Kelley, who has issued weather forecasts on New England Cable News since 1992. He describes himself as a “student of climate change,” but says his experience with the variability of computer models has made him skeptical that anyone can predict how greenhouse gases will change the environment in the coming decades.

“How can their computer models be better than ours?” he said. “We look at computer projections all the time, and we know how off they can be.”

Kelley acknowledges the climate is changing, but like many skeptics he questions whether rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are the reason. He believes most of the changes are natural, not man-made.

“I’m much less alarmed by global warming than most people,” he said. “I’d rather it be warmer.”

Kelley said he was deeply concerned by what he sees as Michaels’s firing.

“It’s alarming that you can be scapegoated or branded as a denier,” he said.

Officials at WGBH did not return messages seeking comment, and earlier said simply that Michaels’s departure was a personnel matter.

In a statement last week, Michaels said her “personal beliefs as a private citizen have been positioned inaccurately,” and maintained that she never claimed not to believe in vaccines.

“Scientific consensus does not equal complacency. It is a challenge to scientists to verify the science or push it forward,” she said.

Maibach, whose study was funded by the National Science Foundation, said that while broadcast meteorologists are generally more skeptical of human activity causing climate change, nearly all — 99 percent of the 646 broadcast meteorologists he surveyed — acknowledged that the earth’s climate is changing, whatever the reason.

Meteorologists have grown more accepting of the scientific consensus on climate change, surveys show. A study he just completed, though not yet published, found an increase in the percentage of meteorologists who attributed climate change to human activity.

In a separate survey of members of the American Meteorological Society, Maibach found that 67 percent said they thought climate change is entirely, largely, or mostly caused by human activity. About 20 percent of the group’s members work for broadcast stations.

Despite the shift, environmental advocates are disturbed about the sizable ranks of broadcast meteorologists who remain skeptics, particularly given their public influence.

“It’s definitely concerning,” said Bernadette Woods Placky, director of Climate Matters, a New Jersey program that seeks to help meteorologists reflect climate change in their reports. The group provides broadcast-ready graphics and educational materials to 375 of the nation’s 2,200 TV meteorologists.

Placky said she tells skeptics that there’s a vast difference in the data that weather forecasters and climate scientists use in their computer models. Unlike weather forecasts, climate models are far broader in scope, she said.

“There’s a lot of misinformation out in the public, and meteorologists have a lot going on,” she said. “But they should know that climate models take into account the entire climate system.”

Paul Gross, a meteorologist with WDIV-TV in Detroit for the past 34 years, said he tries to help viewers understand that while weather is a reflection of day-to-day changes, climate change is caused by the slow accumulation of those changes over time.

“Weather is the little picture; climate is the big picture,” he said.

“This shouldn’t be a politically motivated conversation that seeks to confuse the public.”

Rob Eicher, a former weekend meteorologist at WHDH-TV in Boston, said viewers shouldn’t put too much stock in weather forecasters’ views on climate change.

“It’s like asking a podiatrist for help when you have chest pains,” he said. “It’s a different specialty.”

He also pointed to politics as the cause of many skeptical forecasters, especially those who work at stations run by right-leaning owners.

“What people need to understand is that there’s a completely different set of physics in understanding weather and climate changes,” he said.

“We can predict tides years and years in advance, but I can’t tell you what the wave heights will be in a few days from now. Climate deals with much larger issues.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 14, 2017, 09:02:11 am
Flynn was not fired because he violated the Logan Act.  He was fired because he lied to his boss.  I can't imagine any President who would not have fired him under those circumstances.  And rightly so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 14, 2017, 09:57:26 am
Hey, anyone catch those selfies of the Mar-a-Lago member with the nuclear football? How about those open-air emergency security meetings with the Prime Minister of Japan in full view of club members? (Whose membership price has curiously doubled since Trump was elected President, by the way...)

You can't make up **** like this. Dear goc, save us from the Cheeto in Chief!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 14, 2017, 09:59:30 am
Meanwhile, Patreus, still on probation for lying to the FBI, is on the list of candidates considered to replace Flynn?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 14, 2017, 10:17:36 am
Flynn was fired because he got caught.  He's not the sacrificial lamb - he's the tip of the iceberg.  Page, Manafort, Flynn, et al - fallen aides all brought down because of illegal connections to the Putin regime.  Gee, what do they all have in common?

Ryan and Admiral Ackbar can try and cover this up all they want, but the blood is in the water now.  The professional intelligence community is horrified by the gross incompetence they're seeing from this administration, and the word is they've stopped briefing the president accurately because they just assume whatever they tell him goes straight to the Kremlin. The press may be a shell of what it was when they brought down a President 40+ years ago, but combined with the concerted weight of the intelligence community doing everything they can to destroy it, this administration is doomed.  The foul truth will come out in all its revolting glory.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 14, 2017, 10:26:59 am
Flynn was not fired because he violated the Logan Act.  He was fired because he lied to his boss.
And the press found out about it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 14, 2017, 10:28:17 am
Meanwhile, Patreus, still on probation for lying to the FBI, is on the list of candidates considered to replace Flynn?
And illegally sharing highly classified information!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 14, 2017, 10:31:29 am
How long will it be before top Trump aides Sean Spicer and Kellyanne Conway have had enough and leave? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 14, 2017, 10:33:32 am
How long will it be before top Trump aides Sean Spicer and Kellyanne Conway have had enough and leave? 

They may both get fired before they get the chance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 14, 2017, 10:39:37 am
Deeg

The press didn't "bring down" Nixon. Nixon's actions as president did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 14, 2017, 12:00:54 pm
Deeg

The press didn't "bring down" Nixon. Nixon's actions as president did.

That's both true and misleading, IMHO.  If the WaPo hadn't bulldogged that story into the open, he might have gotten away with the whole thing.

For the record, what we're seeing with this administration  - even just what's already been proved indisputably - dwarfs Watergate.  We're talking about high treason here, plain and simple.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 14, 2017, 03:04:02 pm
Flynn was fired because he got caught.  He's not the sacrificial lamb - he's the tip of the iceberg.

Caught doing what?

What is it that you believe led to Trump asking him to resign (assuming that is what happened)?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 14, 2017, 03:05:22 pm
That's both true and misleading, IMHO.  If the WaPo hadn't bulldogged that story into the open, he might have gotten away with the whole thing.

For the record, what we're seeing with this administration  - even just what's already been proved indisputably - dwarfs Watergate.  We're talking about high treason here, plain and simple.

Can you even define treason?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 14, 2017, 03:06:03 pm
Meanwhile, Patreus, still on probation for lying to the FBI, is on the list of candidates considered to replace Flynn?


You are flatly wrong about what I have highlighted, but when Bill Clinton DID get in trouble for lying under oath before a court and a grand jury, am I wrong in assuming that did not bother you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 14, 2017, 04:27:04 pm
And the press found out about it.

I am not sure what you are saying, Eastcoast.  Do you think that Trump would not have fired him for lying to Pence if the press had not found out about it?  If so, why do you think so?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 14, 2017, 04:30:52 pm
jes

Why do all your responses to wrong doing by republic pols just consist of "ya but, somebody else did worse"?

david petreus admitted to the charges of passing classified material to his mistress.

michael flynn engaged in foreign policy against the administration still in charge as a private citizen (probably with trumps instruction) and then lied about it when the cover-up started. 

kellyanne crossed an ethics barrier when she promoted ivana's failing clothing line at Nordstroms, but you will have a minutia driven 'look over there' for that too. So clear this jump from the NYT today.

"The federal Office of Government Ethics said that Kellyanne Conway “has violated the standards of conduct and that disciplinary action is warranted.”

Then you have this from president clueless child's Russian friends...

Russia Deploys Missile That Violates Treaty, U.S. Says

By MICHAEL R. GORDON
3:35 PM ET

Moscow is believed to have two battalions of a new cruise missile, and has deployed a fully operational unit despite U.S. protests.


Maybe US protests, but not white house ones...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 14, 2017, 04:52:41 pm
"Why do all your responses to wrong doing by republic pols just consist of "ya but, somebody else did worse"?

Good grief, Otto, both sides play the neener-neener game. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 14, 2017, 05:26:20 pm
I love it when the right plays the moral equivalency card while the administration is actively selling out the country to a hostile power.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 14, 2017, 05:55:03 pm
jes

Why do all your responses to wrong doing by republic pols just consist of "ya but, somebody else did worse"?

Bullsh*t.

You mention Conway.  I have never offered anything resembling a "ya but, somebody else did worse" response.

You mention Flynn.  I have responded, but never once offered anything resembling a "ya but, somebody else did worse" response.

In fact, regarding Patreas (who I do not even know to be a Republican pol), my response was not "ya but, somebody else did worse." My response to the  post from tico was that he was factually wrong with his post, since Patreas was never charged, let alone convicted of, lying to the FBI, so he can not possibly be on probation for that.  BUT, since tico did appear very concerned about government officials lying in official settings, I asked what seems to be a reasonable question -- whether it is selective concern, or genuine concern.  I have never suggested what Patreas did was acceptable on any level.  In fact I have pointed to the handling of Patreas as a good benchmark for what should be done with the other Clinton, Hilary.

In fact I quite routinely rip Republicans as well as Democrats, conservatives as well as liberals.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 14, 2017, 08:54:20 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-communications-trump.html

High treason...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2017, 11:10:23 pm
I am not sure what you are saying, Eastcoast.  Do you think that Trump would not have fired him for lying to Pence if the press had not found out about it?  If so, why do you think so?

Uh...  What was he waiting for?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 14, 2017, 11:16:00 pm
Did you read the article? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2017, 11:18:08 pm
Which article
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2017, 07:51:09 am
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-communications-trump.html

High treason...

Can you even define treason?  (Note I am not asking you for a definition of "high," because it would appear you have that one down.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 15, 2017, 08:51:18 am
From Deeg's article: "Several of Mr. Trump’s associates, like Mr. Manafort, have done business in Russia. And it is not unusual for American businessmen to come in contact with foreign intelligence officials, sometimes unwittingly, in countries like Russia and Ukraine, where the spy services are deeply embedded in society. Law enforcement officials did not say to what extent the contacts might have been about business."

and:

"The intelligence agencies then sought to learn whether the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election.

The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation."

But hey, the headline of the article is pretty bad, and it's the NY Times, and it fits my narrative, so run with it!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 15, 2017, 09:38:28 am
Keep fiddling, Nero.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2017, 01:43:26 pm
Keep fiddling, Nero.

Someone here has power comparable to being the Emperor of Rome?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 15, 2017, 05:11:34 pm
Baseball and politics are intersecting today.  NY Post says that Jeffrey Loria may be the next Ambassador to France. 

For about the last week, there have been rumors that Loria was close to selling the Marlins to Jared Kushner's brother.  What a coincidence!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 15, 2017, 05:38:28 pm
Get Loria out of baseball by any means necessary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 15, 2017, 07:33:56 pm
Yeah, but ambassador to Bangladesh sounds better.  Or maybe Greenland.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 16, 2017, 08:37:21 pm
Uranium ever heard of it!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 16, 2017, 09:15:31 pm
It’s this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2017, 09:20:51 pm
http://www.mirror.co.uk/science/scientists-reveal-400-billion-plan-9831177

Scientists reveal £400 BILLION plan to 're-freeze' the Arctic in retaliation against climate change
The plan involves building hundreds of millions of pumps that will spray seawater across the surface to replenish the thawing ice
BYJEFF PARSONS  13:52, 16 FEB 2017UPDATED13:53, 16 FEB 2017

The warming up of our planet as a result of increased human activity since industrial times is incontrovertibly true.

Climate scientists who have been warning us for years are now rolling up their sleeves and getting stuck into fixing the problem .

An ambitious £400 BILLION plan to "refreeze" the arctic has been proposed by a team of researchers from Arizona State University. They say that by installing 10 million wind-powered pumps over the ice cap, they can spray sea water over the surface to replenish the fading ice.

"We show that where appropriate devices are employed, it is possible to increase ice thickness above natural levels, by about 1 m over the course of the winter," said Steven J. Desch, the lead author of the paper explaining the proposal .

"We examine the effects this has in the Arctic climate, concluding that deployment over 10% of the Arctic, especially where ice survival is marginal, could more than reverse current trends of ice loss in the Arctic, using existing industrial capacity."

According to the calculations, pumping 1.3 meters of water onto the surface will result in the ice being thicker by one metre.

This is the equivalent of rolling back 17 years of global warming.

But the sheer amount of construction involved would take a massive effort from governments and industry.

Creating a mere 10 million pumps would require 10 million tonnes of steel each year. But covering the 9.8 million kilometers squared that make up the Arctic Ocean means coming up with 100 MILLION pumps and, therefore, 100 million tonnes of steel.

Currently, the US produces 80 million tonnes of steel each year in total.

"The implied scale of the technique (production of ice over millions of square kilometres) may have discouraged further investigation," said Desch.

But can we really afford not to do something? The scientists don't think so.

"For the preservation of the Arctic and its unique ecosystems, and especially to preserve its role in Earth's climate through the ice-albedo feedback, and to prevent the worst positive feedbacks such as release of gigatons of greenhouse gases stored in the permafrost, it is vital to do as much as possible to prevent loss of sea-ice in the Arctic," they wrote.

"Moreover, the need is urgent , as the normal cooling effects of summer sea ice are already lessened and may disappear in less than two decades."

Although some people have suggested that losses of sea ice in the Arctic are counterbalanced by gains in the Antarctic, this isn't true.

Over the last 30 years more than a million kilometres squared of ice have been lost at both the poles combined.

"Sea ice is disappearing from the Arctic – rapidly," Desch told the Guardian .

"The sorts of options we are proposing need to be researched and discussed now. If we are provocative and get people to think about this, that is good.

"The question is: do I think our project would work? Yes. I am confident it would. But we do need to put a realistic cost on these things. We cannot keep on just telling people, ‘Stop driving your car or it’s the end of the world’. We have to give them alternative options, though equally we need to price them."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 16, 2017, 11:00:26 pm
The ice bucket in the Antarctic isn't gaining.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 17, 2017, 07:37:38 am
The ice bucket in the Antarctic isn't gaining.

And you still are not learning how to write coherently.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 17, 2017, 08:22:08 am
Answer the assertion of ice loss in the Antarctic o'denier of science.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 17, 2017, 08:26:07 am
TRUMP SAYS HE HAS BEEN TREATED VERY UNFAIRLY BY PEOPLE WHO WROTE CONSTITUTION


By Andy Borowitz   
February 10, 2017


WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Hinting darkly that “there’s something going on,” Donald J. Trump complained on Friday that he has been treated “very unfairly” by the people who wrote the United States Constitution.

“If the Constitution prevented me from doing one or two things, I’d chalk that up to bad luck,” he said. “But when literally everything I want to do is magically a violation of the Constitution, that’s very unfair and bad treatment.”

Lashing out at the document’s authors, Trump said that “America is a great country, but we have maybe the worst constitution writers in the world.”

“Russia has much better constitution writers than we do,” he said. “I talked to Putin, and he said their constitution never gives him problems.”

“The situation is very unfair!” he added.

In an ominous warning, Trump said that, as of Friday, he was putting the writers of the U.S. Constitution “on notice.”

“I don’t have their names yet, but that’s something I’m looking into,” he said. “These jokers are not going to get away with this.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 17, 2017, 11:56:26 am
The great thing about satire is that it points out the idiots that believe it is true.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 17, 2017, 12:04:47 pm
Actually, it's otto's best post.  He should cut and paste more often.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 17, 2017, 12:06:40 pm
Keep fiddling...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 17, 2017, 02:40:23 pm
The great thing about satire is that it points out the idiots that believe it is true.

Keep fiddling...

And Deeg adds his name to the list.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 17, 2017, 02:41:15 pm
Answer the assertion of ice loss in the Antarctic o'denier of science.

And you still have not learned how to write coherently.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 17, 2017, 04:00:20 pm
It's best just to pass on the answer jes and move on.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 17, 2017, 04:12:27 pm
Fatuously Addled Teaching Assistant


How about this article on the effects of Global Climate Change.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/02/17/world/americas/100000004937997.mobile.html (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/02/17/world/americas/100000004937997.mobile.html)


Instead of the noise that you offer.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 17, 2017, 04:48:28 pm
It's best just to pass on the answer jes and move on.

If you ever figure out how to write a coherent question, let me know.  I will do my best to answer.  I have a great many flaws, but failing to respond or running from an argument are not on the list.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 17, 2017, 05:05:09 pm
You just did.

And avoiding a challenging position defines your minutiae.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 17, 2017, 05:09:02 pm
You just did.

And avoiding a challenging position defines your minutiae.

Point to a question, or learn how to actually pose a question, and I will respond.  None of your last five posts here qualify.  The only way I can respond to incoherency is to point out that it is incoherent and ask you to try again.  I have done so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 17, 2017, 10:41:41 pm
Just keep dodging the question...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 20, 2017, 11:40:20 am
Just keep dodging the question...

Just keep failing to pose one.

Oh, and by the way, any chance you could ever post the link to the actual original source of your nonsense 97% claim about scientific agreement on anthropogenic global warming... or did I correctly identify it as the Cook "study" I have already pointed out was a crock?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 20, 2017, 03:56:58 pm
So apparently Fowler rather innocuously spoke out against the Muslim ban, and was absolutely ravaged by the "best fans in baseball".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 20, 2017, 03:58:35 pm
So apparently Fowler rather innocuously spoke out against the Muslim ban, and was absolutely ravaged by the "best fans in baseball".
My observation is that they don't like their athletes expressing politics 'round here.  Rednecks love Red birds.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 20, 2017, 03:59:35 pm
You have a link of what actually happened?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 20, 2017, 04:00:03 pm
http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/02/20/dexter-fowler-reacts-to-travel-ban-some-cardinals-fans-react-badly-fowler-responds/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 20, 2017, 04:01:18 pm
"For the record. I know this is going to sound absolutely crazy, but athletes are humans, and not properties of the team they work for."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 20, 2017, 04:02:40 pm
The hoi polloi (sp) reaction to the tweets is what is really vicious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 20, 2017, 04:04:28 pm
http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/02/20/dexter-fowler-reacts-to-travel-ban-some-cardinals-fans-react-badly-fowler-responds/

Thanks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 20, 2017, 04:04:54 pm
I never thought this guy would show up in the Politics forum but . . .


(http://www.fangraphs.com/not/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Cards-Fan.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 20, 2017, 04:06:20 pm
https://fee.org/articles/welfare-dependent-immigrants-are-a-myth/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 20, 2017, 04:42:50 pm
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/how-10-facebook-comments-tell-the-story-of-dexter-fowler-the-cardinals-and-america-in-2017-171623704.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 20, 2017, 04:51:57 pm
One of the worst exchanges went something like this:

That's two strikes, Fowler, shut up.

Two strikes?  His politics and what?  Being Black?

Politics and being a Cub and, yeah, I guess he has 3 strikes.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 20, 2017, 04:53:57 pm
I think it was the first tweet that got people got wound up about.  It was Fowler's picture, his quote, and then underneath it, the caption was "Go play for Iran.  We never wanted you."

That didn't jibe with his quote, but some people don't need a solid reason for being ignorant.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 22, 2017, 09:27:45 pm
Well not everything Trump does is bad...unless you're "confused" I guess.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/official-trump-revoke-transgender-bathroom-guidance-173331315--politics.html

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 22, 2017, 09:29:26 pm
Yes, by all means keep hiring racists and **** while giving the greenlight to harassing and bullying kids.


If Trump were serious about protecting people in public bathrooms, he'd ban GOP senators from using them.  They've been arrested for lewd behavior in restrooms more often than the entire population of transgendered people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 22, 2017, 09:56:44 pm
LMFAO

Some people honestly have no sense of human decency or morals and justify it by saying that the ones who do are ignorant and racist.

That's America's rallying cry these days.

Accept that the world is corrupt and let the corrupt bury your nose in it or automatically  be labeled a racist or ignorant.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 22, 2017, 09:58:15 pm
And there's no such thing as transgendered.

That's just a new word for crossdresser.

You are what the Lord made you whether you like it or not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 22, 2017, 10:02:08 pm
And there's no such thing as transgendered.

That's just a new word for crossdresser.

You are what the Lord made you whether you like it or not.

Ah, ignorance on stilts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 22, 2017, 10:07:34 pm
Yes, by all means keep hiring racists and **** while giving the greenlight to harassing and bullying kids.


If Trump were serious about protecting people in public bathrooms, he'd ban GOP senators from using them.  They've been arrested for lewd behavior in restrooms more often than the entire population of transgendered people.

The concern is not with what actual "transgendered people" might do (in part because there are so remarkably few of them), but more with what might be done by those pretending to be transgendered (which nearly always will be men) as an excuse to go into the bathroom, changing rooms or showers of the opposite gender.

But if the only way you think you can persuade anyone to agree with you is by mischaracterizing the position of the other side of the issue, then by all means, continue with your straw man arguments.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 22, 2017, 10:21:15 pm
The transgender bathroom thing has always confused me.  Where did these people go take a whiz the past 150 years?  Did they just hold it until they got home?  I'm guessin' they went into a bathroom and nobody noticed or gave a damn.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 23, 2017, 12:15:41 am
God, this place is depressing.

The world is passing you by, whether you like it or not. Get used to it - the ashbin of history is waiting for you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 23, 2017, 06:38:14 am
God, this place is depressing.

The world is passing you by, whether you like it or not. Get used to it - the ashbin of history is waiting for you.

That always sounds good when you have no persuasive substantive argument to offer.  Of course since everyone, and everything, will eventually be in the ashbin of history," it is also an argument that is incredibly vapid, but, hey, you can only play the cards you are dealt.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 26, 2017, 02:08:05 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKPAn7uRcVY
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 27, 2017, 12:14:08 pm
Quote
The concern is not with what actual "transgendered people" might do (in part because there are so remarkably few of them), but more with what might be done by those pretending to be transgendered (which nearly always will be men) as an excuse to go into the bathroom, changing rooms or showers of the opposite gender.

But if the only way you think you can persuade anyone to agree with you is by mischaracterizing the position of the other side of the issue, then by all means, continue with your straw man arguments.


So your in support of punishing one group of people for what another group may do? Must be that Rand Paul newletter thinking of not allowing "colored" people to vote because of what a group of white ones may do?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 27, 2017, 12:18:29 pm
the president clueless child today explaining a policy move on healthcare by saying, "Obamacare very bad" while his solution will be, "very good".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 27, 2017, 04:09:15 pm
the president clueless child today explaining a policy move on healthcare by saying, "Obamacare very bad" while his solution will be, "very good".

He had to put it in terms that Little Homo and his liberal friends could understand.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 27, 2017, 04:20:02 pm
Uh, what?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 27, 2017, 05:03:54 pm

So your in support of punishing one group of people for what another group may do? Must be that Rand Paul newletter thinking of not allowing "colored" people to vote because of what a group of white ones may do?

As I have mentioned before, reading comprehension is a learned skill.  In other words, with a bit of effort, you could actually learn to understand what you read, something you have just again demonstrated remains a skill you lack.

Meanwhile, until then, just as a bit of practice for you, could you point out anywhere I have ever even suggested "punishing" a transgender person for being transgendered, let alone punishing an entire group of transgendered people.

Once you realize I have never done that and give up on that challenge, is there any possibility you could find the actual purported text of the Rand Paul newsletter you reference, and once you find it post a link to the actual newsletter, and cut and paste into your response the language from the newsletter in which you have imagined anyone writing in the newsletter was "thinking of not allowing 'colored' people to vote because of what a group of white ones may do"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 27, 2017, 05:20:16 pm
I believe Otto may be referring to the Ron Paul newsletter controversy, not Rand Paul. Ron Paul was associated with a newsletter that had some ghost writers who issued some racist things in the newsletter. Ron Paul said he had nothing to do with it and the story pretty much died as the local NAACP chairman said he had known Ron Paul for 20 years and found him to be an honorable fellow with no racist tendencies.  Other than that, I can find no reference regarding Rand Paul and a newsletter at all. I'm sure Otto will be here to clear things up in a jiffy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 27, 2017, 05:20:29 pm
Yup, the trogs are really showing their true spots now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 27, 2017, 05:28:58 pm
I believe Otto may be referring to the Ron Paul newsletter controversy, not Rand Paul. Ron Paul was associated with a newsletter that had some ghost writers who issued some racist things in the newsletter. Ron Paul said he had nothing to do with it and the story pretty much died as the local NAACP chairman said he had known Ron Paul for 20 years and found him to be an honorable fellow with no racist tendencies.  Other than that, I can find no reference regarding Rand Paul and a newsletter at all. I'm sure Otto will be here to clear things up in a jiffy.

I am sure otto wouldn't be able to clean up a spill on aisle 9....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on February 27, 2017, 07:08:43 pm
So jes, the "concern" is not with transgender people using a bathroom which corresponds with their identity, but with another group of people (mostly men) who would perp on a child. I assume you know that a man who perps on a child is already against the law.


So forcing a transgender person to use a bathroom which is opposite their gender ID is not punishment to them is okay in your closed southern mind.

I got ya, you're siding against the freedom of one group because what another may do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 28, 2017, 02:09:58 am
So jes, the "concern" is not with transgender people using a bathroom which corresponds with their identity, but with another group of people (mostly men) who would perp on a child. I assume you know that a man who perps on a child is already against the law.

So forcing a transgender person to use a bathroom which is opposite their gender ID is not punishment to them is okay in your closed southern mind.

I got ya, you're siding against the freedom of one group because what another may do.

I asked you to you point out anywhere I have ever even suggested "punishing" a transgender person for being transgendered, let alone punishing an entire group of transgendered people.

Your post above does not do so.

I then asked you to find the actual purported text of the Rand Paul newsletter you reference, and once you find it post a link to the actual newsletter, and cut and paste into your response the language from the newsletter in which you have imagined anyone writing in the newsletter was "thinking of not allowing 'colored' people to vote because of what a group of white ones may do."

You have done neither.

You also have neither apologized for making the claim about your contention concerning me, nor admitted any error regarding your claim concerning Rand Paul.

That being the case, I see no reason to continue the exchange with you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 01, 2017, 09:40:49 am
Well lets see...


President Cheeto plans to imitate the economic failure in Kansas nationwide so...


Why not achieve failure straight from conservative orthodoxy in education...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/upshot/dismal-results-from-vouchers-surprise-researchers-as-devos-era-begins.html?mabReward=A6&recp=2&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&region=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine

Excerpt..

"But research has also linked higher test scores to a host of positive outcomes later in life. And voucher advocates often cite poor test scores in public schools to justify creating private school vouchers in the first place.

The new voucher studies stand in marked contrast to research findings that well-regulated charter schools in Massachusetts and elsewhere have a strong, positive impact on test scores. But while vouchers and charters are often grouped under the umbrella of “school choice,” the best charters tend to be nonprofit public schools, open to all and accountable to public authorities. The less “private” that school choice programs are, the better they seem to work.

The new evidence on vouchers does not seem to have deterred the Trump administration, which has proposed a new $20 billion voucher program. Secretary DeVos’s enthusiasm for vouchers, which have been the primary focus of her philanthropic spending and advocacy, appears to be undiminished."

Failure advocates advocating more failure. Typical of conservatism.

Enjoy
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 01, 2017, 10:14:29 am
Much like advocating socialism despite its historic failure when tried anywhere else.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 01, 2017, 05:01:48 pm
Much like advocating socialism despite its historic failure when tried anywhere else.

Actually much worse.

If you look at the article which otto and the New York Times appear to offer as fact and as news, every sentence that otto cut and pasted is opinion.  It is not even opinion buttressed by solidly supporting facts.  EVERY sentence is opinion, and virtually nothing but opinion.

In other words someone who didn't like school choice before they pretended to conduct a "study" of it rather unsurprisingly concluded after their study that they still didn't like it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 01, 2017, 05:11:17 pm
I have to laugh when test scores are used as the end all of educational achievement. My wife is a high school teacher and trust me, test scores don't equal education. The problem is, there isn't an especially easy way to measure true education without looking at each student on a one-by-one basis. To judge if a school is succeeding or failing you have to look at each student, start with where they began and measure their progress and I'm not talking their ability to memorize test answers and useless facts. I'm talking about creativity, problem solving and developing real world relationships with others like most people do in the workplace today. Unfortunately anything that would cause the teaches union to have to chuck their lesson plans and learn new techniques, methods and ways of teaching is vehemently opposed by the union bosses.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 01, 2017, 05:30:45 pm
I have to laugh when test scores are used as the end all of educational achievement. My wife is a high school teacher and trust me, test scores don't equal education. The problem is, there isn't an especially easy way to measure true education without looking at each student on a one-by-one basis. To judge if a school is succeeding or failing you have to look at each student, start with where they began and measure their progress and I'm not talking their ability to memorize test answers and useless facts. I'm talking about creativity, problem solving and developing real world relationships with others like most people do in the workplace today. Unfortunately anything that would cause the teaches union to have to chuck their lesson plans and learn new techniques, methods and ways of teaching is vehemently opposed by the union bosses.

While criticizing the "union bosses," you voice concerns sounding remarkably like those heard from those very "union bosses."  As to any of the meaningful test results being the result of memorizing test answers and useless facts, it would appear you have not looked at the commonly used tests in several years.

For example, try the PARCC sample test questions here for 8th grade math https://parcctrng.testnav.com/client/index.html#login?username=17MT08PTNE01010100&password=PCPRACTICE  Or try these for 8th grade English/Reading http://www.lumoslearning.com/llwp/resources/common-core-practice-tests-and-sample-questions/practice-test.html?type=Teacher&state=NM&cur=1098&btn=start

Once you do, let me know if you genuinely still believe they are simply testing "ability to memorize test answers and useless facts."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 01, 2017, 05:34:45 pm
I have to laugh when test scores are used as the end all of educational achievement. My wife is a high school teacher and trust me, test scores don't equal education. The problem is, there isn't an especially easy way to measure true education without looking at each student on a one-by-one basis. To judge if a school is succeeding or failing you have to look at each student, start with where they began and measure their progress and I'm not talking their ability to memorize test answers and useless facts. I'm talking about creativity, problem solving and developing real world relationships with others like most people do in the workplace today. Unfortunately anything that would cause the teaches union to have to chuck their lesson plans and learn new techniques, methods and ways of teaching is vehemently opposed by the union bosses.

One of the core issues for the NEA is reducing the reliance on standardized testing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 02, 2017, 11:19:31 pm
Opinion? Every word an opinion?

Really Addled Teaching Assistant


While you certainly can point to the quote from (your hero) Milton Friedman as his opinion, the rest seems to be a well researched conclusion based several large charter school studies. Studies conducted in states that have a red tint.


But hey, you have that libertarian pipe dream to defend.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 02, 2017, 11:23:10 pm
Robb


Is Sweden on your globe? Norway? Or China?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 02, 2017, 11:25:06 pm
Why don't you ask jes if he can point to a libertarian one?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 02, 2017, 11:33:11 pm
The world is flat.  Globes are the result of fake news.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 03, 2017, 04:37:55 am
Robb
Is Sweden on your globe? Norway? Or China?

So you think China is an example showing socialism has NOT been a failure?

Really?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 03, 2017, 04:48:31 am
Opinion? Every word an opinion?
Really Addled Teaching Assistant
While you certainly can point to the quote from (your hero) Milton Friedman as his opinion, the rest seems to be a well researched conclusion based several large charter school studies. Studies conducted in states that have a red tint.
But hey, you have that libertarian pipe dream to defend.

Sometimes it is easy to understand why you post without quoting what you are responding to.....   this one is a good example, since the following clearly is what you were responding to:
Actually much worse.
If you look at the article which otto and the New York Times appear to offer as fact and as news, every sentence that otto cut and pasted is opinion.  It is not even opinion buttressed by solidly supporting facts.  EVERY sentence is opinion, and virtually nothing but opinion.
In other words someone who didn't like school choice before they pretended to conduct a "study" of it rather unsurprisingly concluded after their study that they still didn't like it.

Note the first line of your post here is, "Opinion? Every word an opinion?"  And note that what I wrote was, "every sentence that otto cut and pasted is opinion."

There is a reason "word" and "sentence" are spelled, pronounced and defined differently.  That reason is that they are not the same things.

Now, can you actually point to a single SENTENCE in your original cut and paste from the New York Times which is not opinion?

A single sentence which is not opinion in what you cut and pasted is all you need to find and point out to prove I am wrong.

A single sentence.

Surely that is not too much of a burden for you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 03, 2017, 12:53:46 pm
Jes

I assume that you are a big enough boy to understand the failure of your every sentence is opinion shtick, so I took this sentence out for you to point out the opinion.

"Researchers have used this data to compare voucher students with similar children who took the same tests in public school."


You can start anytime.


Maybe you should read one the sources article since I'm guessing you have not.

http://educationresearchalliancenola.org/files/publications/ERA-Policy-Brief-Public-Private-School-Choice-160218.pdf (http://educationresearchalliancenola.org/files/publications/ERA-Policy-Brief-Public-Private-School-Choice-160218.pdf)

Or the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative think tank and proponent of school choice...

https://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/publication/pdfs/FORDHAM%20Ed%20Choice%20Evaluation%20Report_online%20edition.pdf (https://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/publication/pdfs/FORDHAM%20Ed%20Choice%20Evaluation%20Report_online%20edition.pdf)


But you have your opinion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 03, 2017, 02:50:33 pm
I am somewhat familiar with the Fordham study as it is a common stick by which teacher's unions beat vouchers advocates over the head. The problem is, you need to actually read the study. For instance, as mentioned on page 34, the findings of the study, namely that math and reading scores are worse in Ohio Ed choice schools than in public schools makes a nice sound bite and is typically used as otto has done above. But look at the study, they measured only high-performing public schools. From page 34, "but the overwhelming evidence indicates a substantial negative effect on test scores of attending
private schools under an EdChoice voucher for those students who were attending the highest-performing
schools
amongst those that were eligible for the voucher. We cannot generalize these findings to students who
had previously attended much lower-performing public schools because we cannot conceive of a credible way
to make that type of comparison."
In other words, the very students who would use the vouchers to escape failing public schools are not included in the study. And don't forget, private schools are not teaching to the exams as public schools are required to do. Of course their scores are going to be lower. As I mentioned in a previous post, high test scores do not equal a good education.

I blame a lot of this on Bush and his No Child Left Behind garbage. Now with the next generation, Common Core, we have finally jumped the shark on educating our children. Unless someone in America develops a Matrix-style brain upload system, we will keep falling further and further behind until we figure out that educating young minds is more than memorizing useless facts and passing tests.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 03, 2017, 04:50:20 pm
I am somewhat familiar with the Fordham study as it is a common stick by which teacher's unions beat vouchers advocates over the head. The problem is, you need to actually read the study. For instance, as mentioned on page 34, the findings of the study, namely that math and reading scores are worse in Ohio Ed choice schools than in public schools makes a nice sound bite and is typically used as otto has done above. But look at the study, they measured only high-performing public schools. From page 34, "but the overwhelming evidence indicates a substantial negative effect on test scores of attending
private schools under an EdChoice voucher for those students who were attending the highest-performing
schools
amongst those that were eligible for the voucher. We cannot generalize these findings to students who
had previously attended much lower-performing public schools because we cannot conceive of a credible way
to make that type of comparison."
In other words, the very students who would use the vouchers to escape failing public schools are not included in the study. And don't forget, private schools are not teaching to the exams as public schools are required to do. Of course their scores are going to be lower. As I mentioned in a previous post, high test scores do not equal a good education.

I blame a lot of this on Bush and his No Child Left Behind garbage. Now with the next generation, Common Core, we have finally jumped the shark on educating our children. Unless someone in America develops a Matrix-style brain upload system, we will keep falling further and further behind until we figure out that educating young minds is more than memorizing useless facts and passing tests.

Yes No Child Left Behind predates Common Core, but the later in no way replaced the former.  They were separate and independent of each other, even being unrelated to each other.  Common Core is in no way a later "generation" of anything from No Child Left Behind.

You also have again made reference to "memorizing useless facts and passing tests," while I note you have not taken up my challenge to look at examples of the PARCC exam, which is the most widely used standardized test today, to find any examples of what you are talking about.  That was probably a good idea, since you won't FIND examples of it.  There is less memorization today in public education than any time in the last 100 years... and that may actually be one of the reasons for the decline in education.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 03, 2017, 05:01:07 pm
Jes
I assume that you are a big enough boy to understand the failure of your every sentence is opinion shtick, so I took this sentence out for you to point out the opinion.
"Researchers have used this data to compare voucher students with similar children who took the same tests in public school."
You can start anytime.
Maybe you should read one the sources article since I'm guessing you have not.
http://educationresearchalliancenola.org/files/publications/ERA-Policy-Brief-Public-Private-School-Choice-160218.pdf (http://educationresearchalliancenola.org/files/publications/ERA-Policy-Brief-Public-Private-School-Choice-160218.pdf)
Or the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative think tank and proponent of school choice...
https://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/publication/pdfs/FORDHAM%20Ed%20Choice%20Evaluation%20Report_online%20edition.pdf (https://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/publication/pdfs/FORDHAM%20Ed%20Choice%20Evaluation%20Report_online%20edition.pdf)
But you have your opinion.

~sigh~ Let's go back to what I asked you to do, since that was not it, nor was it even close.

I asked you to "point to a single SENTENCE in your original cut and paste from the New York Times which is not opinion....  A single sentence which is not opinion in what you cut and pasted is all you need to find and point out to prove I am wrong (in saying that EVERY sentence in what you had cut and pasted was opinion).  A single sentence.  Surely that is not too much of a burden for you."

You did find a sentence from somewhere which was a statement of fact and not opinion and pasted it above,  That sentence was the following: "Researchers have used this data to compare voucher students with similar children who took the same tests in public school."

But HERE is what you originally posted and was what I was pointed out was entirely opinion and absent of facts:
Well lets see...
President Cheeto plans to imitate the economic failure in Kansas nationwide so...
Why not achieve failure straight from conservative orthodoxy in education...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/upshot/dismal-results-from-vouchers-surprise-researchers-as-devos-era-begins.html?mabReward=A6&recp=2&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&region=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine
Excerpt..
"But research has also linked higher test scores to a host of positive outcomes later in life. And voucher advocates often cite poor test scores in public schools to justify creating private school vouchers in the first place.
The new voucher studies stand in marked contrast to research findings that well-regulated charter schools in Massachusetts and elsewhere have a strong, positive impact on test scores. But while vouchers and charters are often grouped under the umbrella of “school choice,” the best charters tend to be nonprofit public schools, open to all and accountable to public authorities. The less “private” that school choice programs are, the better they seem to work.
The new evidence on vouchers does not seem to have deterred the Trump administration, which has proposed a new $20 billion voucher program. Secretary DeVos’s enthusiasm for vouchers, which have been the primary focus of her philanthropic spending and advocacy, appears to be undiminished."
Failure advocates advocating more failure. Typical of conservatism.
Enjoy

The important point here is that the sentence you now point to as a factual statement from what you had previously cut and posted here.... simply does not appear in what you cut and posted here.  I suspect that was because you could not find any statement of fact in what you had cut and pasted.... just as I had written.

Enjoy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 04, 2017, 01:46:21 pm
Addled Teaching Assistant


Again dwelling in the boring minutiae of the circular argument that makes you, you.


In a better time you would deal with the information provided instead of engaging in the shoot the messenger claptrap.


Why the demise?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 05, 2017, 09:39:52 am
Addled Teaching Assistant
Again dwelling in the boring minutiae of the circular argument that makes you, you.
In a better time you would deal with the information provided instead of engaging in the shoot the messenger claptrap.
Why the demise?

I was dealing with the information you provided.  That was the information you provided in the following post:

I pointed out that every sentence in what you cut and pasted was opinion and devoid of a single statement of fact.  That is not shooting the messenger.  It is instead directly addressing the message.  Unlike you in this exchange all of my comments have been focused on the message in what you posted.  You, on the other hand, have been engaging in ad hominem attacks (shooting the messenger) in every one of your posts.

If you later decided to post something more which at least leaned toward factual statements, that would appear to be because you finally realized that the MESSAGE posted was not persuasive and needed to be improved.... not because I attacked either you or the New York Times, but because I pointed out there were real problems with the CONTENT pf what you posted (i.e. the message).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 06, 2017, 12:38:34 pm
Okay addled minutiae

Please provide where the opinion is on this paragraph from the article. Ya know, the devoid of a single statement of fact. The message that you have to disprove is in quotes.

Quote
The first results came in late 2015. Researchers examined an Indiana voucher program that had quickly grown to serve tens of thousands of students under Mike Pence, then the state’s governor. “In mathematics,” they found, “voucher students who transfer to private schools experienced significant losses in achievement.” They also saw no improvement in reading.


Also you can try to devoid this too.

Quote
Some voucher supporters observed that many private schools in Louisiana chose not to accept voucher students, and those that did had recently experienced declining enrollment. Perhaps the participating schools were unusually bad and eager for revenue. But this is another way of saying that exposing young children to the vagaries of private-sector competition is inherently risky. The free market often does a terrible job of providing basic services to the poor — see, for instance, the lack of grocery stores and banks in many low-income neighborhoods. This may also hold for education.

You can read the source material here for further help in devoiding. Where some libertarian professor blames over regulation.

https://jaypgreene.com/2016/01/04/over-regulation-backfires-on-voucher-supporters/ (https://jaypgreene.com/2016/01/04/over-regulation-backfires-on-voucher-supporters/)

Maybe you can fault the study, or not.

http://seii.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/SEII-Discussion-Paper-2015.06-Abdulkadiro%C4%9Flu-Pathak-Walters.pdf (http://seii.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/SEII-Discussion-Paper-2015.06-Abdulkadiro%C4%9Flu-Pathak-Walters.pdf)


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 06, 2017, 04:50:13 pm
Okay addled minutiae

Please provide where the opinion is on this paragraph from the article. Ya know, the devoid of a single statement of fact. The message that you have to disprove is in quotes.


Also you can try to devoid this too.

You can read the source material here for further help in devoiding. Where some libertarian professor blames over regulation.

https://jaypgreene.com/2016/01/04/over-regulation-backfires-on-voucher-supporters/ (https://jaypgreene.com/2016/01/04/over-regulation-backfires-on-voucher-supporters/)

Maybe you can fault the study, or not.

http://seii.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/SEII-Discussion-Paper-2015.06-Abdulkadiro%C4%9Flu-Pathak-Walters.pdf (http://seii.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/SEII-Discussion-Paper-2015.06-Abdulkadiro%C4%9Flu-Pathak-Walters.pdf)

Neither of the things you just cut and pasted were in what you originally posted.  My point was very clear and very simple, and so far you have done absolutely nothing to refute it -- every sentence, every statement, in what you originally cut and pasted was a statement of opinion, devoid of fact.

Finding something else that included factual claims in it (whether true or not is a different story), does nothing to refute my original comment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 06, 2017, 05:11:27 pm
I don't know why, but this song is kind of coming to mind for me right now . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y1wm7CFRCQ
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 06, 2017, 05:39:49 pm
What I have seen addled is your inability to read and think critically about an article which contradicts your religious belief in libertarianism.


So you can move on to your next mundane discussion regarding the meaning of words.

So I offer a primer...


https://youtu.be/PHedekI5w4w (https://youtu.be/PHedekI5w4w)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 06, 2017, 08:14:59 pm
To all the trump voters out there, it must be empowering that a twitter/message board guy who can use all the intelligence gathering capabilities of our country to evaluate issues disregards them to believe breitbart.


I think that must give Robb hope.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 06, 2017, 08:19:52 pm
Mark Levin totally knows something that the rest of the government dont. Liberals are trying to destroy america... its obvious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 06, 2017, 08:33:25 pm
Song must heard in the Cheeto presidency...


https://youtu.be/AmAaWCFlxEE (https://youtu.be/AmAaWCFlxEE)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 06, 2017, 10:55:30 pm
It cracks me up that you label me a Trump voter.  Pay attention moron
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 06, 2017, 11:01:47 pm
Actually, Otto and Trump have a lot in common.  They both read or listen only to the news, bloggers, columnists, or propagandists who have the same agendas as themselves.  Lots of studies now that show that social media and news dissemination are the leading causes of our divisions in this country.  Trump follows only the psycho nuts on the right.  Otto, the left.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 07, 2017, 11:25:44 am
I would hardly call the New York Times or Washington Post a radical left as breitbart is reactionary right.

If you are, then maybe you should explain why.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 07, 2017, 11:41:36 am
Do you consider the New York Post and Washington Times (ironic, right) to be reactionary right?

To answer your question, no, not radical left, but definitely left.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 07, 2017, 12:38:29 pm
So the House's Obamacare replacement is worse than Obamacare.  Conservatives are going to kill it because they have even worse ideas of what the healthcare bill should do.  The Democrats are smartly keeping their mouths shut, because well their ideas are even worse.  I wonder if it is too late to get a job on Wall Street maybe I can win the lottery and retire.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 07, 2017, 01:34:13 pm
So the House's Obamacare replacement is worse than Obamacare.  Conservatives are going to kill it because they have even worse ideas of what the healthcare bill should do.  The Democrats are smartly keeping their mouths shut, because well their ideas are even worse.  I wonder if it is too late to get a job on Wall Street maybe I can win the lottery and retire.

Just wondering what makes it worse?  I've only read a couple of the articles that have come out since the Republicans released their plans, and I really haven't been able to wrap my arms around the changes yet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on March 07, 2017, 01:53:46 pm
My thoughts on the Affordable Care Act

The skyrocketing cost of healthcare itself and the scams being perpetrated by Big Pharma (such as creating artificial shortages of critical medications as they near the expiration of their patents) have absolutely nothing to do with the increase in insurance premiums.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 07, 2017, 02:38:41 pm
By eliminating pre-existing condition exclusions, mandating additional Essential Health Benefits and removing lifetime caps you are going to see premiums increase. From what I've seen of the new bill, it doesn't address any of those issues. Those are certainly not all of the problems, but they are some of the biggest.

I would love to see a system with ever increasing Health Savings Accounts that allow patients to buy health insurance as more of a stop-loss rather than primary coverage. Help people get started with these accounts, let them build through FICA withholding throughout their life, then if they have a fund left when they retire they can roll it into an IRA. This would put the onus on individuals to shop their health coverage, stay out of the ER unless it is necessary and shop more for care. People will have more motivation to stay healthy as it will effect their bottom line as well. The larger their HSA grows, the less stop loss coverage they will need which drives down costs even further. The nice thing is in such a system the average person would build their HSA in their healthy years and by the time they would actually need it should have a nice nest egg saved up. All you have to do is make provisions for the chronically ill and disabled and away you go. The transition would be the killer though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 07, 2017, 03:09:21 pm
The transition need not be rough at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 07, 2017, 03:11:59 pm
Just wondering what makes it worse?  I've only read a couple of the articles that have come out since the Republicans released their plans, and I really haven't been able to wrap my arms around the changes yet.

It keeps all of the popular Obamacare carrots, no lifetime caps, preexisting condition and 26 year olds on parents plans (not a bigger driver of costs) and removes the rather pathetic sticks that Obamacare had in defined sign up periods and the tiny penalty/tax.  The Republicans replaced the sticks with a penalty that for a fraction of the cost of the deductible will allow you to buy insurance at any time.  People will be incentivized to not get coverage until they need, that will sky rocket premiums. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 07, 2017, 03:15:31 pm
My thoughts on the Affordable Care Act

The skyrocketing cost of healthcare itself and the scams being perpetrated by Big Pharma (such as creating artificial shortages of critical medications as they near the expiration of their patents) have absolutely nothing to do with the increase in insurance premiums.

Could you explain how "Big Pharma" creates "artificial shortages of critical medications as they near the expiration of their patents"?

And once you do that could you explain how whatever situation you have just described is new in the last few years and did not exist before ObamaCare?

I asked the first question because I genuinely do not know what you are talking about.... and suspect that you do not know either.  I ask the second question because I know quite well what you are talking about and am hoping that if you simply try to answer my question honestly you will realize that you are wrong and that the reason insurance premiums are soaring is because of ObamaCare, not because of what you want to call  "healthcare... scams... by Big Pharma."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on March 07, 2017, 03:15:47 pm
Robb how does eliminating pre-existing condition exclusions, mandating additional Essential Health Benefits, and removing lifetime caps increase premiums?  Eliminating those things will decrease premiums.

So the young and healthy will stay out of the insurance market and drive up the cost of the older and sicker - those that actually need the coverage will not be able to afford it then.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 07, 2017, 03:16:59 pm
By eliminating pre-existing condition exclusions, mandating additional Essential Health Benefits and removing lifetime caps you are going to see premiums increase. From what I've seen of the new bill, it doesn't address any of those issues. Those are certainly not all of the problems, but they are some of the biggest.

I would love to see a system with ever increasing Health Savings Accounts that allow patients to buy health insurance as more of a stop-loss rather than primary coverage. Help people get started with these accounts, let them build through FICA withholding throughout their life, then if they have a fund left when they retire they can roll it into an IRA. This would put the onus on individuals to shop their health coverage, stay out of the ER unless it is necessary and shop more for care. People will have more motivation to stay healthy as it will effect their bottom line as well. The larger their HSA grows, the less stop loss coverage they will need which drives down costs even further. The nice thing is in such a system the average person would build their HSA in their healthy years and by the time they would actually need it should have a nice nest egg saved up. All you have to do is make provisions for the chronically ill and disabled and away you go. The transition would be the killer though.

B+.  I would add the poor/working poor with the chronically ill and disabled and it becomes an A+.  Get elected to congress.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on March 07, 2017, 03:53:17 pm
You're all missing the point.  It's that huge tax break for execs making over 500K that ensures this bill will make health care affordable for all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on March 07, 2017, 03:54:36 pm
Maybe I mis-read Robb's quote.  I read it as eliminating a each in the list and you probably just meant the first item.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 07, 2017, 04:42:56 pm
Do you consider the New York Post and Washington Times (ironic, right) to be reactionary right?

To answer your question, no, not radical left, but definitely left.

The New York Times is about as far to the left as FOX news is to the right.

Britebart is about as far to the right as the Huffington Post is to the left.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 07, 2017, 04:43:24 pm
Maybe I mis-read Robb's quote.  I read it as eliminating a each in the list and you probably just meant the first item.

While I am sure Robb is able to speak for himself, I took his post to mean that by requiring insurance companies to cover those with pre-existing conditions, you will either push up health insurance rates or force insurance providers to leave the business.... which will push up rates by reducing competition.  I also took his post to mean that mandating additional Essential Health Benefits would push up insurance rates.  And that removing lifetime caps has also pushed up insurance rates.  All of these were part of ObamaCare, and it is the reason the entire damn bill needs to be scrapped instead of having lawmakers cherry pick the plan's carcass to eliminate parts they do not like and to keep the parts which some voters view as Christmas gifts they do not want to return.  Of COURSE the average idiot wants to keep many of the things which drive up insurance premiums -- most people like the idea of getting something for nothing.  But it doesn't work, and thinking reform will address the problem is a fantasy.  Unfortunately we now have a president who is more likely to continue the move toward socialized medicine that we would have seen if Obama had a third term.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 07, 2017, 04:59:05 pm
Keeping children on your plan until age 26 has very little effect on cost, since that is the age that requires the least health services.  The major cost is that there is no incentive for them to get their own plans, which would help average out the costs.  However  a great many would not get their own plan anyway.

The pre-existing condition exclusion is the big one, but in my opinion, is being dealt with very poorly.  Instead of requiring insurance to cover new customers that have pre-existing conditions, they should require insurance companies to cover new customers that have pre-existing conditions IF THEY PREVIOUSLY HAD A POLICY ELSEWHERE, that covered that condition.  In other words, if you have to change insurance plans because you are changing jobs, then your conditions are covered by the new company (assuming the old policy was still in effect until you started work at the new company).  Or if you had a personal policy, and now get a job that provides medical insurance.  Or if you are changing personal policies because you are moving, and the old company can not cover those in your new area.

This would eliminate the danger of losing coverage due to changing jobs, and would not be an incentive for having no coverage at all until you got sick.

Also, they should eliminate all "required coverage", and allow the individual to choose what he wants to insure, and what he wants to self-cover.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 07, 2017, 05:12:18 pm
Keeping children on your plan until age 26 has very little effect on cost, since that is the age that requires the least health services.  The major cost is that there is no incentive for them to get their own plans, which would help average out the costs.  However  a great many would not get their own plan anyway.

The pre-existing condition exclusion is the big one, but in my opinion, is being dealt with very poorly.  Instead of requiring insurance to cover new customers that have pre-existing conditions, they should require insurance companies to cover new customers that have pre-existing conditions IF THEY PREVIOUSLY HAD A POLICY ELSEWHERE, that covered that condition.  In other words, if you have to change insurance plans because you are changing jobs, then your conditions are covered by the new company (assuming the old policy was still in effect until you started work at the new company).  Or if you had a personal policy, and now get a job that provides medical insurance.  Or if you are changing personal policies because you are moving, and the old company can not cover those in your new area.

This would eliminate the danger of losing coverage due to changing jobs, and would not be an incentive for having no coverage at all until you got sick.

Also, they should eliminate all "required coverage", and allow the individual to choose what he wants to insure, and what he wants to self-cover.

Instead of thinking we can pick and chose how we can mandate companies to do certain things based either on how popular the action might be with voters (which ultimately is where all government regulation ends up, regardless how it might have started), or based on how much or how little we imagine the regulation or rule will increase cost or distort the marketplace, it is much better to come to grips with the fact that neither you, nor I, or Congress in its "infinite wisdom," can make sound decisions on such matters without seriously screwing things up and causing a multitude of both unforeseen distortions and also utterly unforeseeable distortions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 07, 2017, 07:40:58 pm
it is much better to come to grips with the fact that neither you, nor I, or Congress in its "infinite wisdom," can make sound decisions on such matters without seriously screwing things up and causing a multitude of both unforeseen distortions and also utterly unforeseeable distortions.

Coming to grips with that idea would be wonderful.  It would be even better if everyone promised never to break the law, and actually kept that promise.

Since neither of those things are likely to happen in our lifetime, we are probably better off finding a politically feasible solution that is better than the one being advocated by the Republicans.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 08, 2017, 12:01:12 am
Completely scrapping ObamaCare and moving to more market based approaches IS politically feasible.  Parts of your suggestion would NOT be a move in that direction.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 08, 2017, 09:10:57 am
We had that system in America for a long time jes.


It utterly failed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 08, 2017, 01:03:33 pm
Completely scrapping ObamaCare and moving to more market based approaches IS politically feasible.  Parts of your suggestion would NOT be a move in that direction.

There is no way that they would get enough votes in the Senate to totally scrap everything in Obamacare.  I wish there was, since that is what I would like them to do. 

I would also like to ride a unicorn around the city.

The odds of both are about equal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 08, 2017, 04:52:54 pm
There is no way that they would get enough votes in the Senate to totally scrap everything in Obamacare.  I wish there was, since that is what I would like them to do. 
I would also like to ride a unicorn around the city.
The odds of both are about equal.

The only certain way to fail is to give up.

It sounds as if that is exactly what you are doing.

Any Republican who previously voted for outright repeal when Obama was in office, and who campaigned on a platform calling for repeal, needs to be held to task for anything less.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 08, 2017, 04:58:09 pm
We had that system in America for a long time jes.
It utterly failed.

The major improvements in healthcare and life expectancy came BEFORE the federal government got involved in health care, and the more the federal involvement has been the slower we have seen improvements in life expectancy in this country (with a few years in the last ten or so actually showing some declines) and the higher we have seen prices climb.

Certainly an argument can be made that free market approaches to health care have "utterly failed," though the only people who would believe that, the only people who would believe that increasing the role of government in health care has been successful, are people who define success as an expansion of the size and scope and power of government, and not someone who is actually concerned about the quality or cost of health care.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 08, 2017, 07:36:32 pm
The only certain way to fail is to give up.

But the most likely way to fail is to reject the good when the perfect is not achievable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 08, 2017, 09:18:57 pm
But the most likely way to fail is to reject the good when the perfect is not achievable.

There is nothing about the current Trump/Ryan proposal which is good, nor are any of the suggestions you offered as desirable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 08, 2017, 09:49:31 pm
There is nothing about the current Trump/Ryan proposal which is good, nor are any of the suggestions you offered as desirable.

They are to reasonable people.  Those who vote for Libertarian candidates are not reasonable people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 09, 2017, 05:55:36 am
They are to reasonable people.  Those who vote for Libertarian candidates are not reasonable people.

You want to be taken seriously and at the same time are describing Trump as reasonable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 09, 2017, 07:08:10 am
You have a reading comprehension problem again.  I did not say that Trump was reasonable.  I said that the current bill being discussed in Congress was better than the Current Obamacare program, and had a chance to actually be implemented, as opposed to that which you advocate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 09, 2017, 10:13:05 am
Here's why Dusty hasn't met a Hillary voter and why I can count on one hand the number of Trump voters I know in my condo.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/purple-america-has-all-but-disappeared/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/purple-america-has-all-but-disappeared/)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 09, 2017, 10:59:48 am
Quote
The major improvements in healthcare and life expectancy came BEFORE the federal government got involved in health care, and the more the federal involvement has been the slower we have seen improvements in life expectancy in this country (with a few years in the last ten or so actually showing some declines) and the higher we have seen prices climb.


And you post to others about being taken seriously???
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 09, 2017, 02:47:19 pm

And you post to others about being taken seriously???

Would you care to refute the points I made, or just suggest that someone making them should not be taken seriously?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 09, 2017, 02:54:19 pm
You have a reading comprehension problem again.  I did not say that Trump was reasonable.  I said that the current bill being discussed in Congress was better than the Current Obamacare program, and had a chance to actually be implemented, as opposed to that which you advocate.

No problem with my comprehension of what you wrote, though it is possible you had a problem comprehending it, or difficulty in writing what you actually meant.

Here in succession are our relevant posts:
There is nothing about the current Trump/Ryan proposal which is good, nor are any of the suggestions you offered as desirable.
They are to reasonable people.  Those who vote for Libertarian candidates are not reasonable people.
You want to be taken seriously and at the same time are describing Trump as reasonable.
You have a reading comprehension problem again.  I did not say that Trump was reasonable.  I said that the current bill being discussed in Congress was better than the Current Obamacare program, and had a chance to actually be implemented, as opposed to that which you advocate.

Now, back up from that last post of yours.  You said the Trump/Ryan proposal is good and desirable to "reasonable people," and since Trump is proposing it and supporting it, that would suggest you are considering him one of those "reasonable people."

As to what has a chance of passage, it is increasingly looking as if the Trump/Ryan ObamaCareLite is what has no chance of passage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 09, 2017, 03:02:26 pm
Trump has had very little to do with the bill up til now.

However, I don't understand what you are trying to say.  Is it your position that if ANYONE that you consider to be unreasonable is in favor of something, then that something must be itself unreasonable, regardless of who else might be in favor of it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 09, 2017, 03:11:41 pm
Trump has had very little to do with the bill up til now.

However, I don't understand what you are trying to say.  Is it your position that if ANYONE that you consider to be unreasonable is in favor of something, then that something must be itself unreasonable, regardless of who else might be in favor of it?

No.  My position is simply that describing Trump as reasonable makes it hard for others to take you seriously.

Just as I posted before:
You want to be taken seriously and at the same time are describing Trump as reasonable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 09, 2017, 04:35:08 pm
So far, Trump has been much more reasonable than I had expected.  If you only pay attention to his rhetoric, he seems unreasonable, but so far, his actual performance has been quite reasonable. 

Cutting damaging regulations has been extremely reasonable.  His first travel ban was reasonable.  His replacement travel ban, in response to an unreasonable activist court was very reasonable.  His choices of most cabinet positions has been entirely reasonable.  His backing off and letting those qualified cabinet secretary has been very reasonable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 09, 2017, 04:47:08 pm
His position on ObamaCare.... not so much.

Of course that was also true during his vacilating positions on the issue during the campaign.

And unfortunately, what a president says, or tweets, also counts in determining how reasonable he is.  The Donald is not likely to ever qualify.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 09, 2017, 04:49:06 pm
Quote
The major improvements in healthcare and life expectancy came BEFORE the federal government got involved in health care, and the more the federal involvement has been the slower we have seen improvements in life expectancy in this country (with a few years in the last ten or so actually showing some declines) and the higher we have seen prices climb.


This isn't you making a point. It's you crapping your pants and posting how you feel about it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 09, 2017, 04:58:33 pm
His position on ObamaCare.... not so much.

Of course that was also true during his vacilating positions on the issue during the campaign.

And unfortunately, what a president says, or tweets, also counts in determining how reasonable he is.  The Donald is not likely to ever qualify.

His position on Obamacare is certainly not what I would want to see.  However, it is an improvement over Obamacare, and unlike your silly proposition, it is at least possible.  Letting the perfect be the enemy of the good is hardly reasonable.  It is, however, typical of why conservatives tend to fail, and libertarians almost universally fail.

Anyone who looks only at what he says and ignores what he does, is especially foolish.  Liberals have advanced their position greatly, using the tactic of saying one thing while doing another.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 09, 2017, 05:00:19 pm

This isn't you making a point. It's you crapping your pants and posting how you feel about it.

And which part of it do you dispute?

Try to find the data to show that any of it is wrong.

It is very difficult to find any objective measure which supports your contention that health care in this country has benefited from expanding the role of the federal government in it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 09, 2017, 05:17:22 pm
Quote
it is an improvement over Obamacare


The  new republicare or trumpcare plan will cost more, insure fewer people, provide less actual insurance and really just functions as another tax break for the rich.


I really hope they pass it and own it. So when the very people that elected the myth of trump die faster.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 09, 2017, 05:27:25 pm
Quote
And which part of it do you dispute?

All of it. Its just an asinine statement by a libertarian intent on denying reality.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 09, 2017, 05:33:51 pm
All of it. Its just an asinine statement by a libertarian intent on denying reality.

So now that you have chosen to dispute it, find the data which supports your position.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 09, 2017, 05:34:36 pm
And let's hear it for increasing the minimum wage..... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/03/09/genius-burger-flipping-robot-replaces-humans-first-day-work/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 09, 2017, 05:41:47 pm
Well addled libertarian why don't you take up one of the greatest discoveries affecting healthcare and longevity, Penicillin. 


And make the case for individuals acting alone and in their own greedy self interest in its discovery and development.


Should be fun.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 10, 2017, 04:15:02 pm
https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/cassidy-collins-introduce-comprehensive-obamacare-replacement-plan

This would be a better option than the House Republican plan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 10, 2017, 05:25:03 pm
https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/cassidy-collins-introduce-comprehensive-obamacare-replacement-plan

This would be a better option than the House Republican plan.

Here is what Collins boasts her plan would keep:  This proposal keeps essential consumer protections, including prohibitions on annual and lifetime limits, prohibition of pre-existing condition exclusions, and prohibitions on discrimination. It also preserves guaranteed issue and guaranteed renewability and allows young adults to stay on their parents’ plan until age 26, as well as preserving coverage for mental health and substance use disorders.

Now, before really beginning to dispute what is "good" or "bad" about the plan, could you perhaps set out the criteria you would use in determining whether a government measure in general is good or is bad?  What is it that you desire from government, and what is it that you do not want government to do?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 10, 2017, 05:29:11 pm
Well addled libertarian why don't you take up one of the greatest discoveries affecting healthcare and longevity, Penicillin. 
And make the case for individuals acting alone and in their own greedy self interest in its discovery and development.
Should be fun.

I am sure you believe you have a point in there somewhere, and that it might somehow address what I asked you to do, but for the life of me I can not see what that point my be or how your comment would in any way either:
A) support your contention that health care in this country has benefited from expanding the role of the federal government in it.  Or,
B) refute my statement that, "The major improvements in healthcare and life expectancy came BEFORE the federal government got involved in health care, and the more the federal involvement has been the slower we have seen improvements in life expectancy in this country (with a few years in the last ten or so actually showing some declines) and the higher we have seen prices climb."

Any chance you could clarify things?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 13, 2017, 08:21:08 pm
I am sure she is on her way to becoming a liberal icon.... https://www.texastribune.org/2017/03/12/rep-farrar-bill/

With proposal to penalize men for masturbating, legislator aims to shake up health debate
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, a Houston Democrat, filed House Bill 4260 Friday, which would fine men $100 for masturbating.

BY ALEX SAMUELSMARCH 12, 2017  6:20 PM

When it comes to issues related to health, state Rep. Jessica Farrar says that men should have to undergo the same “unnecessary” and “invasive” procedures that she says Texas women are subjected to under recently passed state laws.

That’s why the the Houston Democrat on Friday filed House Bill 4260, which would fine men $100 for masturbating and create a required booklet for men with medical information related to the benefits and concerns of a man seeking a vasectomy, a Vi-agra prescription or a colonoscopy. The bill would also let doctors invoke their "personal, moralistic, or religious beliefs" in refusing to perform an elective vasectomy or prescribe Vi-agra, among other proposed requirements in the bill.

While Farrar knows her "proposed satirical regulations" will not become law, she hoped the bill's filing would at least foster a deeper discussion about what should be a priority during session years.

“What I would like to see is this make people stop and think,” Farrar told The Texas Tribune. “Maybe my colleagues aren’t capable of that, but the people who voted for them, or the people that didn’t vote at all, I hope that it changes their mind and helps them to decide what the priorities are.”

Farrar said her bill, titled the “Man’s Right To Know Act,” takes the argument that “we’re looking at the sanctity of life,” a term that has already been highly debated this legislative session as several Texas Republicans have proposed legislation aimed at abortions.

"Protecting the life of unborn children should not be a controversial issue," state Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, said last month.

In proposing a fine for mastur-bation, Farrar says that if a man’s semen is not used to create a pregnancy, “then it’s a waste ... because that semen can be used  — and is to be used — for creating more human life.”

Farrar continued: “Men have to answer for their actions and so forth. So if there’s going to be an emission, it would have to be done in a hospital where the semen could be preserved for future pregnancies or it would be directly deposited into the va-gina of a woman.”

HB 4260 also calls for informed consent for elective vasectomies, colonoscopy procedures and Vi-agra prescriptions. Consent is informed only if at least 24 hours have passed since a man’s initial health care consultation for the procedure or prescription. The bill would also require a rectal exam before administering an elective vasectomy or colonoscopy procedure, or prescribing **** — an exam that the bill acknowledges is medically unnecessary.

An outspoken proponent of abortion rights, Farrar has fought against Texas legislation mandating a 24-hour waiting period between a required consultation and receiving an abortion, and another measure requiring women to have a transvaginal ultrasound while listening to the fetal heartbeat before undergoing the procedure, a measure Farrar says “messes with women’s heads.”

Farrar has criticized several anti-women’s health bills that have been filed this session, primarily a measure filed by state Rep. Byron Cook, R-Corsicana, that would require Texas hospitals to bury or cremate fetal remains and another by state Rep. Tony Tinderholt, R-Arlington, that would charge both abortion providers and women who receive an abortion with murder.

At a House State Affairs committee hearing Wednesday, Cook was challenged by Farrar and other House Democrats who questioned how his bill would impact women’s mental health and how much it would cost. Cook said his measure would create a registry of organizations that can help pay for burial or cremation of fetal remains. That way, the cost associated with burials would not fall on women, Cook said.

“Let me be clear: this bill has nothing to do with abortion procedures whatsoever. It has everything to do with ensuring the dignity of the deceased,” Cook said Wednesday. “We believe Texas can do better than this.”

Cook did not immediately respond to the Tribune’s request for comment Sunday.

In a statement, Tinderholt said Farrar lacked “a basic understanding of human biology.”

"I'm embarrassed for Representative Farrar,” Tinderholt said. “Her attempt to compare [HB 4260] to the abortion issue shows a lack of a basic understanding of human biology. I would recommend that she consider taking a high school biology class from a local public or charter school before filing another bill on the matter."

Farrar said the filing of her bill was necessary this session because of the bills she says directly targeted women’s ability to make choices about their own bodies and care. And she told the Tribune that the election of President Donald Trump will add additional hurdles and that the tone regarding women’s health has gotten worse from years past.

“Especially with Trump as president, I think these folks are on fire now. They’re off the chain now,” Farrar said. “If they can elect someone based on making racist remarks and derogatory remarks toward women and such, then we’ve just given them license to offend and license to be even worse than before.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 13, 2017, 08:54:05 pm
I have absolutely no problem with doctors that have a religious or moral problem with either vasectomys or **** refusing to perform or prescribe them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 13, 2017, 08:54:24 pm
I would love to know where you can get a same day screening colonoscopy or vasectomy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 13, 2017, 10:05:48 pm
I would love to know where you can get a same day screening colonoscopy or vasectomy.

I think the Lorena Bobbit clinic performed same day vasectomies.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 13, 2017, 11:05:11 pm
I believe that was a same day penectomy. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 14, 2017, 10:54:03 am
I believe that was a same day penectomy. 

Which is the opposite of an Adadictomy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 14, 2017, 10:58:05 am
"I'm not Inspector Gadget.  I don't believe people are using their microwave to spy on the Trump Campaign."

You know, it's never good when one of your top surrogates has to go on TV and say something like that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 14, 2017, 11:09:09 am
Which is the opposite of an Adadictomy.
Reminds me of the generic names for V iagra: dyxafloppin and styfacox
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 14, 2017, 01:54:51 pm
Okay jes, lets look at what clarity looks like.

Quote
A) support your contention that health care in this country has benefited from expanding the role of the federal government in it.  Or, B) refute my statement that, "The major improvements in healthcare and life expectancy came BEFORE the federal government got involved in health care, and the more the federal involvement has been the slower we have seen improvements in life expectancy in this country (with a few years in the last ten or so actually showing some declines) and the higher we have seen prices climb."

Lets look at price increases since 2001 from The Kaiser Family Foundation. Their data shows that premiums increased by 20 percent from 2011 to 2016, compared to 31 percent from 2006 to 2011 and 63 percent from 2001 to 2006.

Which of the three time segments would benefit people the most? Which one was a result of higher federal government involvement?

Or in the number of insured people, which leads to better healthcare and life expectancy.

About 23 million have gained insurance under the PPACA. The uninsured rate fell to 10.9 percent at the end of last year, according to Gallup, compared with 17.1 percent at the end of 2013. Analysis from the Commonwealth Fund concluded that the Affordable Care Act was responsible for a majority of the decline. The uninsured in America has fallen from 57 MILLION in 2009 to about 24 MILLION today.



Now how about you look at any of the major drug discoveries such as Penicillin or Salk's Polio vaccine and then claim some libertarian mountain man came down from on high to improve healthcare or life expectancy.




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 14, 2017, 02:10:10 pm
That is the employer market and the premiums, which other than mandating what is a qualified plan to avoid the Obamacare tax the federal government has little to do with.

Here is the link, it isn't as rosy as you make it out to be.

http://kff.org/health-costs/press-release/average-annual-workplace-family-health-premiums-rise-modest-3-to-18142-in-2016-more-workers-enroll-in-high-deductible-plans-with-savings-option-over-past-two-years/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 14, 2017, 05:08:47 pm
Okay jes, lets look at what clarity looks like.

Lets look at price increases since 2001 from The Kaiser Family Foundation. Their data shows that premiums increased by 20 percent from 2011 to 2016, compared to 31 percent from 2006 to 2011 and 63 percent from 2001 to 2006.

Which of the three time segments would benefit people the most? Which one was a result of higher federal government involvement?


Clarity?

You are referencing DATA from the Kaiser Family Foundation, not price increases from the Kaiser Family Foundation.  You also provide no link to allow checking your claim, or to see what it is that you are referencing as increasing.  You offer no "clarity."  You offer ambiguity, and do so without any reference to any period in which government intervention in the marketplace was already huge.  You also offer blocks of time for comparison which do not necessarily offer a meaningful measure.

Then you pose a question ("Which of the three time segments would benefit people the most?") which not only makes little sense, it offers nothing resembling an objective measure for improvement in life expectancy and totally ignores my point that the major improvements in life expectancy (a rather objective measure) came BEFORE major government involvement in health care and that there has actually most recently (after the massive increase in the role of government in health care in this country) been a DECLINE in life expectancy.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/us-life-expectancy-declines-for-the-first-time-since-1993/2016/12/07/7dcdc7b4-bc93-11e6-91ee-1adddfe36cbe_story.html?utm_term=.9081a411d4d5


Or in the number of insured people, which leads to better healthcare and life expectancy.

You have not only assumed facts not in evidence, you have assumed facts which I had already pointed out to you are directly at odds with observable reality.  See the link I offered above.



About 23 million have gained insurance under the PPACA. The uninsured rate fell to 10.9 percent at the end of last year, according to Gallup, compared with 17.1 percent at the end of 2013. Analysis from the Commonwealth Fund concluded that the Affordable Care Act was responsible for a majority of the decline. The uninsured in America has fallen from 57 MILLION in 2009 to about 24 MILLION today.

Not only is having insurance quite different from having, or getting, health care, neither having insurance nor having health care necessarily result in either greater health, or longer life.  In fact, as I have pointed out, as the number of people with health insurance has increased in this country, the rate of increase in life expectancy has fallen, and the most recent data (as referenced in the link provided about) shows that as ObamaCare brought an increase in the number of people WITH insurance, life expectancy declined.

DECLINED.



Now how about you look at any of the major drug discoveries such as Penicillin or Salk's Polio vaccine and then claim some libertarian mountain man came down from on high to improve healthcare or life expectancy.

The polio vaccine was the result of private, not public, funding, and penicillin was the result of the combined efforts of so many researchers over such a long period of time that any claim that it resulted from public funding or from a greater government role in health care is absurd.  (In fact the final steps in researching and producing it came from St Mary's Hospital in England in 1928.... when the hospital was a private, volunteer facility, before England nationalized health care.... and when the facility was operated on rather libertarian principles.)

So, once again, I ask you to either:
A) support your contention that health care in this country has benefited from expanding the role of the federal government in it.  Or,
B) refute my statement that, "The major improvements in healthcare and life expectancy came BEFORE the federal government got involved in health care, and the more the federal involvement has been the slower we have seen improvements in life expectancy in this country (with a few years in the last ten or so actually showing some declines) and the higher we have seen prices climb."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 14, 2017, 06:48:14 pm
(https://scontent.fsnc1-5.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/17342600_674328939405318_8405310792942523100_n.jpg?oh=8fef4807820c58c9a3d2cbccf75a6aeb&oe=59642AC0)

From the "We Are Capitalists" facebook page --

THE MISLEADING IMPLICATION: "20 million people gained healthcare due to Obamacare. This confirms that Obamacare was successfully addressing the underlying problems within the healthcare market."
THE REALITY: The majority of these people were simply placed on an expanded version of Medicaid, meaning, rather than addressing the issues plaguing the dysfunctional healthcare market, Obamacare did little to improve markets and simply pushed people into government-run healthcare, paid by taxpayers.
People keep touting, as though it were some sort of success story, that "more people have health insurance today due to Obamacare." This particular talking point seems astonishingly absurd, however, since Obamacare contained within it a MANDATE that FORCED people to get health insurance. Of course, if you put a gun to someone's head and tell them to buy something, they're more likely to buy it. This is akin to passing a law requiring everybody to buy one additional pair of shoes, then proclaiming yourself a business genius because you then saw shoe sales increase. If sales didn't increase because the product became more affordable or more desirable, however, it should be obvious that you didn't actually "fix" anything.
Let's take a look at the numbers:
• A 2015 estimate showed that, of the 20 million newly insured people, 14.5 million were put on Medicaid and CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Program). [a]
• Of this 14.5 million placed on tax-payer financed health insurance, about 3.4 million were previously eligible before Obamacare , but hadn't enrolled because they didn't need it. That means tax payers are paying the health insurance costs of 3.4 million people who knew they didn't actually need it but were forced to accept the hand-out anyways since Obamacare mandates they have insurance.
• Additionally, of the 20 million, 2.3 million were simply young adults (aged 19 to 25) who gained coverage between 2010 and 2013 as a result of Obamacare's provision which said they got to stay on their parent's insurance until they were 26. [c] People 19-25 rarely require extensive healthcare, however, which is why they rarely choose to buy it themselves. So while letting them stay on their parent's insurance may have been helpful in a handful of circumstances, it was mostly "fixing" a problem which did not exist. Matter of fact, the reason the ACA wanted younger people insured was precisely BECAUSE they don't get sick enough to cost money, and thus represent income for health insurance providers rather than costs.
• Lastly, in 2016, the numbers didn't look much better. Preliminary data indicated that net total enrollment increased by "2,535,020 individuals in the first three-quarters of 2016." [d] But of that 2.5 million increase, the net increase in PRIVATE (market) insurance was actually only "490,211 individuals." Again, Medicaid accounted for "81 percent of the incremental growth in enrollment in 2016." [d]
Thus, roughly 81% of the newly insured people in 2016 were simply given free insurance which everyone else funded. How is that a success? A successful reform would have seen people affording their own private health insurance - when and only IF they wanted it - because the product would have gotten better, cheaper, or both. Instead, since that wasn't accomplished, Obamacare simply pushed people into government-run insurance to pretend it had "solved" the problem. It was called "The AFFORDABLE Care Act," but a more appropriate name would have been "The Forced Welfare Expansion Act."
----------------------
Sources:
[a] https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/187551/ACA2010-2016.pdf

http://kff.org/health-reform/state-indicator/medicaid-expansion-enrollment/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D

[c] https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/187551/ACA2010-2016.pdf

[d] http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/house_budget_testimony-haislmaier.pdf
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 14, 2017, 08:16:21 pm
https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2017/01/02/learning-from-cbos-history-of-incorrect-obamacare-projections/#3e58d2b446a7
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 14, 2017, 08:20:03 pm
Included in the link above, but worth an independent look --

(https://blogs-images.forbes.com/theapothecary/files/2016/11/Economic-Recovery-Comparison-Graph-1.jpg?width=960)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest372 on March 14, 2017, 09:15:39 pm
Where is the corresponding red-dot CBO GDP Projections for the Reagan recovery?  This graph makes it look like the Reagan recovery exceeded expectations.  That might be the case, where's the evidence.

The differences in GDP growth from the 1980s and the 2010s are well known and undisputed.  After the Dot Com bubble this has been the case. It's apolitical.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 14, 2017, 10:53:59 pm
Where is the corresponding red-dot CBO GDP Projections for the Reagan recovery?  This graph makes it look like the Reagan recovery exceeded expectations.  That might be the case, where's the evidence.

The differences in GDP growth from the 1980s and the 2010s are well known and undisputed.  After the Dot Com bubble this has been the case. It's apolitical.

The Reagan recovery DID exceed the CBO's expectations, and the expectations of the media and of the left.  If you were around at the time, it would be hard not to remember that.  If you need evidence to support that point, you clearly either were not around at the time, or were paying no attention.

As to the differences in GDP growth between the 1980's and 2010's being "well known and undisputed," you need to pay more attention to political/economic debates.  Obama supporters tend to claim what is shown in the graph simply did not happen -- that the "Obama recovery" was remarkably strong and much better than the recovery in the 1980's.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest372 on March 15, 2017, 12:32:37 am
So in other words, I need to take your word for it? Sorry.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2017, 07:37:09 am
So in other words, I need to take your word for it? Sorry.

Go to a library, ask for their back issues of Time or Newsweek for the decade and read.  Sometimes when what you are doing is asking someone else to provide basic information for you, you need to put on your big boy pants and check things yourself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 15, 2017, 10:49:45 am
Other notable Reagan economic recovery facts.


Turned our nation from a creditor one to a debtor one.

Became net importer from exporter

Huge budget deficits became the norm
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 15, 2017, 11:42:58 am
Mr. Price argued that Medicaid, not the Affordable Care Act, is the leading driver of more coverage.

“Well, in fact the number of individuals who actually got coverage through the exchange who didn’t have coverage before, or who weren’t eligible for Medicaid before is relatively small. So we’ve turned things upside down completely for three or four or five million individuals.”

This is misleading. Out of the 20 million people who have gained insurance under the law, about 14.5 million received coverage through Medicaid, 3.3 million of whom were previously eligible.

A majority of these Medicaid enrollments, 11.2 million, occurred because of the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of the health care program. The health care law raised the eligibility cutoff to adults under 65 who made less than 138 percent of the poverty line.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 15, 2017, 12:15:59 pm
Are you saying that was a good thing?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 15, 2017, 01:41:03 pm
Are you saying that was a good thing?

otto has difficulty identifying anything which expands the size, scope and power of government, while simultaneously increasing dependence on government, as anything other than a "good thing."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 16, 2017, 05:19:19 pm
i realize what effective government is and what it takes to support it.

You guys want failure government which your conservative t-bag pols deliver.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 16, 2017, 05:20:27 pm
I also support English as the primary language.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 16, 2017, 05:23:08 pm
I support people at least being able to write somewhat coherent sentences in English.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 16, 2017, 06:01:20 pm
Good for you guys.


Both your high school English teachers must be proud of your ability to police this board.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 16, 2017, 08:01:36 pm
At least they write like they made it to high school.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 17, 2017, 07:59:45 pm
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/five-9th-circuit-judges-dish-out-ruthless-take-down-to-anti-trump-travel-ban-decision/

Five 9th Circuit Judges Dish Out Ruthless Take Down to Anti-Trump Travel Ban Decision
by Robert Barnes | 8:56 am, March 16th, 2017

In one of the most ruthless opinions issued of fellow panel judges, five judges from across the political spectrum in the Ninth Circuit went out of their way to issue an opinion about a dismissed appeal, to remind everybody just how embarrassingly bad the prior Ninth Circuit stay panel decision was on Trump’s travel ban. The five judges included the famed, and most respected intellectual amongst the Ninth Circuit, Alex Kozinski. The others included Jay Bybee, Consuelo Callahan, Carlos Bea and Sandra Ikuta.  Nobody other than the original panel came to the defense of the original panel decision, a less than promising start for future approvals of district court interference in Presidential immigration policy.

The language of the opinion was almost Scalian: the five Ninth Circuit judges noted their “obligation to correct” the “manifest” errors so bad that the “fundamental” errors “confound Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedent.” The district court questioned any judge issuing a “nationwide TRO” “without making findings of fact or conclusions of law” on the merits of the matter and conducting published opinions on seminal matters of national security based on “oral argument by phone involving four time zones.”

Aside from the procedural defects of the process, the five panel jurists then noted the deep legal problems with the panel’s order: its a-historicity, it’s abdication of precedent, and its usurpation of Constitutionally delegated Presidential rights. Mirroring much of the Boston judge’s decision, the five judges then detail and outline what other critics, skeptics and commentators have noted of the prior panel decision, including critical commentary from liberal law professors and scribes Jonathan Turley, Alan Dershowitz, and Jeffrey Toobin. The original 3-judge panel “neglected or overlooked critical cases by the Supreme Court and by our making clear that when we are reviewing decisions about who may be admitted into the United States, we must defer to the judgment of the political branches.” Of particular note, the five panel judges note how the 3-judge panel decision in “compounding its omission” of Supreme Court decisions and relevant sister Circuit precedents, also “missed all of our own cases” on the subject. The 5 judges conclude the panel engaged in a “clear misstatement of law” so bad it compelled “vacating” an opinion usually mooted by a dismissed case.

The five judges note some of the absurdities in the original 3-judge panel decision: claiming a consular officer must be deferred to more than the President of the United States; claiming first amendment rights exist for foreigners when the Supreme Court twice ruled otherwise; the claim that people here could claim a constitutional right for someone else to travel here, a decision specifically rejected by the Supreme Court just a year ago; and analogous Trumpian kind of immigration exclusion was uniformly approved by Circuit courts across the country in decisions issued between 2003 and 2008. As the five panelists conclude, the overwhelming precedent and legal history reveals a court simply cannot “apply ordinary constitutional standards to immigration policy.”

The five judges don’t quit there, though. They go on to identify other “obvious” errors. As the 5 judges note, the 3-judge panel hid from the most important statute, noting the 3-judge panel “regrettably” “never once mentioned” the most important statutory authority: section 1182(f) of title 8. Additionally, the 3-judge panel failed to even note the important Presidential power over immigration that all courts, Congress, and the Constitution expressly and explicitly gave him in all of its prior precedents.

Unsatisfied with that harsh condemnation, the five judges go even further. The judges concur with the Boston judge’s understanding of “rational basis” review, and condemn the Seattle judge’s and the 3-judge panel’s misapplication and elemental misunderstanding of what “rational basis” is. As the 5 judges note, “so long as there is one facially legitimate and bona fide reason for the President’s actions, our inquiry is at an end.” The issue is whether a reason is given, not whether a judge likes or agree with that reason. That means the executive order sufficed, and no further consideration of the reasons for Trump’s order were allowed.

The five judges still weren’t finished. Next up, the ludicrous suggestion the President had to produce classified and national security information to explain and explicate publicly all the empirical reasons he felt the order needed for safety rationales. As the five judges panel note, judges are not New York Times editors here to substitute for the President at their unelected will. A gavel is not a gun; a judge is not the commander in chief. And, again the 5 panel judges noted the Supreme Court specifically condemned just this kind of demand from judges — demanding classified information to second guess executively privileged decisions. As the court concluded, “the President does not have to come forward with supporting documentation to explain the basis for the Executive Order.”

The panel wraps up its ruthless condemnation of its fellow 3-panel decision by noting their errors are “many and obvious,” including the failure to even “apply the proper standard” of review. As the five judges wisely note: “we are judges, not Platonic guardians,” and the great losers of the 3-panel decision are those that believe elections matter and the rule of law deserves respect, as both were sacrificed for results-oriented judges who ignored the law and evaded the historical precedent to try to reverse the policy outcome of the recent election.

Robert Barnes is a California-based trial attorney whose practice focuses on Constitutional, criminal and civil rights law. You can follow him at @Barnes_Law
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 17, 2017, 08:57:30 pm
Ninth Circuit, Alex Kozinski appointed by Ron Reagan
Ninth Circuit, Jay Bybee appointed by George W Bush (famous for the signing of the torture memo)
Ninth Circuit, Consuelo Callahan appointed by George W Bush
Ninth Circuit, Carlos Bea appointed by George W Bush
Ninth Circuit, Sandra Segal Ikuta appointed by George W Bush



What political spectrum is the writer referring too?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 18, 2017, 10:07:47 am
Ninth Circuit, Alex Kozinski appointed by Ron Reagan
Ninth Circuit, Jay Bybee appointed by George W Bush (famous for the signing of the torture memo)
Ninth Circuit, Consuelo Callahan appointed by George W Bush
Ninth Circuit, Carlos Bea appointed by George W Bush
Ninth Circuit, Sandra Segal Ikuta appointed by George W Bush



What political spectrum is the writer referring too?

The political spectrum of the person who nominated them does not necessarily address the political views of the person nominated.  "Political spectrum" with reference to judges also often is used regarding the judge's judicial philosophy, and not the judge's support of one political party or another.

But if questioning the author's view as to what constitutes the "political spectrum," you are conceding more than I would expect from you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on March 24, 2017, 05:51:23 pm
So much winning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 24, 2017, 06:25:07 pm
Well the Tea Party conservatives ought to be happy.  Obamacare is still in place.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 24, 2017, 06:26:17 pm
John Boehner predicted a few weeks ago that Obamacare was going to stay largely intact when all was said and done because Republicans can't agree on anything when it comes to health care.  That prediction is looking pretty good right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on March 24, 2017, 06:31:12 pm
Some of the republicans not voting for TrumpCare did so because it did not go far enough towards replacing the Affordable Care Act.

Another group of republicans who voted no said it went too far by wiping out desirable parts of the ACA.

In other words, whatever changes were needed to “fix” the bill would have further increased the GOP “yes” votes on one side and increased the GOP “no” votes on the other side.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 24, 2017, 08:02:30 pm
Well the Tea Party conservatives ought to be happy.  Obamacare is still in place.

And without much effort it will truly implode, making it quite easy to flatly repeal it at that time.

This was the best rest possible at the moment from the current Congress and president.

Now, so long as Congress and Trump have the gonads to strip it of funding and enforcement and to allow it to die on the vine, there is a much better chance of getting complete repeal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on March 24, 2017, 09:31:12 pm
Sounds great.. Then more stupid poor people can die. I think if you don't make over 500K you should just die already, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on March 24, 2017, 09:39:18 pm
FYI,  If you strip any agency or policy of funding it tends to not do so well.  That's not letting it die on the vine... That's salting the earth. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 24, 2017, 09:43:25 pm
Sounds great.. Then more stupid poor people can die. I think if you don't make over 500K you should just die already, right?

Since the adoption of ObamaCare, the U.S. has seen the first decline in life expectancy in some time.

And since health insurance became fairly common in the U.S. in the mid-1960's the rapid improvement in life expectancy which had been seen before health insurance became common slowed considerably, with the rate of improvement continuing to slow as health insurance became more common.

Of course when facts don't fit the narrative, ignore the facts and continue to push the narrative.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 24, 2017, 09:44:50 pm
FYI,  If you strip any agency or policy of funding it tends to not do so well.  That's not letting it die on the vine... That's salting the earth. 

Forget salting the earth, pour Roundup on the damb thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on March 24, 2017, 11:03:02 pm
Facts? I'm going to assume we are not making our judgment on the success or failure of the ACA based on a 1 year increase in mortality rate? 1 year? Did you bail out of Epstein's plan after one year?  But to me the ACA is poor for this reason: What country that has universal coverage has worse mortality rates?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 25, 2017, 09:19:38 am
Facts? I'm going to assume we are not making our judgment on the success or failure of the ACA based on a 1 year increase in mortality rate? 1 year? Did you bail out of Epstein's plan after one year?  But to me the ACA is poor for this reason: What country that has universal coverage has worse mortality rates?

This doesn't mean what you think it means.  Mortality rates refer to specific diseases, not the average age that a population dies.

Take prostate cancer for incidence.  The US has a lower mortality than Canada, UK, etc...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2706483/

The US healthcare system is really great at treating and finding disease.  The US life expectancy suffers because of a bunch of other factors that are more under personal care- smoking, obesity, etc...

FYI,  If you strip any agency or policy of funding it tends to not do so well.  That's not letting it die on the vine... That's salting the earth. 

The ACA is going to self implode because enough healthy young people aren't buying insurance.  They aren't buying insurance because of the Democrats set up the penalty to get it passed. 

I saw a great quote and I can't quite remember it 100%, but it is basically Americans want socialized health care, they just don't want the rationing or taxes to actually make it economically viable.  Unless you are willing to pay 50% federal income taxes for everyone or live with death panels, you really don't socialized medicine in America. 

Yesterday I spent 1 hour after my clinic getting a 2 month old transferred to another hospital because he has a surgical condition that he needs corrected to be able to eat and live.  The hospital took the kid and I spent the time doing even though his parents don't have insurance and neither of us may get reimbursed if he doesn't get put on medicaid because it is the right thing to do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on March 25, 2017, 12:41:31 pm
My understanding was that life expectancy, death rate, mortality rates could be  synonymous..that it was context that defined their meaning. I will adjust that.. Thanks.

With regards to socialized medicine it's my understanding we already have it so people need to move on from that devil word "socialized." Otherwise, get off the roads.

Personal choices are a huge factor in life expectancy.. But that's an educational issue with some legislative avenues like banning Trans fat...  (though anti smoking ads and legislation put a huge dent in cigarette use) ...  So let's ignore outcomes and look at cost: if you have a single payer I would hope that you can eliminate some of the inefficiency regarding administrative cost.

If someone is so antigovernment that the thought is unbearable than cap private insurers profits to incentivise lower admin cost and executive pay.  You cap some utilities so it's not a new idea. There is no justification for admin costs being near double every other comparable nations.

One thing is clear: what we had before ACA is untenable regarding cost and outcome.  The answer to improving health care in the US isn't to wait for ACA to fail... Gloat... And then return to PRE-ACA.  I would argue the lack of a public option doomed the ACA. Add that and lets see what happens to health care costs.

Thank you for your work at the clinic.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 25, 2017, 03:43:31 pm
With regards to socialized medicine it's my understanding we already have it so people need to move on from that devil word "socialized." Otherwise, get off the roads.

Roads are a public good, not "socialized."  A socialized road would require to drive it only at a certain time and route.  Completely different.

If someone is so antigovernment that the thought is unbearable than cap private insurers profits to incentivise lower admin cost and executive pay.  You cap some utilities so it's not a new idea. There is no justification for admin costs being near double every other comparable nations.

This is a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of the cost of health care.  It sounds good to some, but doesn't bend the cost curve at all.  Insurance companies make a large amount of because they deal with large amounts of money.  The actual return on investment is small compared to say what Apple makes on an iPhone.

One thing is clear: what we had before ACA is untenable regarding cost and outcome.  The answer to improving health care in the US isn't to wait for ACA to fail... Gloat... And then return to PRE-ACA.  I would argue the lack of a public option doomed the ACA. Add that and lets see what happens to health care costs.

The cost is untenable before or after ACA.  The lack of a public option doesn't matter.  Young healthy people would still have to buy insurance and the penalty was set low for political reasons, because Democrats couldn't been seen as taxing the middle class.  Medicare currently insurances 15% of the population and is funded with 2.9% on all earned income.  It covers 80% of doctor visits and hospitals.  That 2.9% tax is unable to fund medicare as is.  A public option that covers are a greater percentage of the population and assuming a higher percentage of costs and prescription coverage would require a vast tax increase on everyone.  It would also require rationing, because as it is know our tax dollars will be able to fund only Medicare/Medicaid/SS and interest on the deficit.  Everything else will require borrowing money.  That was true before ACA and after.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 25, 2017, 04:17:47 pm
The insurance companies are already capped under ACA. They have a 80/20 spread that forces them to pay 80 cents in claims for every dollar received. That 20% isn't profut, that inludes all overhead including an average 4% paid to brokers. Then you have marketing, product development, research, customer service, actuarial departments, legal and so forth.  Taking away their "massive" profits solves nothing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 25, 2017, 05:36:49 pm
In the effort of consistency. One fails miserability.

Quote
And without much effort it will truly implode, making it quite easy to flatly repeal it at that time.

This was the best rest possible at the moment from the current Congress and president.

Now, so long as Congress and Trump have the gonads to strip it of funding and enforcement and to allow it to die on the vine, there is a much better chance of getting complete repeal.

So without effort it fails, but that effort requires congress to strip it of funding and enforcement?

Say legally addled individual, has that imploding happened in Massachusetts?


Move on, your libertarian BS is too exposed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 26, 2017, 09:19:47 am
Facts? I'm going to assume we are not making our judgment on the success or failure of the ACA based on a 1 year increase in mortality rate? 1 year? Did you bail out of Epstein's plan after one year?  But to me the ACA is poor for this reason: What country that has universal coverage has worse mortality rates?

I did not limit my argument to a one year decrease in life expectancy, but also pointed out that the rapid improvement in life expectancy came in the roughly 60 years before health insurance became common in this country, and that the improvement has slowed considerably with the expansion of health insurance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 26, 2017, 09:24:28 am
In the effort of consistency. One fails miserability.

So without effort it fails, but that effort requires congress to strip it of funding and enforcement?


Please point to where I wrote that "without effort it fails."  In fact, though funding something should be what takes effort, instead of simply NOT funding something, I wrote that, " so long as Congress and Trump have the gonads to strip it of funding and enforcement and to allow it to die on the vine."

I wrote that could be done without MUCH effort, not without ANY effort.  Gonads will be required.  Not much effort will be needed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 26, 2017, 09:38:01 am
With regards to socialized medicine it's my understanding we already have it so people need to move on from that devil word "socialized." Otherwise, get off the roads.

Let me see if I can follow the logic here -- because I oppose socializing medicine, I should not drive on the roads?

PLEASE explain the logic in that because I see none.

To point out just one problem with it, if I opposed a government plan to simply give everyone $10,000, that would not mean it would make any sense for me not to take the $10,000 giveaway with my name on it.

If someone is so antigovernment that the thought is unbearable than cap private insurers profits to incentivise lower admin cost and executive pay.  You cap some utilities so it's not a new idea. There is no justification for admin costs being near double every other comparable nations.

What there is no justification in thinking is that you or any collective of other like-minded folks can do close to as good a job of making economic decisions than those decisions produced by a free market.  Additionally, your reference to capping utilities does not exactly support your overall position since utility rates tend to be significantly lower in areas where utility rates (and profits) are not regulated.

Regulating, limiting, or capping profit or profit percentages is one of the worst ideas to come along in the history of government intervention in the marketplace... and the experience with regulated utilities illustrate this very well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on April 11, 2017, 10:57:28 pm
Looks like Dusty will have a candidate he'll be proud to get behind in 2018.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2703101-wwe-superstar-kane-announces-hes-running-for-mayor-of-knox-county-tennessee?utm_source=cnn.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2703101-wwe-superstar-kane-announces-hes-running-for-mayor-of-knox-county-tennessee?utm_source=cnn.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 12, 2017, 08:45:28 pm
Addled Teaching Assistant


What did Enron teach us about your type of free market? Public utilities in California during the Enron libertarian market fared just fine.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 12, 2017, 08:49:20 pm
Healthcare in America prior to the enactment of the PPACA was a largely unregulated for profit business and how does the cost of healthcare in America compare to other industrial nations?


Or the cost of pharmaceuticals?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 12, 2017, 09:30:16 pm
Healthcare in America prior to the enactment of the PPACA was a largely unregulated for profit business and how does the cost of healthcare in America compare to other industrial nations?


Or the cost of pharmaceuticals?


My goc. This may be the dumbest thing I have ever read.

HHS
FDA
DEA
JACHO
State Medical Boards
State Insurance Commissioners

That's just off the top of my head
State/Local/Federal spending accounted for 46% of all healthcare spending in the US.

Hell if you want to see how regulated healthcare is here is a 90 page on documentation and billing guildelines

https://www.cms.gov/Outreach-and-Education/Medicare-Learning-Network-MLN/MLNProducts/Downloads/eval-mgmt-serv-guide-ICN006764.pdf

And miss dot one i and the Feds will send in a company to audit you and they will bring the pain.





Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 13, 2017, 06:07:01 pm
My goc. This may be the dumbest thing I have ever read.

You obviously do not read otto's posts often.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 13, 2017, 11:03:14 pm
Okay cubbiebird

Just how did the  FDA regulate healthcare prior to 2010?

Here's a primer on what the FDA does for a start.
"The FDA is the government agency responsible for reviewing, approving and regulating medical products, including pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices. It also regulates various other products, including food, cosmetics, veterinary drugs, radiation-emitting products, biological products and tobacco."

Or the DEA?


How did the HHS regulate care offered by HMO'S?


Also please source the 46% number. So I can laugh at you.


You can start there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 14, 2017, 02:50:03 am
See?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 14, 2017, 01:19:25 pm
Okay cubbiebird

Just how did the  FDA regulate healthcare prior to 2010?

Here's a primer on what the FDA does for a start.
"The FDA is the government agency responsible for reviewing, approving and regulating medical products, including pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices. It also regulates various other products, including food, cosmetics, veterinary drugs, radiation-emitting products, biological products and tobacco."

Approving and regulating medical products, including pharmaceutical drug and medical devices.  That seems pretty straight forward, unless you don't think medicine and medical devices have anything to do with medicine.  They did that prior to ACA as well.

Quote from: otto105 link=topic=96.msg307471#msg3\
Or the DEA?
[/quote

The DEA regulates physician prescribing of controlled substances.  Every provider sends them a check every couple years to have a DEA number.  If you do bad things with that number they have the power to arrest you. 


How did the HHS regulate care offered by HMO'S?


Also please source the 46% number. So I can laugh at you.

CMS sets the codes that providers can bill for and those codes are what is adopted by insurance companies.  Direct regulations of insurance occurs at the state level  by state insurance commissioners.

The 46% number comes from CMS.

https://www.cms.gov/research-statistics-data-and-systems/statistics-trends-and-reports/nationalhealthexpenddata/downloads/highlights.pdf

Feds 29%, State and Local Government 17%.  The Federal government is the largest spender of healthcare dollars.

Try to do better.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 14, 2017, 01:56:19 pm
Ignorance can be amusing.  Little Homo is an unending source of amusement. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 16, 2017, 08:02:34 pm
Cubbiebird
Quote
Approving and regulating medical products, including pharmaceutical drug and medical devices.  That seems pretty straight forward, unless you don't think medicine and medical devices have anything to do with medicine.  They did that prior to ACA as well.

The FDA assuring the medical equipment functions properly and that drugs function as tested is not what jes was referring too when he posted his libertarian crap in regard to private verses public healthcare spending.

Also if the DEA was regulating physician prescribing of controlled substances, most of trump country would be jail for violating them.

I really again don't the CMS coding of healthcare provided for payment is regulating healthcare performed.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 17, 2017, 08:02:05 am
"I really again don't the CMS coding of healthcare provided for payment is regulating healthcare performed. "

Is there a "Little Homo" translator in the house?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 17, 2017, 05:02:14 pm
Cubbiebird
The FDA assuring the medical equipment functions properly and that drugs function as tested is not what jes was referring too when he posted his libertarian crap in regard to private verses public healthcare spending.


But that point is precisely in response to what YOU asked CUBluejays in this post:
Okay cubbiebird

Just how did the  FDA regulate healthcare prior to 2010?

So, just to recap, YOU ask a question, CUBluejays answers that question directly and succinctly.... and then you complain that the answer he provided was not "is not what jes was referring to."  Of course the fact he was not addressing what I was referring to might be a result of his responding to YOUR post and YOUR question, not mine.

And your reference to me having "posted (my) libertarian crap in regard to private verses public healthcare spending," would appear to be in response to this:
the rapid improvement in life expectancy came in the roughly 60 years before health insurance became common in this country, and that the improvement has slowed considerably with the expansion of health insurance.

The most interesting part of this may be the fact that while you try to brand my position as "libertarian crap," I don't recall you at any time posting any data which would refute it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 17, 2017, 06:31:10 pm
Come on, Jes.  Has Little Homo ever posted any data that refuted anything?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 17, 2017, 06:41:49 pm
Come on, Jes.  Has Little Homo ever posted any data that refuted anything?

I was actually surprised when I realized the point I made (and which otto has not so much as tried to refute), but if you really want a meaningful measure of the value of increased healthcare spending on the quality of healthcare, it would seem that life expectancy would be a very important factor in any serious measure... and that data argues rather forcefully that increasing government spending on healthcare rather clearly has a perverse effect on the quality of care.  Libertarian that I am, even I did not really expect that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 17, 2017, 06:49:29 pm
So addled where does that put Cuba?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 17, 2017, 07:36:09 pm
So addled where does that put Cuba?

Same place as it always was -- so much smaller than the U.S. as to be of much less statistical significance, and a nation in which giving credence to official life expectancy figures since 1960 requires one to first accept the Castro regime as a source of reliable data.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 17, 2017, 07:38:39 pm
Same place as it always was -- so much smaller than the U.S. as t be of much less statistical significance, and a nation in which giving credence to official life expectancy figures since 1960 requires one to first accept the Castro regime as a source of reliable data.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14497
 With a 1990 cutoff of aid from the Soviet Union, there has been a huge decline in living standards.  Sanitation, housing, food and critical vitamin shortages have all become far worse.

Nevertheless, the question remains: How do you have a long life expectancy with increasingly deteriorating conditions?  You change the way you count, as Cuba has done, says IBD:

If a newborn doesn't live more than 24 hours, it often doesn't show up in infant mortality statistics.
The figure is depressed even further by abortion; at seven in 10 pregnancies, Cuba's abortion rate is Latin America's highest.
Cuba also has one of the world's highest suicide rates, which also doesn't show up in expectancy data.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 17, 2017, 07:43:21 pm
Come on, Jes.  Has Little Homo ever posted any data that refuted anything?

I've seen this at least 4 times now.  Is this autocorrect, or is this on purpose? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 17, 2017, 07:48:40 pm
But when you look more closely at Cuba, even if you accept at face value the government data.... it supports my point even more vividly than does the United States life expectancy figures -- in 1900, the average life expectancy in Cuba was only 32.  In 1960, before the wonderful benefits of the glorious revolution would have had a chance to produce fruit for life expectancy, 60 years of unregulated, corrupt free market capitalism had seen life expectancy increase to 64.  http://lasa.international.pitt.edu/Lasa2003/McGuireJames.pdf at page 56

Enjoy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 17, 2017, 07:55:32 pm
I was wondering the same thing, br.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 17, 2017, 08:17:29 pm
I've seen this at least 4 times now.  Is this autocorrect, or is this on purpose?

It's on purpose. DaveP just wants to remind the world what a good christian he is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 17, 2017, 08:24:55 pm
It's on purpose. DaveP just wants to remind the world what a good christian he is.

Strange.  i don't recall davep even once making such a claim, and that is during 19 years now of reading his posts.  What I do remember more times than I can count, however, is you attacking Christianity, and anyone professing to be a Christian, and anyone you thought likely was a Christian, just about anytime the opportunity presented itself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 17, 2017, 08:46:56 pm
jes

The question was about life expectancy and the Country of Cuba beats your libertarian concept government.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 17, 2017, 09:07:48 pm
jes
The question was about life expectancy and the Country of Cuba beats your libertarian concept government.

Find the "question" you reference.

My original point was that if you use the most meaningful measure of whether health care has improved or worsened (that measure being life expetancy), what you see in the US is that life expectancy improved much more rapidly in the 65 years before the federal government got involved in the funding an delivery of health care in a big way than in the 52 years since.  You offered Cuba as the typical socialist example of the miracle of socialism for health care.  I challenged the validity of the data coming from Cuba, but then pointed out (with a link to the data, including the page number where you find the chart), that just as with the United States, when using life expectancy as the measure, the quality of health care improved much more BEFORE the government socialized health care than since.

In other words, your example of Cuba did not refute my point; it strongly supported it.

Enjoy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 17, 2017, 10:25:50 pm
I've seen this at least 4 times now.  Is this autocorrect, or is this on purpose? 

Otto likes to give everyone demeaning nicknames, rather than debate them with respect, so I chose one for him at random.  I have told him that I will immediately stop it if he does, but he likes his game too much.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 18, 2017, 07:14:51 am
Why is being a homo demeaning?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 18, 2017, 09:18:14 am
It is not otto who is demeaned by that nickname.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 18, 2017, 09:58:26 am
Otto likes to give everyone demeaning nicknames, rather than debate them with respect, so I chose one for him at random.  I have told him that I will immediately stop it if he does, but he likes his game too much.
If anyone believes that I'll give them a great deal on some ocean front property in southern Illinois.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dihard on April 18, 2017, 10:34:41 am
I've seen this at least 4 times now.  Is this autocorrect, or is this on purpose?

Thank you for bringing that up. It has been on my mind and upsetting me since I read it again the other day. (I actually stopped reading this thread months ago because of it.)

Regardless of Dave's history with Otto, and whatever nicknames Otto may have bestowed upon others, I find the use of Little Homo to be incredibly offensive. I can't imagine anyone would be OK with Little N-word or Little **** or something similar. Not that the word Homo, or what it means, is anything offensive or insulting. But clearly the way dave is using it, it is meant to be so.

Why is this allowed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 18, 2017, 10:38:00 am
Funny, when Cletus comes here attacking my beliefs and celebrating the death of the leader of my faith you were all silent, yet you are all offended by Dave's remark. I remember growing up using the term gay and homo as a slur toward my friends, but I don't use it now and think Dave should find another way to make his point. However, I do find many of you hypocrites when you get all up in arms about it when you aren't equally upset by the crap being spewed by people who agree with you politically. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 18, 2017, 11:29:11 am
Why is being a homo demeaning?

It is not otto who is demeaned by that nickname.

Actually, otto's posts over the years have made clear that despite professing to be liberal, he considers "gay" and "homo" to be slurs, as well as "little" and considers those for whom such terms fit to be somehow inferior to others.  He has also shown that he feels the same towards women.

Thank you for bringing that up. It has been on my mind and upsetting me since I read it again the other day. (I actually stopped reading this thread months ago because of it.)

Regardless of Dave's history with Otto, and whatever nicknames Otto may have bestowed upon others, I find the use of Little Homo to be incredibly offensive. I can't imagine anyone would be OK with Little N-word or Little **** or something similar. Not that the word Homo, or what it means, is anything offensive or insulting. But clearly the way dave is using it, it is meant to be so.

Why is this allowed?

Not being one of the administrators here, I don't really know why they allow it, or why they allow otto to make efforts at insulting other posters with nearly every post (his last post to me, addressing me by my actual name is the first I recall that in more than six years), but would guess it is either because they are not personally offended by the use of the slur (which otto himself used toward others before davep's first use of it), or because they share my belief that attempting to censor others, ever when someone such as davep is being deliberately insulting and adding nothing whatsoever to the exchange in the process, would not only be ineffective, it would be far worse than any harm coming from the insult.

By the way, I have at least twice in the past encouraged davep, and others, not to use such nicknames for otto, and to resist joining his practice.

My urgings appear to have absolutely no effect over anyone.

Funny, when Cletus comes here attacking my beliefs and celebrating the death of the leader of my faith you were all silent, yet you are all offended by Dave's remark. I remember growing up using the term gay and homo as a slur toward my friends, but I don't use it now and think Dave should find another way to make his point. However, I do find many of you hypocrites when you get all up in arms about it when you aren't equally upset by the crap being spewed by people who agree with you politically.

Cletus has been criticized roundly and repeatedly by many here, myself included -- http://bbf.createaforum.com/general-discussion/politics-religion-etc/?message=307672

I'm not really sure what you are talking about with him, but it appears your memory my be faulty.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 18, 2017, 11:48:09 am
Cubbiebird
The FDA assuring the medical equipment functions properly and that drugs function as tested is not what jes was referring too when he posted his libertarian crap in regard to private verses public healthcare spending.

Also if the DEA was regulating physician prescribing of controlled substances, most of trump country would be jail for violating them.

I really again don't the CMS coding of healthcare provided for payment is regulating healthcare performed.
Here is a 102 page PDF of DEA cases against doctors....

https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/crim_admin_actions/doctors_criminal_cases.pdf

If you were the least bit curious I'd waste my time educating you further on this, but it frankly isn't worth my time.  I think it would be much better for you to just admit you have zero clue what your talking about.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 18, 2017, 11:54:27 am
If you were the least bit curious I'd waste my time educating you further on this, but it frankly isn't worth my time.  I think it would be much better for you to just admit you have zero clue what your talking about.

If otto limited his posts to matters on which he had some clue of what he was talking about, we would never see any posts from him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 18, 2017, 12:34:57 pm
Fascinating discussion.  I agree with most ideas posted, both pro and con.

Dave, you’re my friend, but I’ve been meaning to email you often that I didn’t think the homo reference was appropriate.  I’m sure you could have found some other “demeaning” term, as you put it.

But I have another question, because I often get confused and would like to get educated.

Does anyone else here watch “Big Bang Theory”?  My wife and I love it.  I think some of the best writers are on that show and the characters deliver those lines with great inflection and timing.  My favorite actor is Sheldon (Jim Parsons).  Staying in character for 10 seasons is an acting triumph.  Most people know that Parsons is gay, so I’m floored sometimes by some of dialogue or comedic situations the characters are put in.  Hollywood is one of the biggest supporters of gay rights and promotion of honesty within the gay community, so why is the gay lifestyle the source of some of the biggest laughs on BBT?  When Leonard’s mother suggests to Howard and Raj that hey harbor homosexual desire for one another, they completely flip out (to the roar of laughter from the audience.)  When Raj invites Stuart to move in with him for a while, someone asks them how it’s going, and Raj responds, “Great.  There was a hole in my life and there was a hole in Stuart’s life, so now we are filling each others holes.”  Great laughter as Stuart’s eyebrows shoot up in denial.  I don’t get it.  If being gay is not demeaning, why does Hollywood continue to make it (no pun intended) the butt of jokes?  And why does Parsons tolerate the idea that gay ridicule is okay?  Confuses me.

This happens on other shows, too.  What is the reaction when a straight character in a comedy or drama is asked if they’re gay?  Pandemonium.  Denial.  Holy crap!

On “Modern Family,” we have two characters who are gay.  One, in real life is gay, the other is not.  Yet the one who is not plays his role in such an effeminate stereotypical manner that it would offend me if I were gay.  Again, I’m old and misguided.  Help me understand.

In English murder mysteries, my wife and I have both noticed that the butler no longer did it.  The gay guy did it.  And we may find out at the end that he’s gay and that’s WHY he did it.  Head scratchers.
I’m only saying that the one stage upon which being gay should be free of guffaws actually is the most abusive.

Fair question: do I laugh when the gay jokes are made?  Yes.   And I apologize.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on April 18, 2017, 01:22:45 pm
When the intent is to cause harm, it's not cool.

That's not the only time it's not cool, of course, but that's the time when it's least cool.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 18, 2017, 02:01:54 pm
When the intent is to cause harm, it's not cool.

That's not the only time it's not cool, of course, but that's the time when it's least cool.
Good point, DMF.  But whether it's religion, sexual orientation, race, sex, or station in life, isn't any ridicule harmful if overdone?  I remember some studies from 25 years ago or so that the situation comedies showing most dads as being idiots was eroding respect for fathers.  Don't know if there was ever a follow up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 18, 2017, 02:58:50 pm
It isn't just the situation comedies. Just watch any commercial that depicts men and women in it. Men are almost universally shown as bumbling idiots while the wiser women or children set them straight. I always make a mental note on the most egregious and vow not to patronize their business. In some cases I even take the time to write and tell them why. I don't know why they want to alienate half of the adults in America, but apparently it works, or they'd quit doing it. Or perhaps not. I just read an article about the producer's of ABC's Designated Survivor musing about why their ratings have tanked. I watched the show in the beginning and enjoyed it, then they started slanting leftwards and touting the liberal agenda more and more to the point I stopped, just like all of my other conservative friends. What was the producer's reasoning for the their bad ratings? Politics fatigue. Some day Hollywood is going to realize that only half of the country agrees with them. It would be an interesting experiment to have an overtly conservative political drama on a major network once and see what the ratings looked like. Anyway, just rambling now, but I do wonder how it would do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 18, 2017, 03:40:26 pm
Fascinating discussion.  I agree with most ideas posted, both pro and con.

Dave, you’re my friend, but I’ve been meaning to email you often that I didn’t think the homo reference was appropriate.  I’m sure you could have found some other “demeaning” term, as you put it.

I agree whole-heartedly that davep should drop the "little homo" epithet.... but NOT because the phrase is offensive to gays (though I do understand how it might be insulting to gays to try to lump otto in with them), but because it is a continuing personal attack.... just as is seen in nearly any post otto ever types.

Coming down on davep for his epithet for otto, while NOT coming down on otto for doing the same thing with nearly everyone is about like only calling the second foul in basketball and letting anyone get away with charges, tripping, elbowing, or openly punching someone else.... so long as their behavior is the first foul.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 18, 2017, 03:58:58 pm
Here is a small assortment of the first lines of a few of otto's posts, each time using a "nickname" which would certainly appear to have been caclulated to insult or offend.

As I have said, I with davep and others would stop doing the same when directing posts at otto, but ONLY focusing on davep's use of "little homo" and ignoring what otto himself routinely does which essentially invites the kind of epithet seen from davep is ignoring the first foul.


Addled.....
some warehouse guy posts a fox "news" link.
barelydave
IsFullOfIt
Happy Warehouse Guy
IsFullOfIt
IsFullOfIt
Addled Teaching Assistant
Happy warehouse guy
unbiased what addled assistant
So addled where does that put Cuba?
addled idiot
Well unshavenbear
ATTENTION RELIGOUS FANATIC!!!
Some idiot posts
same idiot comes back in with...
Another idiot posted...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 18, 2017, 05:43:38 pm
jes

I would not assume that you know me or what being a "Liberal" is.

Quote
Actually, otto's posts over the years have made clear that despite professing to be liberal, he considers "gay" and "homo" to be slurs, as well as "little" and considers those for whom such terms fit to be somehow inferior to others.  He has also shown that he feels the same towards women.

I live in Madison Wisconsin. I don't use "gay" or "homo" as slurs. Also, I did not marry a Pat Nixon, but rather a Hillary Clinton. Your attempt to cast shade on me is misguided.

And for the record, I consider you always having to be right in every argument or discussion on these boards tediously boring. Hence the many nicknames such as fatuous legal aid, addled teaching assistant, unemployed lawyer et al....


Additionally, the level of reactionary discourse on the bear board invites derision and scorn. Discourse such as Planned Parenthood murders children and sells their body parts for profit as a fact.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 18, 2017, 05:47:39 pm
Quote
It isn't just the situation comedies. Just watch any commercial that depicts men and women in it. Men are almost universally shown as bumbling idiots while the wiser women or children set them straight. I always make a mental note on the most egregious and vow not to patronize their business. In some cases I even take the time to write and tell them why. I don't know why they want to alienate half of the adults in America, but apparently it works, or they'd quit doing it. Or perhaps not. I just read an article about the producer's of ABC's Designated Survivor musing about why their ratings have tanked. I watched the show in the beginning and enjoyed it, then they started slanting leftwards and touting the liberal agenda more and more to the point I stopped, just like all of my other conservative friends. What was the producer's reasoning for the their bad ratings? Politics fatigue. Some day Hollywood is going to realize that only half of the country agrees with them. It would be an interesting experiment to have an overtly conservative political drama on a major network once and see what the ratings looked like. Anyway, just rambling now, but I do wonder how it would do.

We do, but bill o'reilly went on an extended vacation and sean handity demographic only includes older white rural viewers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 18, 2017, 11:40:18 pm
We do, but bill o'reilly went on an extended vacation and sean handity demographic only includes older white rural viewers.

Believe it or not, neither O'Reilly nor Hannity are "dramas."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 18, 2017, 11:55:21 pm
I don't use "gay" or "homo" as slurs.

You have, and where you live indicates nothing beyond where your mail is delivered.  Your use of "tea-baggers" as a slur, when the term is a reference to a sexual practice primarily common between gay men, is but one example of your use of sexual preference as a slur, something I have also pointed out before.

Also, I did not marry a Pat Nixon, but rather a Hillary Clinton.

Who you married is not relevant to the point I made that you have in the past used a person's sexual preference (specifically being gay), their physical size (specifically being small), and their gender (specifically being female), as insults.

I have even pointed out your hypocrisy in this in the past.

Additionally, I did not say you were or were not a liberal.  I simply pointed out that you have used those slurs "despite professing to be liberal," a practice which is quite common among those professing to be liberal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on April 19, 2017, 12:13:23 pm
You don't have to be gay to "tea bag" someone Jes.

You should give it a try.

You may enjoy it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 19, 2017, 02:43:00 pm
You don't have to be gay to "tea bag" someone Jes.
You should give it a try.
You may enjoy it.

Nor did I either say you had to be gay to tea bag someone or that I am not personally familiar with it.  I wrote, "the term is a reference to a sexual practice primarily common between gay men."  When otto began using the phrase he even expressly commented on how he felt it was appropriate for those who supported the Tea Party movement BECAUSE tea bagging was a sexual practice primarily common between gay men, AND he felt that it was insulting to call someone a tea bagger.

As I have said, I don't like seeing davep use his "Little Homo" nickname for otto, nor do I like seeing others come up with their own insulting nicknames for otto, but he really has brought such nicknames on himself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 19, 2017, 08:45:26 pm
jes

Those professing to be Liberals? You know them enough to make blanket assertions?

Sure.


This after you have made a big case out of the Tea-bag label? I find your protests to be lacking. Only those on the bear board who find gay slurs to be demeaning cast them on others. Which all you conservatives do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 19, 2017, 09:06:14 pm
jes
Those professing to be Liberals? You know them enough to make blanket assertions?
Sure.
This after you have made a big case out of the Tea-bag label? I find your protests to be lacking. Only those on the bear board who find gay slurs to be demeaning cast them on others. Which all you conservatives do.

The specific slur I was referencing was "tea baggers," and, yes, those professing to be liberals commonly use the slur.  It's not as if you were in any way original to start using it.  Obama was using it as long ago as 2010: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/conservatives-upset-with-obamas-reference-to-tea-baggers/

As to your contention that "all you conservatives do" use gay slurs, the fact that you wrote "you conservatives" makes clear that you once again are incorrectly calling me "conservative," but we can set that issue to the side for the moment.  I am more interested in when it is you think I have "cast.... gay slurs... on others."  I would challenge you to combing the archives and finding such an example, but I will be content with you even simply referencing an example.  If you can't, then your claim is quite clearly bull.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 19, 2017, 09:18:21 pm
I wonder how many images of tea-naggers with tea bags hanging from their hats one could find on the web....


You think that would be easy for me Addled?


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 19, 2017, 09:20:50 pm
And yes you're a conservative libertarian. It's something that you have made abundantly clear.


Don't run from it. You're from Tennessee. I'm happy that you didn't have to eat dirt and drink moonshine growing up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 20, 2017, 07:45:43 am
I wonder how many images of tea-naggers with tea bags hanging from their hats one could find on the web....
You think that would be easy for me Addled?

I notice you do not even begin to deny my point that you admitted using the phrase as an insult because of of the association the phrase had with homosexuality.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 20, 2017, 07:50:56 am
And yes you're a conservative libertarian. It's something that you have made abundantly clear.
Don't run from it. You're from Tennessee. I'm happy that you didn't have to eat dirt and drink moonshine growing up.

How long does it take you to catch onto things?

I am FROM Tennessee the same as I am FROM New York, San Diego, Tucson, Ann Arbor, Missouri, Chicago, Georgia, New Mexico, Texas, Arkansas and Kentucky.   I grew up in Indiana, lived there until age 23 and moved back twice.  Tennessee was four states back.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 20, 2017, 07:52:25 pm
I don't consider the term "homosexual" to be demeaning.  But for those interested, it started years ago when Otto started referring to the tea party as the Teabaggers.  In the context, it was clear that he considered it to be a demeaning term, and since he refused to stop, I chose to use his tactics.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 20, 2017, 08:28:26 pm
I thought it was merely a random choice of words.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 21, 2017, 04:15:38 pm
(https://usmc1302.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/tea20bag20hat.jpg)


(http://s4.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20110211&t=2&i=334498511&w=780&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&sq=&r=2011-02-11T191658Z_01_BTRE71A1HKI00_RTROPTP_0_USA-POLITICS)


(http://opinionhead.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/tea-party-hat-tea-bag-300x201.jpg)


Teabaggers!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 21, 2017, 06:00:34 pm
I notice that you STILL are not denying that when you followed Obama's lead in using the term you acknowledged here that the reason you were using the term was because of the link the name and activity had to gay sex practices and that you felt it was a good insult to use for conservatives supporting the Tea Party movement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 21, 2017, 08:43:23 pm
I think the term describes quite fully what you see in the pictures.


And while davep feels that term homosexual is not demeaning, he feels very different when it may be associated with him. Maybe he is sexually insecure?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on April 22, 2017, 05:43:14 am
I think the term describes quite fully what you see in the pictures.
And while davep feels that term homosexual is not demeaning, he feels very different when it may be associated with him. Maybe he is sexually insecure?

What does or doesn't describe what is in the pictures has never been the question.  The issue, which you are trying to dodge, is your repeated, continued, and admitted use of the term because of the link the name and activity had to gay sex practices and that you felt it was a good insult to use for conservatives supporting the Tea Party movement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on May 07, 2017, 06:39:05 pm
I actually feel refreshed that the newbie pol Marcon in France won the election today by a margin of 65-35. 


Our popular vote loser president must be a little disappointed with the result.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 07, 2017, 07:59:20 pm
Our popular vote loser president must be a little disappointed with the result.

Sometimes I get confused over such things, but in American presidential elections, is the goal winning the popular vote.... or is it getting elected?

Anyone able to help me out on that one?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on May 13, 2017, 09:39:05 pm
The point of elections is for the public to elect people that will govern effectively.


One party has forgotten that.


That help.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 13, 2017, 11:01:08 pm
Both parties nominated a flawed candidate.  No matter what, we were getting a flawed President.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on May 14, 2017, 09:56:39 am
Unfortunately, that's how much of the electorate looked at it in November.  Perhaps there are different degrees of being flawed?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 14, 2017, 10:04:12 am
Yeah, that's why I'm looking forward to Dwayne the Rock Johnson and Oprah running in 2020.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 14, 2017, 11:30:19 am
Both parties nominated a flawed candidate.  No matter what, we were getting a flawed President.

Could you offer a list of president of the United States who have NOT been "flawed"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 14, 2017, 12:33:49 pm
As Playtwo said, there are degrees of flaws.  But two people seldom agree on the importance of various flaws.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 14, 2017, 12:56:49 pm
As Playtwo said, there are degrees of flaws.  But two people seldom agree on the importance of various flaws.

I don't think anyone would dispute that.  The comment from CurtOne to which I was responding, however, suggested something else, hence my question.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 14, 2017, 02:28:30 pm
Curt was merely making a literal interpretation of a comment that was not meant to be quite that absolutely literal.

You should be no stranger to that kind of argument.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on May 15, 2017, 11:31:49 am
There's a part of me that will welcome President Oprah, mostly because of how much those who brought us President Trump will hate it and how richly they will deserve it, but also because there's little doubt she would be a much, much better president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 15, 2017, 02:51:35 pm
If Oprah had run against Hillary, I would have voted for Oprah.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JBN on May 15, 2017, 03:00:21 pm
Yeah, that's why I'm looking forward to Dwayne the Rock Johnson and Oprah running in 2020.

As long as he gives her the rock bottom on a bed of nails, I'm all for it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on May 16, 2017, 04:27:17 pm
So how bout Trumpy droppin classified intel on the Russians like a Snoop Dogg song?

Will he start his own "Lock him up!" chant?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 16, 2017, 05:46:24 pm
So how bout Trumpy droppin classified intel on the Russians like a Snoop Dogg song?

Will he start his own "Lock him up!" chant?

No sane person with even the remotest familiarity with the relevant law i suggesting Trump did anything illegal in "droppin classified intel on the Russians."  Incredibly stupid and further evidence he is not competent to hold the office, yes, but that is not the same as criminal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on May 19, 2017, 02:00:11 pm
What does the michael flynn debacle say about the vice president and his ability to tell the truth. Michael flynn's lawyers have stated that their client informed the transition team that he was under FBI investigation for his Russian dealings and disclosed meetings.


Vice president pence denied meetings on camera on several occasions, then claimed this weekend that he did not know of the FBI investigation even though his was the transition team head.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on May 19, 2017, 05:14:02 pm
What does the michael flynn debacle say about the vice president and his ability to tell the truth. Michael flynn's lawyers have stated that their client informed the transition team that he was under FBI investigation for his Russian dealings and disclosed meetings.

Vice president pence denied meetings on camera on several occasions, then claimed this weekend that he did not know of the FBI investigation even though his was the transition team head.

A bit closer to home, what does it say about you, otto, that you don't believe Flynn at all when he says he was doing nothing improper in any of his communication with any of the Ruskies.... but you believe not just him, but second-hand reports (what his lawyers say he said) of what he said, about what he told Pence?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on May 22, 2017, 04:48:54 pm
I believe that michael flynn himself just answered your deflection by pleading the 5th.


Also, thank you popular voter loser for confirming that you gave the Russians sensitive information by confirming that "I didn't says Israel" today.


Nice.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 22, 2017, 06:44:47 am
Can anyone who watched Trump's Afghanistan speech last night can explain his goals there, not his strategy, but his goals?

Is his "goal" simply killing lots of terrorists?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 22, 2017, 09:06:44 am
Dolt.  His goal is to build on his previous efforts to make America great again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 29, 2017, 03:55:21 pm
dan haren‏Verified account @ithrow88  17h17 hours ago
dan haren Retweeted Joel Osteen
You sound like my agent trying to get me a job after my 2013 season with the Nationals

Joel OsteenVerified account @JoelOsteen
Give people the grace to change. Don’t judge their whole life on one season, one mistake.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 30, 2017, 02:43:26 am
Poor Joel's had better days.

I can't lie that I know of what I speak.

I've read a few of his books.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 27, 2017, 11:27:59 am
Corey doesn't believe this, but I have always liked him and enjoyed his posts for almost 20 years.  And I realize that this is a cheap shot, and not at all fair.  But some straight lines just can't be ignored.

Which is more surprising:

That Corey has read a few of Joel Osteens books

or

That Corey has read a few books?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on September 27, 2017, 12:02:18 pm
Imagine a Trump supporter taking shots at anyone.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 27, 2017, 12:16:55 pm
Imagine a Trump supporter taking shots at anyone.

Check out Facebook.com
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 27, 2017, 12:50:05 pm
Trump is diverting attention from Houston, Florida, and Puerto Rico with all this crap about the NFL.

Irony is that the NFL now wants to unify us with the National Anthem.  That's always been the purpose of the National Anthem who started the distraction from that purpose?

Trump has earned his disdain from the media.  Unfortunately, the media seems to forget with much of its coverage that nearly half of the voters and 2/3 of the states didn't want liberal rule.  As a result, when they insult Trump who deserves it, they also insult half the country who have more conservative values who do not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on September 27, 2017, 01:15:12 pm
Check out Facebook.com

hard pass
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on September 27, 2017, 03:05:18 pm
If Trump would have kept his dam n mouth shut and his fingers off his Twitter account, most of those players kneeling would probably have been finished with that by Week 9 or 10 of the season or at least it would barely be getting attention from anyone by that point.  I guess he's got to fire up his base though.

That's one story I'm really getting sick and tired of.  We have way many more problems in this country than that.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on October 24, 2017, 06:13:38 pm
Thank goodness the scientific consensus behind global warming has now been so clearly established that we can ignore the 400+ scientific papers this year alone concluding that there is no anthropogenic global warming.   http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/10/24/delingpole-now-400-scientific-papers-in-2017-say-global-warming-is-a-myth/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on October 25, 2017, 10:44:16 pm
lol
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on November 20, 2017, 04:46:10 pm
Jes


What about the 16,000+ actual climate scientists who just published a joint statement warning about the future effects of global climate change?


400/16000 = 0.025%

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 12, 2017, 09:34:13 pm
With 9% of the vote still to be counted, I don't want to get too excited.  But the AP and CNN have called it, so...

GREAT JOB ALABAMA!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on December 12, 2017, 09:43:56 pm
Only 11k lead with about 80k to count.... Cannot believe how close this is...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 12, 2017, 09:58:26 pm
With 9% of the vote still to be counted, I don't want to get too excited.  But the AP and CNN have called it, so...

GREAT JOB ALABAMA!

Good that they didn’t elect him. Bad, very bad, that it was ever in doubt.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 12, 2017, 10:08:05 pm
Good that they didn’t elect him. Bad, very bad, that it was ever in doubt.

I agree. But Alabama usually gives Republicans 70% of the vote without thinking, so it's big progress.

I grew up in Alabama, and Roy Moore has been on my radar as a terrible person for about 15 years, not just the last month...so this is especially satisfying for me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on December 12, 2017, 10:14:12 pm
With 9% of the vote still to be counted, I don't want to get too excited.  But the AP and CNN have called it, so...

GREAT JOB ALABAMA!

I just hope this is a wake up call for the Republican party not to nominate lunatics like Moore and to tune out the con artists who pump up their candidacies during the primaries. 

Probably not, but sooner or later you have to stop nominating the Roy Moore's, the Christine O'Donnell's, and the Richard Mourdock's of the world. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on December 12, 2017, 10:15:52 pm
I grew up in Alabama, and Roy Moore has been on my radar as a terrible person for about 15 years, not just the last month...so this is especially satisfying for me.

Yeah Moore was absolutely terrible and repugnant even before the sexual assault with teenagers allegations came out. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on December 12, 2017, 11:05:18 pm
I agree. But Alabama usually gives Republicans 70% of the vote without thinking, so it's big progress.

I grew up in Alabama, and Roy Moore has been on my radar as a terrible person for about 15 years, not just the last month...so this is especially satisfying for me.

"Especially satisfying" would have been if the voters had tarred and feathered him, literally and physically.

The best aspect of this is that it will further weaken the influence of Steve Bannon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 15, 2018, 02:16:14 pm
I'm putting this here rather than posting in the Bleachers, Cubs in 2018, or any other topic.

As a former school administrator, killings like yesterday sicken me, but I worked with kids a long time, so whenever something like this happens, it concerns me when the media and the left immediately jump on gun control as the solution.  It isn't.  We've had guns in this country since the beginning, and, yet, horrific scenes like this are relatively recent.  I agree that there is no reason for silencers, automatic weapons, extended magazine, and the like, but even that is putting a band aid on cancer.   

So what has happened in the lat 30 years or so?  Worldwide instant news that give these monsters their 15 minutes of fame?  Social media where hate and frustration can be spouted and spewed?  Computer games where we can kill  thousands who come back to life?  Drugs that alter moods and minds?  You rarely hear anyone trying to limit those.

We do have a disease in this country which is the devaluation of life.  It's old fashioned but when we no longer believe in a higher power whether that's God or an ethical standard and resist teaching that in our schools because we want young minds to search for themselves...it leads to disaster. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 15, 2018, 03:25:39 pm
One of the things I thought about when I saw the story was that the school had 3,000 students in it.  High school can be overwhelming enough when you have 600-700 like the one I went to.  If you're an out of place kid in a school with 3,000 kids in it, I can imagine that can be pretty overwhelming indeed. 

With more and more people moving to urban areas and with public schools consolidating so much in a lot of places, I wonder if that contributes to a lot of the problems and angst that comes up.  It's definitely not like in my dad's day, when he went to a small town high school with maybe like 150-200 students in it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 15, 2018, 03:35:28 pm
http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article200255734.html

Incredible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 15, 2018, 03:40:38 pm
And I'd agree that very strict gun control is putting a band aid on much of the problem.  In the UK, if you watch prime minister's questions which I actually kind of like doing from time to time, the subject of knife violence comes up at just about every one of those.  Granted perhaps having a knife violence problem is better than having a gun violence problem, but it doesn't get to the root of much of the problems in our culture and other instutitions. 

Still, that a troubled 19 year old can easily go and purchase an AR-15 weapon and do that kind of carnage shouldn't be happening. It seems like the only purposes of having an AR-15 is either to kill a significant number of people at one time or if you're a dude needing to compensate for something and this is the hobby you've come up with to do that . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSizVpfqFtw&t=196s

I watched that Youtube video today and was picturing that kid reacting much the same way while he was in that school.

You can have a 2nd Amendment and keep people like the Vegas shooter or the Parkland kid from having easy access to weapons like that at the same time.  If anything protecting law abiding citizens' rights to have a handgun to protect their families or a hunting rifle for sport should go hand in hand with keeping weapons like that off the market.  And sorry if that's your hobby, but that weapon doesn't need to be out there causing the type of carnage it has.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 15, 2018, 03:42:07 pm
#career suicide
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 03:44:13 pm
Curt, I agree there are any number of cultural factors at play, but I don't think you can tie it to "old fashioned" values or religion. There are plenty of secular, culturally liberal nations with much, much lower incidences of gun violence, to say nothing of all-out mass-shootings; and all their kids have the same 24 hr news cycle, social media, violent games, etc.

When you take a wider view of the issue of gun violence throughout the world, the problem becomes clear: the problem is guns. When you consider our number of guns per capita compared to other industrialized nations, we're off the chart. The fact that it's harder to get a drivers license than a FOID is nuts. There is an undeniable statistical correlation between gun ownership and gun crime. And until our legislators pass tougher gun control laws, these tragedies will continue to happen.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 03:50:21 pm
In the UK, if you watch prime minister's questions which I actually kind of like doing from time to time, the subject of knife violence comes up at just about every one of those.  Granted perhaps having a knife violence problem is better than having a gun violence problem, but it doesn't get to the root of much of the problems in our culture and other instutitions. 

Hypothetical: I suffer a MASSIVE heart attack and am rushed to the hospital. In the ambulance, my wife tells the EMTs that my diet consists of nothing but potato chips and ice cream and that I never exercise. When I arrive at the emergency room, should the doctors perform life-saving open-heart surgery, or would they do better to forego the critical intervention and instead recommend dietary changes and a strict regimen of exercise?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 04:08:22 pm
Take 15 minutes to watch the videos and read the story. Seriously.

https://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9444417/gun-violence-united-states-america
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 15, 2018, 04:14:02 pm
Hypothetical: I suffer a MASSIVE heart attack and am rushed to the hospital. In the ambulance, my wife tells the EMTs that my diet consists of nothing but potato chips and ice cream and that I never exercise. When I arrive at the emergency room, should the doctors perform life-saving open-heart surgery, or would they do better to forego the critical intervention and instead recommend dietary changes and a strict regimen of exercise?

The correct answer is cardiac cath with stenting if possible then open heart surgery if needed.  Then cardiac rehab, strict diet and medications.

It is a multifactorial problem in the US and all aspects need to be addressed to fix it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gun_Deaths_by_Year,_Australia,_America.pdf

Here is a graph comparing gun deaths in the US and Australia.  If you notice 1 thing, both graphs go down. 

Here is a good series for a starting point

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/gun-deaths/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 15, 2018, 04:15:12 pm
Hypothetical: I suffer a MASSIVE heart attack and am rushed to the hospital. In the ambulance, my wife tells the EMTs that my diet consists of nothing but potato chips and ice cream and that I never exercise. When I arrive at the emergency room, should the doctors perform life-saving open-heart surgery, or would they do better to forego the critical intervention and instead recommend dietary changes and a strict regimen of exercise?

Well definitely they should do the life saving open heart surgery because I'd hate to see you die of a heart attack over there, tico.  We certainly have a problem with these massive killing sprees, and I think burying our heads in the sand and saying the laws we have are adequate enough definitely isn't appropriate.  We probably don't completely agree on how extensively the laws need to change, but I think requiring a thorough background check on a gun purchase and banning weapons like AR-15's is pretty extensive. 

And I think the doctor would still be correct after the life saving surgery in saying you need to change your habits.  That's something I think Curt was alluding to, and I agree with that.  Even if you were to change gun laws, the criminals and disturbed people will just switch over to knives and other weapons and you wind up with a knife violence problem like in the UK.

By the way tico, you really should be eating better than just ice cream and potato chips.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 15, 2018, 04:26:31 pm
Take 15 minutes to watch the videos and read the story. Seriously.

https://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9444417/gun-violence-united-states-america


A few comments
1.) Gun Deaths include suicide.  In the US males are more likely to commit suicide and that skews the US numbers, but they would still commit suicide by another means.
2.) The mental health studies that they linked is meaningless clap trap.  The author limits "mental illness" to a small subset of severely mentally ill people that make up an even smaller fraction of the population.  It would be like your example above limit hear attacks to only 4 vessel disease that needs open heart surgery.


These problems don't mean better gun control laws are a bad idea.  The case isn't as clear as they want it to be that it is the only solution needed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 15, 2018, 04:39:01 pm
Good post Curt.

We do need extremely strict gun laws though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 15, 2018, 04:42:50 pm
A nut getting loose with a knife, even in a school, is a much different affair than a nut getting loose with an AR-15.  It's a trade I'd be willing to make.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 15, 2018, 04:50:09 pm
By the way tico, you really should be eating better than just ice cream and potato chips.

Damb straight.  Let's toss in fried pork chops and White Castle Hamburgers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 15, 2018, 04:55:16 pm
A nut getting loose with a knife, even in a school, is a much different affair than a nut getting loose with an AR-15.  It's a trade I'd be willing to make.
If all you have is a knife, it's difficult to kill 58 people from a 32nd floor hotel window.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 15, 2018, 05:02:24 pm
But it can be done with an illegal gun.  Banning guns would be no more successful in keeping guns from kids (or adults) than banning drugs has been.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 15, 2018, 05:08:00 pm
Take 15 minutes to watch the videos and read the story. Seriously.

https://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9444417/gun-violence-united-states-america

Tico, Vox is well known for their liberal slant. I could link many conservative sites that show that as many as 2.5 million crimes are stopped or prevented by rightful gun owners each year. Does that mean that AR-15's should be readily available to the general population? I am a conservative and would be open to a discussion on the subject. But that is the problem with finding a solution. With the current political client we are in. We can no longer discuss differences with fellow countrymen who have differing viewpoints. They are the enemy. If you don't agree with Trump you're a moron. If you agree with Trump you are a racist. We no longer discuss the merits of an argument. We simply determine which side agrees with each viewpoint, and cast stones at each other. Instead of discussing what is right and trying to see each other's viewpoint, we protest when a speaker comes to campus whose views are different than ours. Free speech is fine as long as the I agree with it. Then it is hatespeech and should be shunned and stopped. This is a primary reason why I stopped posting in this topic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 15, 2018, 05:09:10 pm
If all you have is a knife, it's difficult to kill 58 people from a 32nd floor hotel window.
What about a truck? He could have driven through that crowd in Las Vegas and possibly killed even more people. It's been done already. Should we ban trucks?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2018, 05:09:35 pm
As a class or group, who has murdered more people than anyone else in each of at least the last 2,500 years?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 15, 2018, 05:12:25 pm
As a class or group, who has murdered more people than anyone else in each of at least the last 2,500 years?

Murderers?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 15, 2018, 05:12:50 pm
Soldiers?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 15, 2018, 05:13:55 pm
Abortion doctors?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 15, 2018, 05:14:18 pm
Stop me when I get it right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 15, 2018, 05:18:51 pm
Husbands?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on February 15, 2018, 05:30:18 pm
zealots
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 15, 2018, 05:34:29 pm
Cardinals fans?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 15, 2018, 05:36:48 pm
Guessing Christians for Jes.

When I was school I seem to remember Fertilizer, gasoline and a rental truck doing a nice job at killing 163.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2018, 05:42:08 pm
Soldiers?

Close  --  Governments.

And who are governments most likely to murder?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 05:52:15 pm

It is a multifactorial problem in the US and all aspects need to be addressed to fix it.


Absolutely yes to an all-of-the-above approach. That MUST start with gun control before we attempt the long remedy of culture.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 06:02:31 pm
A few comments
1.) Gun Deaths include suicide.  In the US males are more likely to commit suicide and that skews the US numbers, but they would still commit suicide by another means.

The article and linked video differentiate between homicide-by- and suicide-by-gun. In both cases, there are clear and differentiated arguments as to why gun control would be an effective remedy. Regarding suicide and the idea that “they would commit suicide by another means,” the data just doesn’t bear this out. Suicide-by-gun is grimly effective. Suicide-by-other-means has a much lower “success” rate, and, thank God, not everyone who attempts suicide continues in their attempt until “successful.” People do move on from falled suicide attempts to lead happy, whole lives.

These problems don't mean better gun control laws are a bad idea.  The case isn't as clear as they want it to be that it is the only solution needed.

I don’t think “only solution needed” is the argument. You have to perform the surgery before you can rehab and lifestyle-change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2018, 06:08:55 pm
Absolutely yes to an all-of-the-above approach. That MUST start with gun control before we attempt the long remedy of culture.

Anything like the "start" you would seem to want is going to require amending the Constitution.  I, and I believe enough other people as to make that impossible, would oppose that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 06:17:03 pm
But it can be done with an illegal gun.  Banning guns would be no more successful in keeping guns from kids (or adults) than banning drugs has been.

Because something can be done illegally, it therefore shouldn’t be regulated/controlled? And regulations/controls do nothing to limit bad actors? Welp, burn the rule book, shut down the courts, and fire all the cops then, ‘cause they ain’t nothing but a drain on municipal, state, and federal budgets.

We don’t know much about the shooter, yet, but this wasn’t some drug lord at the center of an international arms dealing ring. This was a 19 year old kid who walked into Sunrise Tactical Supply in the light of day, cleared a simple background check, and walked out with an assault rifle. Do you really mean to say there is no way this could have been prevented by a different set of laws?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 15, 2018, 06:23:22 pm
Several kids in the school said the boy was a gun freak and they werent surprised.

In 1996 there was a mass shooting in Australia. Less than 2 weeks later they passed strict gun laws and there hasnt been once since...

http://amp.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html?__twitter_impression=true

Something can be done about this but ignorance is stopping it.

If the constitution is dog **** then treat it like dog **** and make things right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 06:24:47 pm
What about a truck? He could have driven through that crowd in Las Vegas and possibly killed even more people. It's been done already. Should we ban trucks?

Ban trucks? This is a total strawman. There is a gaping chasm between sensible gun control and BAN GUNS!!! Also, I was unaware of the death-by-trucks epidemic this country is suffering.

Do you have a problem with the legal constraints placed around the ability to operate a motor vehicle? I’d gladly welcome similar restrictions around fire arms. And what about the regulations on cars themselves? Seatbelts, speed limits, street legal, fuel sources, etc.

Yes, let’s PLEASE regulate fire arms like we do cars.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 15, 2018, 06:35:41 pm
If this number is wrong then blame Google but a quick search shows that there are about 100,000 public schools in the US.

The odds of a gunman not only hitting the school your child goes to but shooting your child has to be about the same as your odds of being struck by lightning especially when all of them now have an armed security guard.

I looked that up for my own piece of mind.

I still believe in strict gun laws.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 06:42:00 pm
Tico, Vox is well known for their liberal slant. I could link many conservative sites that show that as many as 2.5 million crimes are stopped or prevented by rightful gun owners each year. Does that mean that AR-15's should be readily available to the general population? I am a conservative and would be open to a discussion on the subject. But that is the problem with finding a solution. With the current political client we are in. We can no longer discuss differences with fellow countrymen who have differing viewpoints. They are the enemy. If you don't agree with Trump you're a moron. If you agree with Trump you are a racist. We no longer discuss the merits of an argument. We simply determine which side agrees with each viewpoint, and cast stones at each other. Instead of discussing what is right and trying to see each other's viewpoint, we protest when a speaker comes to campus whose views are different than ours. Free speech is fine as long as the I agree with it. Then it is hatespeech and should be shunned and stopped. This is a primary reason why I stopped posting in this topic.

If you’re interested in actually having the discussion, as your post suggests, perhaps it would be better to dispute the facts presented rather than simply write off Vox as a liberal news source.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2018, 06:42:32 pm
I still believe in strict gun laws.

And you still haven't thought about it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2018, 06:46:31 pm
This argument is so weak. Because something can be done illegally, it therefore shouldn’t be regulated/controlled? And regulation/control do nothing to limit bad actors? Welp, burn the rule book, shut down the courts, and fire all the cops then, ‘cause they ain’t nothing but a drain on municipal, state, and federal budgets.

We don’t know much about the shooter, yet, but this wasn’t some drug lord at the center of an international arms dealing ring. This was a 19 year old kid who walked into Sunrise Tactical Supply in the light of day, cleared a simple background check, and walked out with an assault rifle. Do you really mean to say there is no way this could have been prevented by a different set of laws?


And if gun control had prevented this kid you seem to try to portray as just an average kid from getting a gun, but that "drug lord" you mention or other thugs still could get them, the result would be even more violence and crime and murder, even if fewer of the high publicity incidents like this.

It may be simple, but is quite clearly true, that if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.... outlaws and the government, and, of the two, the government is more dangerous, particularly if the populace is unarmed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2018, 06:52:33 pm
Several kids in the school said the boy was a gun freak and they werent surprised.

In 1996 there was a mass shooting in Australia. Less than 2 weeks later they passed strict gun laws and there hasnt been once since...

http://amp.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html?__twitter_impression=true

Something can be done about this but ignorance is stopping it.

If the constitution is dog **** then treat it like dog **** and make things right.


And the total number of murders and **** have climbed and climbed sharply in Australia since the gun confiscation.

If the number of dramatic, high profile shootings and the number of deaths in such shootings are reduced to zero, while the total number of murders rises sharply, does that seem like a good trade?

As to your description of the Constitution as dog ****, I suspect you have never once read the Constitution in order to have any meaningful opinion of it, and you have already demonstrated that you do not want to have any discussion about how or why its provisions came about so you might have some understanding of it.

But, again, this really is not surprising from you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 15, 2018, 07:02:39 pm
The article and linked video differentiate between homicide-by- and suicide-by-gun. In both cases, there are clear and differentiated arguments as to why gun control would be an effective remedy. Regarding suicide and the idea that “they would commit suicide by another means,” the data just doesn’t bear this out. Suicide-by-gun is grimly effective. Suicide-by-other-means has a much lower “success” rate, and, thank God, not everyone who attempts suicide continues in their attempt until “successful.” People do move on from falled suicide attempts to lead happy, whole lives.


I don’t think “only solution needed” is the argument. You have to perform the surgery before you can rehab and lifestyle-change.

Suicide is a complicated topic. So more females attempted suicide, but males are more likely to complete. A BMJ study looked at data from Illinois over a ten year period. When males attempted sucide with a gun the success rate was 97%. When they attempted suffocation the success rate was 91%. You can’t methods and say one is clearly superior. Not every sucide attempt has the same intent.

Another way to look at it Canda’s suicide rate is 10.1/100,000 and the US is 10.3/100,000, but Canada was stricter gun control laws.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2018, 07:03:14 pm
If you’re interested in actually having the discussion, as your post suggests, perhaps it would be better to dispute the facts presented rather than simply write off Vox as a liberal news source.

Then let's talk about some facts and see if you dispute them --

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to assure that the public was able to arm itself to protect itself against an oppressive government.

In the last 150 years virtually every genocide seen or every wholesale slaughter of people has been inflicted on those who had been unarmed by operation of law (or, as in the case of native Americans, at least left with vastly fewer and inferior firearms than the typical government soldier could carry).

That to equal the number of deaths which would be involved in a single genocide of even just one million people would require more than 50,000 shootings as serious as what we saw yesterday.

That disarming the public increases the risk of government becoming oppressive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 07:07:37 pm

And if gun control had prevented this kid you seem to try to portray as just an average kid from getting a gun, but that "drug lord" you mention or other thugs still could get them, the result will ould be even more violence and crime and murder, even if fewer of the high publicity incidents like this.

Yes, you’re right, other developed nations in the world with stricter gun control laws all have much higher gun homicide rates than the US. Oh, wait... what’s that? The gun homicide rate in the US is 10x higher than the rest of the developed world?

It may be simple, but is quite clearly true, that if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.... outlaws and the government, and, of the two, the government is more dangerous, particularly if the populace is unarmed.

Again this strawman that supporting gun controls means outlawing guns. Calm down on the knee-jerk reactions, here. And no, what’s clearly true is that increased gun ownership leads to increased gun violence and homicide. Again, the gun homicide rate in the US is 10x the rest of the developed world.

Finally, if you think an AR-15 with a bump stock is effective protection against a stealth drone carrying hellfire missiles, well, good luck with that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 15, 2018, 07:13:53 pm
Comparing the US to smaller, less deverse European nations isn’t exactly a fair comparison.  Which doesn’t mean strict gun control aren’t a good idea either.

Completely agree with the second point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 07:16:08 pm

And the total number of murders and **** have climbed and climbed sharply in Australia since the gun confiscation.


Holy f$&k Jes, do you check anything?

Homicide rates in Australia are at their lowest in 25 years:

http://crimestats.aic.gov.au/NHMP/1_trends/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2018, 07:34:13 pm
Finally, if you think an AR-15 with a bump stock is effective protection against a stealth drone carrying hellfire missiles, well, good luck with that.

A stealth drone may successfully target an individual, but when large numbers of citizens are armed and resisting, not enough drones or hellfire missiles exist to deal with them, and we have already seen that they are not tremendously in putting down a resistance movement -- we STILL do not have Afghanistan under control.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 15, 2018, 07:46:21 pm
Holy f$&k Jes, do you check anything?

Homicide rates in Australia are at their lowest in 25 years:

http://crimestats.aic.gov.au/NHMP/1_trends/


The murder rate in the US has declined more in the last 20 years WITHOUT GUN CONTROL than it has declined in Australia under the same period..... and, as I said, murders AND **** have increased.  I apologize if I was unclear, since I did not say "the combined total of **** and murders has increased."  Admittedly sloppy writing and a mistake to think that what I wrote, instead of writing "the totals of both murders and **** have increased."

**** in Australia – 1995 to 2007, the source, is the Australian Institute of Criminology:
(https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/r1.png)

(https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/R2.png)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 15, 2018, 08:21:15 pm
when large numbers of citizens are armed and resisting, not enough drones or hellfire missiles exist to deal with them

Japan in WW2 would disagree....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 15, 2018, 08:21:39 pm
The argument of guns vs no guns is semantic at this point.

What is a viable and current solution to stop this? We are now at a pace of having 52 school shootings this year. W.T.F.

If the answer is 2 armed guards at each school. lets make it happen now.
If the answer is more investment in helping people with mental illness. lets make it happen now.

If you dont care for gun violence step one is voting against candidates that accept NRA funds.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ray on February 15, 2018, 08:23:38 pm
I don't think banning guns will help.  In this era of Kardashians, shock, internet and lack of family support, the guys who want to do something will find a way. It takes one kid learning how to build a bomb off internet and blowing up a school and we would have tons of copycats of that. And then we will all be talking about banning fertilizer. The problem needs addressing, not the symptoms. And no, I have no idea how to address the actual problem, but in this day, I think maybe it has to be school based when kids are young teaching them to value life and family, because too many aren't getting that at home?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 15, 2018, 08:26:16 pm
I just dont see how anyone is asking for a ban of guns. Most of us can agree that anyone that has mental health issues should not have access to guns.

How does this mean banning guns?

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 09:07:19 pm
The murder rate in the US has declined more in the last 20 years WITHOUT GUN CONTROL than it has declined in Australia under the same period.....

The most recent statistics for Australia run through 2014. Since you're talking a 20 year timeframe let's look at the stats:

AUS Murder rate 1995: 1.8/100,000
AUS Murder rate 2014: 1/100,000
US Murder rate 1995: 8.2/100,000
US Murder rate 2014: 4.5/100,000

So on a raw numbers basis, sure the "argument" is "true" that (8.22-4.5)>(1.8-1), but that's a terrible application of statistics. (Spoiler alert: it gets even worse later in your post.)

On an actual rate basis, your assertion is false. Moreover, given that Australia already had a much lower murder rate to begin with, any marginal improvement is significantly more difficult to achieve. Therefore, the fact that they have the larger % decrease in murder rate is truly stunning.

and, as I said, murders AND **** have increased.  I apologize if I was unclear, since I did not say "the combined total of **** and murders has increased."  Admittedly sloppy writing and a mistake to think that what I wrote, instead of writing "the totals of both murders and **** have increased."
**** in Australia – 1995 to 2007, the source, is the Australian Institute of Criminology:
(https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/r1.png)

(https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/R2.png)

Huh? Why are we suddenly lumping in **** totals? Why not arson or tax fraud or robbery or identity theft?

We're talking about murder here, specifically gun murder. Adding **** is just an obfuscation when the clear correlation between gun ownership and gun violence is already difficult enough for you to observe. Adding another variable to the equation isn't going to help anything.

But sure, I'll play the game for a moment. For starters, why are you talking about the total numbers of **** and murders? The total numbers of anything is pointless in this discussion. It must be indexed to population. And why chose a total **** graph that cut off in 2007? There is more recent data available. Hint: it doesn't line up with your argument - current Australian **** rates are basically flat to 1996. So much for "climbed and climbed sharply". And finally (remember my earlier spoiler alert?), your top graph shows raw numbers in Australia. Your bottom graph shows rate numbers in the US. This isn't even an apples to oranges comparison. This is apples to dump trucks. It makes no sense.

Again, do you check anything?

EDIT the **** are  r a p e.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 09:16:55 pm
Japan in WW2 would disagree....


Yes, and the situation in Afghanistan (limited troop resources on foreign soil contending with the harsh conditions of the Afghan Himalayas) is clearly analogous to the potential of the armed forces of the US (over 1M service members) being used against its own citizens.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 09:18:18 pm
Comparing the US to smaller, less deverse European nations isn’t exactly a fair comparison.  Which doesn’t mean strict gun control aren’t a good idea either.

Completely agree with the second point.

CBJ, your first point is a fair one. That said, I wonder how the greater population density of Europe might be expected to negatively impact their murder rates.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 09:21:24 pm
I don't think banning guns will help. 

Who is talking about a gun ban here? The strictest measures I've suggested are that firearm ownership/operation be regulated in a similar manner to automobiles; and that as automobile capabilities are also regulated, so should firearm capabilities be regulated.

The problem needs addressing, not the symptoms.

So in your hospital, I die of a heart attack while you tell my flatlining corpse to eat healthy and exercise?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 09:31:55 pm
Also, let's just get it out there that the Kardashians do *not* cause gun violence.

As mentioned before, I don't know if the "values" argument holds water when so many secular, culturally liberal nations have much lower gun crime rates.

And for as "religious" as the US is, don't the vast majority of faith-professing individuals purport to serve a champion of non-violence who embodied enemy love to the point of giving up his life on a cross?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 15, 2018, 09:35:16 pm
Keep up the good fight, Tico.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 15, 2018, 09:50:15 pm
CBJ, your first point is a fair one. That said, I wonder how the greater population density of Europe might be expected to negatively impact their murder rates.

Maybe. I’m not going to take the time to do a deep dive into the statistics, but I doubt population density is a big risk factor. I’m guess population dense areas with money have relatively low murder rates. Now highly dense populations with a poor population has a high murder rate. So Manhattan is likely pretty safe and a slum in Paris not so much. What ratio do European cities have?  US cities? 

Omaha’s homicide rate is 7.3 in 2017. A large majority of the murders are in 1 area that is the poorest part of the city.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 15, 2018, 09:57:09 pm
I agree with all of Tico's posts.

You have to give them credit...Republicans/Fox News have been really effective in creating a straw man gun control advocate who wants to ban all guns. That's not what "gun control" means.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 15, 2018, 10:12:57 pm
tico, that was not what I implied in my argument.  Both sides are going afield here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2018, 10:23:41 pm
Sorry if I misunderstood your point, Curt.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 15, 2018, 10:30:47 pm
I agree with all of Tico's posts.

You have to give them credit...Republicans/Fox News have been really effective in creating a straw man gun control advocate who wants to ban all guns. That's not what "gun control" means.
It's fear, br.  Democrats fear that if they go along with banning the barbaric act of partial birth abortion, somehow that will be used to eventually ban all abortions.  Republicans fear that conceding some common sense gun control laws will eventually lead to banning all guns.   We can't compromise in this country anymore.  We're polarized.  Even when we see the other side has a solid point we can't be caught agreeing to it or we get burned.  We've come a long way from JFK's Profiles in Courage.   Today the title would be Profiles in Cowardice.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 07:50:05 am
Japan in WW2 would disagree....


Probably not.  The **** of Nanking, BY JAPAN, was possible in no small degree because China had disarmed its citizens less than ten years earlier.

Hiroshima and Nagazaki were both attacks in a total war setting, which is virtually never seen when a nation is dealing with a situation within its own borders or with the borders of a nation where the outside power strongly hopes to have the people side with them.  In urban combat, even a squirrel rifle can limit advances.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 07:53:39 am
The argument of guns vs no guns is semantic at this point.

What is a viable and current solution to stop this? We are now at a pace of having 52 school shootings this year. W.T.F.

If the answer is 2 armed guards at each school. lets make it happen now.
If the answer is more investment in helping people with mental illness. lets make it happen now.

If you dont care for gun violence step one is voting against candidates that accept NRA funds.

The 52 shootings a year projection is based on bogus figures.

But your frustration that we should be doing whatever is needed to answer the problem ignores a simple point, we do not KNOW what will work.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 08:01:56 am
The most recent statistics for Australia run through 2014. Since you're talking a 20 year timeframe let's look at the stats:

AUS Murder rate 1995: 1.8/100,000
AUS Murder rate 2014: 1/100,000
US Murder rate 1995: 8.2/100,000
US Murder rate 2014: 4.5/100,000

So on a raw numbers basis, sure the "argument" is "true" that (8.22-4.5)>(1.8-1), but that's a terrible application of statistics. (Spoiler alert: it gets even worse later in your post.)

On an actual rate basis, your assertion is false. Moreover, given that Australia already had a much lower murder rate to begin with, any marginal improvement is significantly more difficult to achieve. Therefore, the fact that they have the larger % decrease in murder rate is truly stunning.

/quote]


So even though the NUMBERS fell more in the United States than in Australia, and the RATES fell more than four times as much.... what Australia did was better?

What Australia did was to round up and destroy all guns.  You pretend NOT to support that, but you make claims like the above, and talk about ME doing a "terrible application of statistics."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 16, 2018, 08:52:08 am
The argument of guns vs no guns is semantic at this point.

What is a viable and current solution to stop this? We are now at a pace of having 52 school shootings this year. W.T.F.

If the answer is 2 armed guards at each school. lets make it happen now.
If the answer is more investment in helping people with mental illness. lets make it happen now.

If you dont care for gun violence step one is voting against candidates that accept NRA funds.

I totally agree with 1 and 2.  But 3 does not seem to follow.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 16, 2018, 09:21:00 am
It's fear, br.  Democrats fear that if they go along with banning the barbaric act of partial birth abortion, somehow that will be used to eventually ban all abortions.  Republicans fear that conceding some common sense gun control laws will eventually lead to banning all guns.   We can't compromise in this country anymore.  We're polarized.  Even when we see the other side has a solid point we can't be caught agreeing to it or we get burned.  We've come a long way from JFK's Profiles in Courage.   Today the title would be Profiles in Cowardice.
This is exactly what I was inferring in my previous post Tico, Curt just said it better.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 16, 2018, 10:04:22 am
I think a compromise could be worked out if both sides decided to give a little.

How about a nationwide ban on any weapons that can shoot more than 10 rounds per minute in return to a nationwide concealed carry law?

If it requires a constitutional amendment, then have one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 16, 2018, 03:02:14 pm
Quote
It's fear, br.

Don't underestimate the incentives at work, too.   My understanding is that gun companies are the driving force behind the NRA's positions.

Also, some politicians reap benefits from keeping their constituents ignorant and afraid.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 16, 2018, 03:09:04 pm
Also, ALL politicians reap benefits from keeping their constituents ignorant and afraid.

Fixed it
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 16, 2018, 03:12:22 pm
Quote
Fixed it

Sure, in a shades of gray kind of sense, but it is demonstrably more true for one side.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 16, 2018, 03:22:02 pm
Nope.  You just don't notice your side doing it because you agree with what they are trying to accomplish. 

Both parties suck and America gets the leadership it deserves.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 16, 2018, 04:30:18 pm
^
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 16, 2018, 05:00:12 pm
Sure, in a shades of gray kind of sense, but it is demonstrably more true for one side.

Agreed.  The Dems need to improve, a lot, but they have a very long way to go before they can match the stupidity of electing Trump and spouting this nonsense that guns are not a problem and can't be controlled anyway.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 16, 2018, 05:03:51 pm
I don't have a side unless we're talking about whether having Trump as president is good for America.  I agree with your assessment that both parties suck and am registered independent.  There is corruption and disgusting behavior on both sides.  In my opinion, however, conservative republicans reap more benefit by keeping people stupid and afraid than do liberal democrats.  YMMV.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 16, 2018, 05:10:14 pm
I agree as well. I am not blind to my blinders, if you get what I mean. I know I bring certain biases to each discussion and as much as I might try, I will have a hard time seeing the other side if I believe they are wrong. A good example is one used above. I cannot fathom being convinced that partial birth abortions need to be legal. Yet, others can somehow make a case for it. I'm sure many cannot fathom a good reason to allow AR-15's to be legal. While others can somehow make a case for them even after this tragedy and many others like it. No matter how hard you try, your bias will impede the discussion. What has seemingly disappeared in this country though, (and I blame both parties for this), is the ability to have a respectful conversation with those we disagree with. I struggle with this myself at times, so I'm not casting stones. Somehow believing differently than me no longer garners respect, but hostility. I could point to college campuses, political rallies with violent protests, and social media especially. Just look at the cable news options and you'll see it in perfect display. Tim Russert did a good job of grilling both sides and came across as a fair guy. Who replaced him? David Gregory and Chuck Todd, whom even the most ardent liberal would agree are anything but objective. But that is the climate we live in. The left hates Sean Hannity and FoxNews. The right pretty much hates everyone not named FoxNews, and that is just cable news. I don't know where this leads. Will it eventually get better? Or are we doomed to a fractured, tribal society where we are defined by what separates us and all else are idiots, morons or worse, dangerous?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 05:12:33 pm
We are now at a pace of having 52 school shootings this year. W.T.F.

Would you care to provide a source for those figures and to show how the number was calculated?  Several news sources have tossed numbers out there which even the libs at politifact have acknowledged are a crock -- http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2018/feb/15/jeff-greenfield/mostly-false-18-us-school-shootings-so-far-2018-an/

If the answer is 2 armed guards at each school. lets make it happen now.

The nation has 100,000 public schools.  A SINGLE armed guard at each school, after salary, benefits and equipment combined (and that equipment would almost certainly involve a patrol car), is going to cost well north of $50,000, but let's use the very conservative $50K a year figure, and then multiply it times 100,000.  For just ONE more armed officer at every school it would cost in excess of $5,000,000,000.  That is FIVE BILLION DOLLARS a year, and even with one more armed officer at every school, that would not totally eliminate such shootings -- the Florida school had an armed school resource officer which is a euphamism for a sheriff's deputy or police officer being stationed there, and that shooting STILL happened.

And then you have the problem seen at my school if you have an armed officer there.  My school is a middle school, 7th and 8th grade, and one of the more pain in the a$$ 8th graders, a girl, last Friday grabbed the school resource officer's gun and tried to wrestle it away from him in the middle of the school day.

If you dont care for gun violence step one is voting against candidates that accept NRA funds.

That is utter nonsense.  The NRA, more than five years ago, advanced and has continued to support a number of moves to increase school safety.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 05:13:42 pm
This is exactly what I was inferring in my previous post Tico, Curt just said it better.


Infer..... imply.... ah, what the heck, they most start with "i" and have two sulables.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 16, 2018, 05:18:09 pm
Again, YMMV, but for my money part of why the divide has gotten as bad as it has is because of people incentivized to make it that way.  Rush.  Hannity.  Ann Coulter (and yeah, I'm sure there are liberal counterparts you could name, but I don't think they do as much damage).  People who probably don't even believe half of what they say, but they've been  so well rewarded for keeping the base whipped to a frenzy, and there's a segment of the population who lap the stuff up as the truth. 

For that reason and what it's done to our society, I hope Roger Ailes is burning in hell.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 05:19:23 pm
I think a compromise could be worked out if both sides decided to give a little.

How about a nationwide ban on any weapons that can shoot more than 10 rounds per minute in return to a nationwide concealed carry law?

If it requires a constitutional amendment, then have one.

I can fire more than ten rounds per minute from a Colt .45 revolver.  With work, I might be able to get to ten rounds a minute with my single-shot breach-load shotgun.  And at the time the Constitution was drafted multiple guns far exceeded that.  In fact Jefferson made sure the Lewis and Clark expedition was equipped with a couple of them to impress the natives just 15 years later.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_air_rifle  (It easily fired 30 rounds a minute.)

If we do have a truly oppressive dictatorial government take over, I really do not want to be limited to firing ten rounds in a minute.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 16, 2018, 05:21:46 pm

Infer..... imply.... ah, what the heck, they most start with "i" and have two sulables.
verb (used with object), inferred, inferring.
1.
to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence:
They inferred his displeasure from his cool tone of voice.
2.
(of facts, circumstances, statements, etc.) to indicate or involve as a conclusion; lead to.
3.
to guess; speculate; surmise.
4.
to hint; imply; suggest.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 16, 2018, 05:22:09 pm
Did the officer pistol whip her Jes?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 16, 2018, 05:23:43 pm
In the future I'll use simpler words for your sake, Jes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 05:24:02 pm
Agreed.  The Dems need to improve, a lot, but they have a very long way to go before they can match the stupidity of electing Trump and spouting this nonsense that guns are not a problem and can't be controlled anyway.

They aren't, and you can't.  The cat is out of the bag on controlling firearms.

This was more than five years ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTMfx4Qh8xg

And 3-D printing has advanced a long way since then.

And, of course it ignores the fact that any remotely competent mechanic can learn how to produce Kalishnakovs in any garage across the country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 05:25:26 pm
Did the officer pistol whip her Jes?

Are you sane, start drinking early for the weekend, or just decide to ask a DUSTY question?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 05:27:38 pm
verb (used with object), inferred, inferring.
1.
to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence:
They inferred his displeasure from his cool tone of voice.
2.
(of facts, circumstances, statements, etc.) to indicate or involve as a conclusion; lead to.
3.
to guess; speculate; surmise.
4.
to hint; imply; suggest.



Number four is NOT a definition of infer.  Period.

It is a misunderstanding of the meaning of infer.  Just as many misunderstand the meaning of imply.

They are different words for a reason.  The fact that many misuse one or both (though usually it is using "infer" when they meant "imply") does not change the definition of either.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 05:28:26 pm
In the future I'll use simpler words for your sake, Jes.

Funny.  So, for MY sake, you will use words you are less likely to misuse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 16, 2018, 05:30:01 pm
If the only options are 3D printing and self assembly, then the problem will be as solved as it ever can be. The number of guns can be severely reduced and the insane gun culture can be changed. It will just take resources from the government (maybe allocate a couple hundred billion of the many hundreds of billions that already go the military and direct it towards a gun buyback) and time. Cultural attitudes about things change all the time and they can on this one, too. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 16, 2018, 05:31:33 pm
There's plenty of incentive for dysfunction on the left too.  The Democrats shut down the government because their progressive activists wanted DACA done without having to compromise with Republicans on any other immigration reform.  I was flipping through some of Politico's political cartoons, and there's one still calling Schumer and Pelosi wimps and spineless for not keeping the shutdown going.  Normal Dems ought to be thanking Schumer for not inflicting any more damage from that stunt than was already caused.  He probably knew that was a bad idea from the start.

Of course, Elizabeth Warren, Kristen Gillibrand, Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, etc and any other Dem who voted for the shutdown and to keep it going even after the rest of the Dems came to their senses has that on their record if they're the nominee against Trump in 2020.  Those are people who will have no business at all talking about how polarized our politics are and how dysfunctional Washington is, and it's probably likely one of them is the nominee in 2020.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 05:36:06 pm
If the only options are 3D printing and self assembly, then the problem will be as solved as it ever can be. The number of guns can be severely reduced and the insane gun culture can be changed.


It won't be solved.  It will be made much, much worse.  If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.... and THEY most certainly will have them.  Gun fatalities, at least in this country with gang violence and organized crime at levels not likely seen in most other countries, would soar.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 16, 2018, 05:40:27 pm

Also, some politicians reap benefits from keeping their constituents ignorant and afraid.

That would seem to apply to all politicians.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 16, 2018, 05:53:56 pm
I'll take dictionary.com over your interpretation every time. Regardless, the fact you saw the need to correct my post when you clearly understood what I meant shows much more about your juvenile need for attention and the need to show your supposed mental superiority which you just think hides your underlying inferiority complex is more telling than my supposed lack of writing skill.

And by the way, syllable is not spelled sulable. Of course,  maybe in your world it is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 16, 2018, 05:58:24 pm
Speaking of syllables.  My wife and I were watching this British show the other night.  I was not aware that they pronounce aluminum completely differently than us.   They pronounce in a-lu-meen-i-um.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 05:58:54 pm
Also, let's just get it out there that the Kardashians do *not* cause gun violence.

As mentioned before, I don't know if the "values" argument holds water when so many secular, culturally liberal nations have much lower gun crime rates.

And for as "religious" as the US is, don't the vast majority of faith-professing individuals purport to serve a champion of non-violence who embodied enemy love to the point of giving up his life on a cross?

The Kardashians personally probably do not, but the celebrity culture we live in certainly does, with nearly all of the shooters being non-social losers who view themselves as nothings who could BECOME somethings, and achieve celebrity status, even if only briefly, for shooting up more people than the last nutjob did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 06:05:11 pm
I don't think banning guns will help.  In this era of Kardashians, shock, internet and lack of family support, the guys who want to do something will find a way. It takes one kid learning how to build a bomb off internet and blowing up a school and we would have tons of copycats of that. And then we will all be talking about banning fertilizer. The problem needs addressing, not the symptoms. And no, I have no idea how to address the actual problem, but in this day, I think maybe it has to be school based when kids are young teaching them to value life and family, because too many aren't getting that at home?

Not to disagree at all with your basic point, because I agree with it, but assuming for the sake of argument that schools were to try teaching that (and pushed academics even further to the side), just how would you propose teaching kids to value life and family?

In particular how would you teach someone without a meaningful family how to value that family which they did not have?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 16, 2018, 06:13:24 pm
I'll take dictionary.com over your interpretation every time. Regardless, the fact you saw the need to correct my post when you clearly understood what I meant shows much more about your juvenile need for attention and the need to show your supposed mental superiority which you just think hides your underlying inferiority complex is more telling than my supposed lack of writing skill.

And by the way, syllable is not spelled sulable. Of course,  maybe in your world it is.


Actually, I did not correct your post, or even try to do so.  I made a light-hearted comment comment about a mistake many people make.

You would appear to prefer being wrong and not knowing it than in being right if it first requires learning and admitting you were wrong.  Mentioning your mistake could only be an effort to show "superiority" if I assumed most people do not understand the difference between the two and would somehow impress them.  I don't.

As to sulable.... you actually think that spelling on my part was serious and not to make light of this entire foolish exchange?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 16, 2018, 06:25:47 pm
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/02/16/politics/parkland-shooting-fbi-tipster/index.html

I think this is also a important point of discussion The FBI was alerted about the shooter twice and did nothing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on February 17, 2018, 06:49:40 pm
Quote
How about a nationwide ban on any weapons that can shoot more than 10 rounds per minute

This has to be one of the most absurd suggestions I may have ever seen.  Clearly someone who has not thought this suggestion through.

Picture your daughter/wife/grandmother/any loved one who has a concealed carry in her purse is attacked by a would be rapist.  She gets the weapon and is able to pull off one round. 

Now sit at you computer for the next 6 minutes and do nothing but think about what is happening while she has to wait to fire another round at her attacker.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 17, 2018, 06:54:00 pm
This has to be one of the most absurd suggestions I may have ever seen.  Clearly someone who has not thought this suggestion through.

Picture your daughter/wife/grandmother/any loved one who has a concealed carry in her purse is attacked by a would be rapist.  She gets the weapon and is able to pull off one round. 

Now sit at you computer for the next 6 minutes and do nothing but think about what is happening while she has to wait to fire another round at her attacker.

Wait a minute, I also oppose davep's idea, for a number of reasons, but he did not say ONE round per minute, but TEN rounds per minute.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 17, 2018, 08:10:17 pm
This has to be one of the most absurd suggestions I may have ever seen.  Clearly someone who has not thought this suggestion through.

Picture your daughter/wife/grandmother/any loved one who has a concealed carry in her purse is attacked by a would be rapist.  She gets the weapon and is able to pull off one round. 

Now sit at you computer for the next 6 minutes and do nothing but think about what is happening while she has to wait to fire another round at her attacker.
Why does she have to wait?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 17, 2018, 08:22:10 pm
This has to be one of the most absurd suggestions I may have ever seen.  Clearly someone who has not thought this suggestion through.

Picture your daughter/wife/grandmother/any loved one who has a concealed carry in her purse is attacked by a would be rapist.  She gets the weapon and is able to pull off one round. 

Now sit at you computer for the next 6 minutes and do nothing but think about what is happening while she has to wait to fire another round at her attacker.

A gun can be made to shoot 10 rounds in 10 seconds, but take 50 seconds to reload.  I did not mean to indicate that it had to have 6 seconds between each shot.  And if she doesn't hit her target in the first 10 shots, another 10 or so probably won't help her much.

The point is, there are very few instances, other than mass killing, that require the ability to shoot hundreds of bullets over any period of time.  I can't envision any scenario in which more than 10 bullets would be necessary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 17, 2018, 10:01:01 pm
A gun can be made to shoot 10 rounds in 10 seconds, but take 50 seconds to reload.  I did not mean to indicate that it had to have 6 seconds between each shot.  And if she doesn't hit her target in the first 10 shots, another 10 or so probably won't help her much.

The point is, there are very few instances, other than mass killing, that require the ability to shoot hundreds of bullets over any period of time.  I can't envision any scenario in which more than 10 bullets would be necessary.

Tell that to the victims of the Sand Creek Massacre, or Wounded Knee, or the blacks lynched in American cities, or the Polish Jews in Krakow, or any other number of people who became the targets of genocide.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 18, 2018, 10:01:28 am
Unfettered gun rights did not prevent any of those genocide (very poor word) actions, nor would they today.  No law or action can solve every possible problem, but this would go a long way to prevent the current one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 18, 2018, 11:02:05 am
Unfettered gun rights did not prevent any of those genocide (very poor word) actions, nor would they today.  No law or action can solve every possible problem, but this would go a long way to prevent the current one.

There is a REASON "Unfettered gun rights did not prevent any of those genocide(s)."  It is the very same reason Star Trek phaser guns did not prevent any of those genocides.

The victims of those genocides had neither.  In EACH case of genocide (other than possibly Rawanda in the 1990's) of genocide in the last 150 years, the victims of genocide had either just lost their right to guns, or had culturally not yet meaningfully acquired guns, or were having their access to new or more guns severely restricted.

Assuming you are right that your "solution" completely eliminated school shootings, at a time when the murder rate overall has been falling, it would increase the odds of genocide.

How many school shootings with 17 fatalities are needed to total the deaths of the holocaust?  I will trust your math.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 18, 2018, 11:56:51 am
The odds of genocide happening in the foreseeable future in the United States is extremely low, while the odds of more mass murders is extremely high.

It is true that the cultures in the prevented third world countries from developing technology for self defense, but in this age of asymmetric warfare had allowed even culturally and industrially undeveloped people to conduct self defense wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere.

This is not a question of regulations that diminish previous interpretations of the second amendment.  It has already been diminished, and rightly so.  We HAVE weapon control, and it will not go away.  What is left is to determine where to draw the line between the right to bear arms and the right to public safety.  It is not unusual for different freedoms to conflict with each other.  It is time to look at the current balance between our rights and freedoms.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on February 18, 2018, 02:33:20 pm
Quote
Wait a minute, I also oppose davep's idea, for a number of reasons, but he did not say ONE round per minute, but TEN rounds per minute.

Crap.  I am a dummy.  For some reason I read the post as 6 rounds per hour when it obviously said per minute.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 18, 2018, 04:11:28 pm
The odds of genocide happening in the foreseeable future in the United States is extremely low, while the odds of more mass murders is extremely high.

It is true that the cultures in the prevented third world countries from developing technology for self defense, but in this age of asymmetric warfare had allowed even culturally and industrially undeveloped people to conduct self defense wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere.

This is not a question of regulations that diminish previous interpretations of the second amendment.  It has already been diminished, and rightly so.  We HAVE weapon control, and it will not go away.  What is left is to determine where to draw the line between the right to bear arms and the right to public safety.  It is not unusual for different freedoms to conflict with each other.  It is time to look at the current balance between our rights and freedoms.

What is the "foreseeable future"?  Did the Germans foresee the Holocaust when the Jews were disarmed?  This nation has racism, bigotry, hatred, and violence in its history and at its core.

Not being able to see the possibility of genocide in the future is only a comment on the limit of your vision.

What what freedoms are in conflict on this issue?  You wrote, "It is not unusual for different freedoms to conflict with each other."  I am sure you believe that to be true, but it is a result of a fundamental understanding of our freedoms under the Constitution.  Those rights exist almost entirely as proscriptions on the powers otherwise granted to government.  In other words, it is VERY, VERY unusual for "different freedoms to conflict with each other," but, to show me wrong, since you believe "it is not unusual," is there any chance you could point to three such conflicts?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 18, 2018, 07:47:36 pm
As I already said, the right to bear arms can conflict with the right to public safety.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 19, 2018, 12:52:04 am
As I already said, the right to bear arms can conflict with the right to public safety.

The right to bear arms is found in the Second Amendment, and it is merely the right not to have government infringe on that right.

Could you point to the language in the Constitution that addresses "the right to public safety"?  Several cases over the years have been brought against local police departments or sheriff's offices for failing to keep the plaintiffs safe, and each time the Supreme Court has made clear that no such obligation exists for government.  In other words, there is no such right, or at least the Supreme Court has concluded that there is none, but  perhaps you could point to the language showing how and why they are wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 19, 2018, 02:29:48 pm
This would be a real extension of existing doctrine, Jes. But I wonder whether the very narrow "special relationship" exception to the usual rule that you note--that the Constitution usually does not oblige government to provide us with affirmative protection--could be extended to the school context, given that we mandate education for minors? Thus, the argument would be, in the same way that the government has an affirmative constitutional obligation to provide a safe environment and adequate medical care to the incarcerated (who are in a special relationship with government because they cannot take care of themselves), so too should it have an affirmative constitutional obligation to provide a safe environment to the children it requires (usually) to attend school.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 19, 2018, 03:24:57 pm
This would be a real extension of existing doctrine, Jes. But I wonder whether the very narrow "special relationship" exception to the usual rule that you note--that the Constitution usually does not oblige government to provide us with affirmative protection--could be extended to the school context, given that we mandate education for minors? Thus, the argument would be, in the same way that the government has an affirmative constitutional obligation to provide a safe environment and adequate medical care to the incarcerated (who are in a special relationship with government because they cannot take care of themselves), so too should it have an affirmative constitutional obligation to provide a safe environment to the children it requires (usually) to attend school.

The problem with indefinite pronouns is that they are, well, indefinite.

WHAT would be an extension of existing doctrine?  Oh, and there IS no Constitutional mandate that states educate anyone, only that education which IS provided is provided equally.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 19, 2018, 11:18:42 pm
(https://scontent.fsnc1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/27972704_2014762165205776_5244951712469693615_n.jpg?oh=15677ef5d54464f1b020ca0312302329&oe=5B156A74)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 23, 2018, 03:06:36 pm
Curt, this is just in case if you were wondering why I was spending so much time on my cell phone last time you were in Nashville.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/02/22/megan-barry-affair-****-cell-phone-photos-deleted-chats-may-show-evidence-crime-mayor-megan-barry/360898002/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 23, 2018, 03:07:31 pm
"N ude" is a censored word here?  **** that!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 23, 2018, 03:13:33 pm
The governor of Missouri is in trouble for a n udie pic, too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 23, 2018, 03:20:30 pm
Yeah I saw that too . . . well not the n ude pic but the story about it. 

Can't any of our public officials just do their jobs without fooling around on the side?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 23, 2018, 03:41:55 pm
Sense of entitlement
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on March 29, 2018, 06:15:42 pm
Nothing surprising here.  https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/parkland-survivor-admits-to-bullying-the-shooter-and-shes-not-sorry/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on May 09, 2018, 04:26:32 pm
Politifact and Snopes already debunked your lame attempt Al.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on June 26, 2018, 03:30:28 pm
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on June 26, 2018, 04:20:10 pm
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

It's always been a favorite of mine, but it only makes sense to reference it in the context of some existing reality.

So who is the "they" who you see as coming, and for whom have "they" recently came?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 26, 2018, 07:38:30 pm
Where is Curt when you need him?  Should it be "and for whom have "they" recently came?" or " and for whom have "they" recently come?"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on June 27, 2018, 06:53:55 am
NO!  It is - Who dey git and why da fuk did dey git 'em?  That is the proper way to say it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 27, 2018, 09:15:11 am
The Supreme Court has just ruled against the ability of Public Employees Unions to collect dues from dissenting Government Employees.  It is not clear if this applies to the entire amount of dues, or only that portion that is expended on political activities.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 27, 2018, 09:38:02 am
The reports now are that this gives Public Employees the right to opt out of all union dues, but they actually have to "opt in" in order to have union dues taken from their paychecks.  This seems to force all states into "Right to Work" states as far as Public Employees are concerned.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on June 27, 2018, 01:12:15 pm
YEEE-HA!!

Justice Kennedy is retiring.

Trump gets another nominee.

Roe v. Wade could well be dead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 27, 2018, 01:39:03 pm
How sad, 2nd worst thing to happen to this country in the last 19 months. first trump... now this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 27, 2018, 02:13:34 pm
This country is about to get less comfortable for anyone who isn't straight, white, and male.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 27, 2018, 02:20:18 pm
It has been for the last 2 years. That treatment is about to become the law though. We are literally going to go back to the 1920s, just in time for the 2020s.

Gains made thru the labor, civil rights, women's rights movements will all be ceded.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 27, 2018, 02:26:46 pm
I think that is overdramatic.  Roberts will likely become the swing vote like he did on Obamacare.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 27, 2018, 02:54:21 pm
No way... he voted with the rule of law on that one... when it comes to setting precedent like repealing roe, he will not be a swing vote. Same goes for Gerrymandering cases, where he shifts drastically to the right.

Roberts aligns himself closer to Alito then anyone else on the bench. I think that will continue, Kennedy was routinely with Ginsberg.

If the swing vote is aligned more to Alito, thats a massive shift to the right... as in, its not a swing vote anymore.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 27, 2018, 04:35:07 pm
No way... he voted with the rule of law on that one... when it comes to setting precedent like repealing roe, he will not be a swing vote. Same goes for Gerrymandering cases, where he shifts drastically to the right.

Roberts aligns himself closer to Alito then anyone else on the bench. I think that will continue, Kennedy was routinely with Ginsberg.

If the swing vote is aligned more to Alito, thats a massive shift to the right... as in, its not a swing vote anymore.

Kennedy disagreed that he voted with the rule of law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_leanings_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_justices

There are two graphs in this that might be of interest to you.  Roberts and Kennedy are the two most liberal of the conservative justices and whatever system you want to use Roberts/Kennedy are much, much closer than Kennedy/Ginsberg and that will likely continue.  The court already leans to the right and has since the 1970's.  That hasn't stopped civil rights, Roe vs Wade, gay rights or whatever else you want for happening.  Again I think you are making way too much out of this.

Even if Roe vs Wade gets over turned it won't make abortion illegal.  It will just return the issue to the states. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 27, 2018, 06:34:21 pm

Even if Roe vs Wade gets over turned it won't make abortion illegal.  It will just return the issue to the states. 

Which is where it should have been all along.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on June 27, 2018, 06:38:11 pm
Dave, you're not one of those crackpots that wants to FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION, are you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on July 02, 2018, 06:26:16 pm
No way... he voted with the rule of law on that one... when it comes to setting precedent like repealing roe, he will not be a swing vote. Same goes for Gerrymandering cases, where he shifts drastically to the right.

Roberts aligns himself closer to Alito then anyone else on the bench. I think that will continue, Kennedy was routinely with Ginsberg.

If the swing vote is aligned more to Alito, thats a massive shift to the right... as in, its not a swing vote anymore.

I want a Supreme Court where Clarence Thomas would be the swing vote....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on July 02, 2018, 06:28:46 pm
lol
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on July 25, 2018, 08:44:12 am
Have we just identified the next addition to Trump's list of potential Supreme Court nominees?  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-court/u-s-appeals-court-constitution-gives-right-to-carry-gun-in-public-idUSKBN1KE28C
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 23, 2018, 09:29:50 pm
Replying to a post from the Cubs in 2018 topic so we don't go down this rabbit hole there...

What did he say that makes him homophobic?

In 2015, Murphy said he disagrees with the "gay lifestyle." The word "lifestyle" in that context is offensive and embarrassingly outdated.

https://deadspin.com/daniel-murphy-disagrees-with-the-gay-lifestyle-1689309224
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 23, 2018, 10:31:19 pm
So can a person disagree with people living contrary to their beliefs with being labeled a homophobe?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 23, 2018, 10:45:59 pm
We live in a world where people want to be offended.

He didnt say a thing wrong if thats all he said.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 23, 2018, 11:12:58 pm
If someone believes that being gay or lesbian is a "lifestyle choice" and disagrees with "living the gay lifestyle," then that's homophobic*. Anyone who says that is being dismissive of another person's core identity. It's no different than saying "I disagree that he's African American" or "I disagree that she's female." It's ridiculous...it's basically saying that someone is morally wrong for just being who they are.

*This assumes you're using the word "homophobic" in the way it is generally used in society now, which is basically shorthand for saying "bigoted against lesbian and gay people." I guess if you want to be pedantic and define "homophobic" as "fear of homosexual people," then I guess you got me. It's not homophobic, it's just bigotry.

Having said this, I do get the impression from the front office's actions leading up to the trade that Murphy has evolved somewhat since he made those comments. I just wish he'd come out and specifically talk about how his views have changed. Today's comments showed some acknowledgement of how his previous comments were problematic, but he still kind of came across as saying "I have a gay friend now."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 23, 2018, 11:18:19 pm
Being gay is a choice not something you're born with like a heart murmur.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 23, 2018, 11:18:52 pm
Wat
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 23, 2018, 11:20:26 pm
Being gay is a choice not something you're born with like a heart murmur.

Oh, so you chose to be straight? I didn't, it's just something that I have always been.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 23, 2018, 11:21:17 pm
Yes.

I choose to bang women not men.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 23, 2018, 11:21:57 pm
Quote
Being gay is a choice not something you're born with like a heart murmur.

Maybe one of the dumbest things you've ever posted, but you're certainly not alone in that belief.  People are stupid.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 23, 2018, 11:25:53 pm
So you're saying that you made the choice of acting on your feelings for women over men? You were attracted to both, but then you chose to just go with women?

Sounds like you're actually bisexual, and you only chose to act on your feelings for women.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 23, 2018, 11:28:58 pm
Understand that I have a few gay family members and am not a gay basher.

I knew a gay man that was really good to me and helped me in a situation that he didnt have to so you're not talking to a homophobe.

You're just talking to a Christian who disagrees with it.

I choose to like blondes and Asians over brunettes and redheads.

They choose to like their own sex.

God wouldnt allow a child to be born a way he disagreed with.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 23, 2018, 11:41:14 pm
Believe it or not this ignorant rednecks best friend has a PhD and is a private school principal in Nashville.

A man who has spent his life around and studied children and he says you can tell if a child is gay or straight on the first day of kindergarten thus meaning they are born that way.

My friends father is law is famous Southern Baptist minister Dr. Richard Land.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 23, 2018, 11:56:07 pm
Here's my point--you didn't actually "choose" any of those things. For as long as you can remember, you were just attracted to women. You never made that choice, you just were straight. You couldn't change your mind tomorrow and choose to be attracted to men. So why do you think that experience is any different from gay or lesbian people? 

You may not be a "gay basher." But just having a gay friend or family member doesn't make you less homophobic*.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 24, 2018, 12:13:03 am
You say homophobic.

I say Christian.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 24, 2018, 06:50:46 am
I am in no way homophobic, have several gay friends and a gay sister, yet do not support the gay lifestyle. I believe it to be anti-biblical and against God's commandments regardless of the "evolution" of man's thinking. So the question remains, "Am I a homophobe?" Here's another, "Should I be shunned by society or forced out of my employment and not allowed to make a living?"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 07:56:39 am
Being gay is a choice not something you're born with like a heart murmur.

Engaging in gay sex, or ANY sex, or NO sex is a choice.

Being gay is not a choice.  Nor is being straight.

What we DO is a result of a choice.

What we FEEL or desire or what turns us on or turns us off or arouses us is NOT a choice.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 07:57:32 am
I am in no way homophobic, have several gay friends and a gay sister, yet do not support the gay lifestyle.

So what is "the gay lifestyle"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 08:01:45 am
Believe it or not this ignorant rednecks best friend has a PhD and is a private school principal in Nashville.

A man who has spent his life around and studied children and he says you can tell if a child is gay or straight on the first day of kindergarten thus meaning they are born that way.

My friends father is law is famous Southern Baptist minister Dr. Richard Land.



So if we should believe the idiot you describe as your best friend because he's a school principal and has a Phd, should we also believe the other school principals who have Phd's (which are not uncommon for school principals) who state the exact opposite position?

Or is your comment simply another example of what is called confirmation bias -- looking for anything which supports our position and simply ignoring everything else, without any real consideration of the evidence?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 08:03:58 am
I just wish he'd come out and specifically talk about how his views have changed. Today's comments showed some acknowledgement of how his previous comments were problematic, but he still kind of came across as saying "I have a gay friend now."

I don't give a damn what his views are on this.

I am much more concerned with hearing what he is going to do in the field to compensate for his limited range.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 08:05:33 am
Maybe one of the dumbest things you've ever posted,

Are you new here?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 24, 2018, 08:45:34 am
I am in no way homophobic, have several gay friends and a gay sister, yet do not support the gay lifestyle. I believe it to be anti-biblical and against God's commandments regardless of the "evolution" of man's thinking. So the question remains, "Am I a homophobe?" Here's another, "Should I be shunned by society or forced out of my employment and not allowed to make a living?"

Your backwards and hateful point of view should be made public and ridiculed. And if that means nobody wants to work with you, tough luck.  You should be shunned and moved to the margins of a modern society. Unfortunately, our country is still so **** up that people like you are the norm.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 24, 2018, 08:50:07 am
Your backwards and hateful point of view should be made public and ridiculed. And if that means nobody wants to work with you, tough luck.  You should be shunned and moved to the margins of a modern society. Unfortunately, our country is still so **** up that people like you are the norm.
Compare the two statements and note which is hateful and backwards.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 24, 2018, 08:59:47 am
I will also say that I disagree with those who engage in premarital sex and who commit adultery after marriage. Does that make me a heterosexualaphobe? Or does it mean I simply disagree with their choices. I realize my views are becoming less and less the norm in this "modern" society. But that doesn't change anything. If my beliefs do not color my hiring practices or the way I treat others in society (including my sister) I have to ask why I must be ridiculed or threatened with losing my employment unless I adhere? And yes Cletus, there are still quite more than a few who believe as I do, yet they do so in a mostly peaceful way, allowing others to believe what they do. I will never conform to the teachings of modern society and there is no need to make my beliefs public. I believe I just did so.

For once I must say I agree with Jesbeard on something. I don't really care what Daniel Murphy's views on gays, minorities, Russian collusion or China's emergence as a super power are. I just hope he can hit in the clutch and play passable defense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 24, 2018, 09:03:56 am
You seem to think that you should be immune from any consequences because you have some gay friends (very doubtful) and because you have the cover of religion.  That’s bullshit and pointing it out is not hateful.  Thankfully, the world is moving away from you and you’ll have to adapt. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 24, 2018, 09:33:45 am
You say homophobic.

I say Christian.

Your religion is just something you're hiding behind so you don't have to take responsibility for your own views. You realize that Christian doesn't automatically mean anti-gay, right? There are many Christian churches and denominations where homophobia doesn't exist.

There are many denominations that openly affirm LGBTQ people--there's a list here: https://www.gaychurch.org/affirming-denominations/. Some of those are pretty big denominations (PCUSA, for example, has over 9,000 churches and 1.4 million members). The Episcopal Church isn't on that list, but their official positions on LGBTQ people are inclusive. The United Methodist Church has anti-gay stances, but many individual churches and members publicly reject the denomination's official policies (and that stance is likely changing in February when UMC leadership meets specifically to resolve disagreement on LGBTQ inclusion).

Bottom line--you've chosen a homophobic brand of Christianity while you have many other choices. That doesn't necessarily make you homophobic, but it's a pretty strong indicator.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 24, 2018, 09:51:35 am
Committing adultery and having pre-marital sex and being gay are analogous?

Y’all are something.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 24, 2018, 10:08:27 am
When you decide, as these guys have, that cultural progress ended 2000 yrs ago, you can get to some pretty weird places.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 24, 2018, 10:28:46 am
I am in no way homophobic, have several gay friends and a gay sister, yet do not support the gay lifestyle. I believe it to be anti-biblical and against God's commandments regardless of the "evolution" of man's thinking. So the question remains, "Am I a homophobe?" Here's another, "Should I be shunned by society or forced out of my employment and not allowed to make a living?"

Your use of the phrase "the gay lifestyle" suggests you've never had a real conversation with either your sister or your friends to understand their perspective. A lifestyle is a choice, just like engaging in premarital sex or cheating on your spouse is a choice. A person's sexual orientation is just part of who they are, like their race, age, or height.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Dusty last night--when did you make the conscious choice to be straight and follow "the straight lifestyle?"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 24, 2018, 10:41:07 am
I think Robb and Dusty are over looking the effect that their views have on gay kids.  Growing up Catholic I did. 

I think there are better ways to go about changing peoples minds that what is happening in this thread.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 24, 2018, 10:47:20 am
The guy has a sister who is gay and still thinks it’s a lifestyle choice. You think you’re going to change his mind?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 24, 2018, 10:47:29 am
People dont change their minds about these things unless they are faced with a situation that makes it extremely personal.

If Robb's sister is gay and he feels this way, there is likely nothing that will make him change his mind.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 24, 2018, 11:01:21 am
People dont change their minds about these things unless they are faced with a situation that makes it extremely personal.

If Robb's sister is gay and he feels this way, there is likely nothing that will make him change his mind.

Being a gay Mormon is a tough life. His sister must deal with **** like this every day.  Robb probably has tried to get her to go to conversion therapy at some point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 24, 2018, 11:06:00 am
Your backwards and hateful point of view should be made public and ridiculed. And if that means nobody wants to work with you, tough luck.  You should be shunned and moved to the margins of a modern society. Unfortunately, our country is still so **** up that people like you are the norm.

Interesting that those that are loudest in demanding tolerance IN others tend to be the most intolerant themselves.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 24, 2018, 11:12:41 am
The guy has a sister who is gay and still thinks it’s a lifestyle choice. You think you’re going to change his mind?

I think calling him homophobic and saying he shouldn't have a job isn't going to work.  Treating people decently has a better shot at changing their minds.  I agree with most of the points you and br are making, but they way you are going about it makes me cringe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 24, 2018, 11:29:08 am
Your use of the phrase "the gay lifestyle" suggests you've never had a real conversation with either your sister or your friends to understand their perspective. A lifestyle is a choice, just like engaging in premarital sex or cheating on your spouse is a choice. A person's sexual orientation is just part of who they are, like their race, age, or height.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Dusty last night--when did you make the conscious choice to be straight and follow "the straight lifestyle?"
Br, I'm glad you asked this question.  I made the choice at about 12 years old. Like my sister, I was molested before I was ten multiple times by 3 different people. Two were men, one a babysitter. I was a very confused young man with attraction to both genders. However, I made the choice at that age what lifestyle I wanted. As such I did not get angry at my sister when she made the opposite choice. I do not shun her, I do not hate her and certainly have never been as rude and vitriolic toward her as some have been in their comments on this very thread. I do however disagree with her choice, and because of my own experience do believe it is a choice. Now, are there some who are born with tendencies to one or the other? Perhaps. But acting on those tendencies is against my beliefs, therefore I chose a different path and am a happily married man of 25 years with 9 children and no attraction whatsoever to men. So how is it possible if some would argue I was born that way? I would argue that if I wasn't molested I wouldn't have had the confusion in the first place. I am NOT saying that all gay people have been molested. I am simply saying that I have been there, chose God's path and never looked back. I don't force that belief on others, but I won't hide from it either.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 24, 2018, 11:36:43 am
I think calling him homophobic and saying he shouldn't have a job isn't going to work.  Treating people decently has a better shot at changing their minds.  I agree with most of the points you and br are making, but they way you are going about it makes me cringe.

The way I’m going about it?

By definition somebody who has such an aversion to homosexuality is a homophobe. And I have not mentioned anyone’s job or profession.

Hope this helps
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 24, 2018, 01:02:43 pm
Robb, first let me say I'm sorry that happened to you as a child. That sucks, and I can't imagine how difficult it must have been to deal with that. I'm glad you've been able to move ahead and have a fulfilling family life as an adult--I know that can be very difficult for a lot of people who have had the experiences you have.

I was a very confused young man with attraction to both genders.

...and because of my own experience do believe it is a choice.

Thanks for answering with a response better than "I bang women, not men." I have no reason to doubt your experience. It's your choice that you decided to follow your religious beliefs and act in a way consistent with that, so I think that's great. But here's the big distinction--almost everyone I've ever met who identifies as gay or lesbian was never attracted to both men and women--they were only attracted to their own sex. The only alternative to being themselves was pursuing unfulfilling, doomed-to-fail relationships where they felt no attraction to the other person. That is not a choice in the same way you had a choice.

I grew up in Alabama and have lived my entire adult life in Georgia--I've always lived in a very conservative area of the country where being gay is not always seen as acceptable. So I knew many people in high school and college who knew they were gay by the time they were 12 or 13 years old, but forced themselves to try to be straight until finally coming out in their late teens or even early-mid 20s. I've volunteered with a church youth group for a long time and have seen LGBTQ teenagers deal with eating disorders and depression because they feel like they have to hide who they are. It is awful for them, and being told that they are making a immoral choice just because of who they are naturally attracted to is so damaging.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 24, 2018, 01:06:28 pm
BR's response is also much better.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 24, 2018, 01:15:34 pm
I take issue with the fact that it is completely disingenuous to refer to homosexuality as a lifestyle choice. That’s precisely what got Murphy in hot water at the time and yet some years later that’s what is being used in this thread today.

A cursory google search would have answered Robb’s inquiry as to what Murphy said that was wrong. Clearly he wanted to strike up a debate.

Why you’re getting sanctimonious about it isn’t necessarily unique, because that’s what you always do, but it is weird.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 24, 2018, 01:40:16 pm
Ok so by the way of thinking here being that you're born attracted to who you are and cant change that does that mean **** are OK and that they cant help it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 24, 2018, 01:43:00 pm
Ok so by the way of thinking here being that you're born attracted to who you are and cant change that does that mean **** are OK and that they cant help it?

Are you comparing adults who take advantage of non-consenting children to same sex consenting adults? This is why your view point is laughed at.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 24, 2018, 01:43:11 pm
Dusty

You've heard this before but must have forgotten:

"The first thing you do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 24, 2018, 02:04:50 pm
Are you comparing adults who take advantage of non-consenting children to same sex consenting adults? This is why your view point is laughed at.

And on top of that, pedophilia is often more about the power dynamic than it is about sex. So even if there wasn't the most important issue of consent, it would often (usually?) inherently about taking advantage of another person anyway.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 24, 2018, 02:13:11 pm
Br, thank you for the thoughtful response. I can understand completely your viewpoint and have grappled with what seems to be conflicting sides of the same coin. If God made us and some are born with the tendency to be attracted to the same sex, yet God commands us not to act on those tendencies, why would he do that? Some have decided there is no God. Some have said he only meant it was wrong thousands of years ago and due to man now being okay with it, he should be too. Then there are those like me who simply don't understand all of it, but trust him more than they do their own knowledge and understanding and believe it will all make sense beyond mortality. I guess that's why they call it faith. Again, I do not hate or even condemn those who believe differently than I do, I simply believe that God knows more than I do, in fact knows all and he has commanded that sexual relations should be between a man and a woman who are lawfully wedded so that is the law I live.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 24, 2018, 02:17:34 pm
Im beginning to like you Robb.

As far as the pedophilia comment goes I wasnt talking about the actual act.

I was saying is it OK for them to have the thoughts and feelings since we apparently cant help who we're attracted to?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 24, 2018, 02:24:50 pm
No. It is never ok to have thoughts and feelings to take advantage of other people. Sexually or otherwise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 07:10:08 pm
You say homophobic.

I say Christian.

Could you point to anything anywhere in the Bible, or in any of the gospels which were not included in the Bible, which indicates that Jesus in any way condemned homosexuality?  I am not asking about anything which indicated a condemnation of homosexual conduct (which I also believe does not exist), but instead of homosexuality.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 07:15:30 pm
Your use of the phrase "the gay lifestyle" suggests you've never had a real conversation with either your sister or your friends to understand their perspective. A lifestyle is a choice, just like engaging in premarital sex or cheating on your spouse is a choice. A person's sexual orientation is just part of who they are, like their race, age, or height.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Dusty last night--when did you make the conscious choice to be straight and follow "the straight lifestyle?"

I'm still waiting for someone to explain what the "gay lifestyle" is.  Preferring, or engaging in, homosexual sex over heterosexual sex (or no sex or any other sexual choice), is not a "lifestyle."  The lifestyle of gays and straights is often identical except for one thing -- the preferred gender of their sex partners.  That alone does not remotely come close to constituting a lifestyle.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 07:31:42 pm
I grew up in Alabama and have lived my entire adult life in Georgia--I've always lived in a very conservative area of the country where being gay is not always seen as acceptable. So I knew many people in high school and college who knew they were gay by the time they were 12 or 13 years old, but forced themselves to try to be straight until finally coming out in their late teens or even early-mid 20s. I've volunteered with a church youth group for a long time and have seen LGBTQ teenagers deal with eating disorders and depression because they feel like they have to hide who they are. It is awful for them, and being told that they are making a immoral choice just because of who they are naturally attracted to is so damaging.

And what of ****?  What of those who are naturally attracted to very young partners for sex?  What of those attracted to animals as sex partners?

This is not for a moment to equate any of the three different preferences or to compare the conduct of one with the conduct of the other.

This is simply to look at the reasoning presented here (which I have set in bold) and pointing out that it applies in equal force to each of the three.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 07:44:30 pm
The way I’m going about it?
By definition somebody who has such an aversion to homosexuality is a homophobe. And I have not mentioned anyone’s job or profession.
Hope this helps

YOU may not have, but I think someone else may have........

Your backwards and hateful point of view should be made public and ridiculed. And if that means nobody wants to work with you, tough luck.  You should be shunned and moved to the margins of a modern society. Unfortunately, our country is still so **** up that people like you are the norm.

Yeah, someone else has.

You seem to think that you should be immune from any consequences because you have some gay friends (very doubtful) and because you have the cover of religion.  That’s bullshit and pointing it out is not hateful.  Thankfully, the world is moving away from you and you’ll have to adapt.

Trust us, Cletus, your comments ARE hateful.  Your comments reek of bigotry.

If you want to understand just HOW disgusting your comments are, I would bet that if most people had to vote on whether they preferred Dusty's comments and the way he has presented himself here or your comments and the way you have presented yourself here.... Dusty would win.

That would make a reasonable person take pause and re-evaluate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 24, 2018, 07:48:45 pm
No. It is never ok to have thoughts and feelings to take advantage of other people. Sexually or otherwise.

Feelings and actions are different.  They are different under the law.  They are different as a matter of language.  They are different as matters of logic.  Most religions regard them differently.  Finding them comparable is just a bit nutty.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 24, 2018, 11:36:48 pm
If God made us and some are born with the tendency to be attracted to the same sex, yet God commands us not to act on those tendencies, why would he do that? Some have decided there is no God. Some have said he only meant it was wrong thousands of years ago and due to man now being okay with it, he should be too. Then there are those like me who simply don't understand all of it, but trust him more than they do their own knowledge and understanding and believe it will all make sense beyond mortality. I guess that's why they call it faith. Again, I do not hate or even condemn those who believe differently than I do, I simply believe that God knows more than I do, in fact knows all and he has commanded that sexual relations should be between a man and a woman who are lawfully wedded so that is the law I live.

I have avoided the Politics & Religion thread in the past, but when the discussion of this topic moved here, I followed it because this is a subject that is very personal to me for two reasons. First, a very close family member of mine is a member of the LGBTQ community, and secondly, my own values were formed largely from my upbringing within the Christian church, which included serving as President of the Oklahoma Methodist Student Movement and two years of seminary.

I never cease to be amazed, and offended, by the arrogance displayed by many fundamentalist Christians who believe that their own narrow understanding of the Bible and the teachings of Jesus are the CORRECT understandings. To state, as you do, that you know what "God knows," suggesting, in effect, that your understanding of the scriptures and the teaching of Jesus is inherently superior and correct, unlike the millions of Christians who believe differently than you do is not only arrogant and self-righteous, it is deeply disrespectful to those whose beliefs are different than yours. I try not to presume to judge others' religious beliefs, but when those beliefs are so disrespectful of others' beliefs, particularly when they are hurtful, I draw the line.  I do not recognize the teachings of Jesus in the bigotry and often hateful words and deeds of those fundamentalist who so often proudly claim to be "Christians" while disrespecting and even demonizing those whose views they oppose.

This sort of blindness to the legitimate beliefs of others has contributed to all manner of horrible actions by people utterly convinced that God was on their side. It was the basis of the Crusades. It was present in the genocide that was committed toward Native Americans. And it made possible the enslavement, then segregation and, even now, some of the current blatant racism toward African Americans. It was a justification for the Holocaust. We see it in some of the fear and inhuman treatment of immigrants and would-be immigrants, particularly those who are not Christians.  It is just this sort of extremist, absolutist ideological rigidity that "Muslim" jihadists rely on to justify their actions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 24, 2018, 11:43:09 pm
Robb, first let me say I'm sorry that happened to you as a child. That sucks, and I can't imagine how difficult it must have been to deal with that. I'm glad you've been able to move ahead and have a fulfilling family life as an adult--I know that can be very difficult for a lot of people who have had the experiences you have.

Thanks for answering with a response better than "I bang women, not men." I have no reason to doubt your experience. It's your choice that you decided to follow your religious beliefs and act in a way consistent with that, so I think that's great. But here's the big distinction--almost everyone I've ever met who identifies as gay or lesbian was never attracted to both men and women--they were only attracted to their own sex. The only alternative to being themselves was pursuing unfulfilling, doomed-to-fail relationships where they felt no attraction to the other person. That is not a choice in the same way you had a choice.

I grew up in Alabama and have lived my entire adult life in Georgia--I've always lived in a very conservative area of the country where being gay is not always seen as acceptable. So I knew many people in high school and college who knew they were gay by the time they were 12 or 13 years old, but forced themselves to try to be straight until finally coming out in their late teens or even early-mid 20s. I've volunteered with a church youth group for a long time and have seen LGBTQ teenagers deal with eating disorders and depression because they feel like they have to hide who they are. It is awful for them, and being told that they are making a immoral choice just because of who they are naturally attracted to is so damaging.

Brjones - You and I have disagreed frequently (particularly in the Today's Game thread), but  I wanted to compliment you for your articulate and obviously deeply felt responses to the attempts to justify homophobic attitudes here.  I have appreciated not only your views, but the effectiveness with which you have expressed them. You and I both know that these words can and do hurt. They contribute to an environment in which many who are more aggressively homophobic than Robb or Dusty feel justified to not only vilify, but mentally and/or physically abuse members of the LGBTQ community.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 25, 2018, 12:02:02 am
Even an ignorant redneck understands this.

Genesis 19...

19 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. 2 “My lords,” he said, “please turn aside to your servant’s house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning.”

“No,” they answered, “we will spend the night in the square.”

3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. 4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.”

6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 7 and said, “No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. 8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don’t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.”

9 “Get out of our way,” they replied. “This fellow came here as a foreigner, and now he wants to play the judge! We’ll treat you worse than them.” They kept bringing pressure on Lot and moved forward to break down the door.

10 But the men inside reached out and pulled Lot back into the house and shut the door. 11 Then they struck the men who were at the door of the house, young and old, with blindness so that they could not find the door.

12 The two men said to Lot, “Do you have anyone else here—sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here, 13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the Lord against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it.”

14 So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were pledged to marry[a] his daughters. He said, “Hurry and get out of this place, because the Lord is about to destroy the city!” But his sons-in-law thought he was joking.

15 With the coming of dawn, the angels urged Lot, saying, “Hurry! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or you will be swept away when the city is punished.”

16 When he hesitated, the men grasped his hand and the hands of his wife and of his two daughters and led them safely out of the city, for the Lord was merciful to them. 17 As soon as they had brought them out, one of them said, “Flee for your lives! Don’t look back, and don’t stop anywhere in the plain! Flee to the mountains or you will be swept away!”

18 But Lot said to them, “No, my lords, please! 19 Your[c] servant has found favor in your[d] eyes, and you[e] have shown great kindness to me in sparing my life. But I can’t flee to the mountains; this disaster will overtake me, and I’ll die. 20 Look, here is a town near enough to run to, and it is small. Let me flee to it—it is very small, isn’t it? Then my life will be spared.”

21 He said to him, “Very well, I will grant this request too; I will not overthrow the town you speak of. 22 But flee there quickly, because I cannot do anything until you reach it.” (That is why the town was called Zoar.[f])

23 By the time Lot reached Zoar, the sun had risen over the land. 24 Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens. 25 Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, destroying all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land. 26 But Lot’s wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

27 Early the next morning Abraham got up and returned to the place where he had stood before the Lord. 28 He looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah, toward all the land of the plain, and he saw dense smoke rising from the land, like smoke from a furnace.

29 So when God destroyed the cities of the plain, he remembered Abraham, and he brought Lot out of the catastrophe that overthrew the cities where Lot had lived.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 25, 2018, 01:06:08 am
Brjones - You and I have disagreed frequently (particularly in the Today's Game thread), but  I wanted to compliment you for your articulate and obviously deeply felt responses to the attempts to justify homophobic attitudes here.

I've said before that I think the Today's Game thread is just stupid in-game reactions at this point--if you want PBP, go to MLB.com, because the Today's Game topic is mostly just reactionary nonsense from Chris and me. But I think this discussion is actually important to have.   

Even an ignorant redneck understands this.

I have many things to say about this. I'm not especially religious any more, but I used to be...and the Sodom and Gomorrah story is one of my top 3 least favorite Bible stories. I could point out half a dozen problems with it (including the fact that its supposed-to-be hero is a complete degenerate)...but since you're quoting Bible verses, I'll just point out that the Bible itself debunks the point you're trying to make. Here's Ezekiel 16:49-50:

Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me.

The Bible says the problem in Sodom was that the people were being a$$holes, taking more resources than what they needed, not caring about others, refusing to help those in need, and acting like they were better than everyone else. There is nothing in there about sexuality...it's all about being generally awful to other people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 25, 2018, 07:24:12 am
Even an ignorant redneck understands this.

Genesis 19...



And even an atheist understands that nothing in Genesis was said by Jesus.

You say your views are a result of being a Christian, but I not only do not recall you ever actually quoting Jesus or referring to any of his teachings, which were almost entirely about love and forgiveness.  You seem instead to focus exclusively on the Old Testament, and do so selectively, while completely ignoring the fact that Jesus clearly told his followers that much of those Old Testament commands no longer applied to them.

Are you sure you are a Christian and not actually an Orthodox Jew.... or perhaps just a run of the mill bigot who picks from the Bible in carte blanch fashion to support your various prejudices?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 25, 2018, 07:45:01 am
I never cease to be amazed, and offended, by the arrogance displayed by many fundamentalist Christians who believe that their own narrow understanding of the Bible and the teachings of Jesus are the CORRECT understandings. To state, as you do, that you know what "God knows," suggesting, in effect, that your understanding of the scriptures and the teaching of Jesus is inherently superior and correct, unlike the millions of Christians who believe differently than you do is not only arrogant and self-righteous, it is deeply disrespectful to those whose beliefs are different than yours. I try not to presume to judge others' religious beliefs, but when those beliefs are so disrespectful of others' beliefs, particularly when they are hurtful, I draw the line.  I do not recognize the teachings of Jesus in the bigotry and often hateful words and deeds of those fundamentalist who so often proudly claim to be "Christians" while disrespecting and even demonizing those whose views they oppose.

This sort of blindness to the legitimate beliefs of others has contributed to all manner of horrible actions by people utterly convinced that God was on their side. It was the basis of the Crusades. It was present in the genocide that was committed toward Native Americans. And it made possible the enslavement, then segregation and, even now, some of the current blatant racism toward African Americans. It was a justification for the Holocaust. We see it in some of the fear and inhuman treatment of immigrants and would-be immigrants, particularly those who are not Christians.  It is just this sort of extremist, absolutist ideological rigidity that "Muslim" jihadists rely on to justify their actions.

You REALLY need to read Robb's post again.  It is rather apparent that you wildly misunderstood what he was saying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 25, 2018, 07:48:50 am
I have avoided the Politics & Religion thread in the past, but when the discussion of this topic moved here, I followed it because this is a subject that is very personal to me for two reasons. First, a very close family member of mine is a member of the LGBTQ community, and secondly, my own values were formed largely from my upbringing within the Christian church, which included serving as President of the Oklahoma Methodist Student Movement and two years of seminary.

I never cease to be amazed, and offended, by the arrogance displayed by many fundamentalist Christians who believe that their own narrow understanding of the Bible and the teachings of Jesus are the CORRECT understandings. To state, as you do, that you know what "God knows," suggesting, in effect, that your understanding of the scriptures and the teaching of Jesus is inherently superior and correct, unlike the millions of Christians who believe differently than you do is not only arrogant and self-righteous, it is deeply disrespectful to those whose beliefs are different than yours. I try not to presume to judge others' religious beliefs, but when those beliefs are so disrespectful of others' beliefs, particularly when they are hurtful, I draw the line.  I do not recognize the teachings of Jesus in the bigotry and often hateful words and deeds of those fundamentalist who so often proudly claim to be "Christians" while disrespecting and even demonizing those whose views they oppose.

This sort of blindness to the legitimate beliefs of others has contributed to all manner of horrible actions by people utterly convinced that God was on their side. It was the basis of the Crusades. It was present in the genocide that was committed toward Native Americans. And it made possible the enslavement, then segregation and, even now, some of the current blatant racism toward African Americans. It was a justification for the Holocaust. We see it in some of the fear and inhuman treatment of immigrants and would-be immigrants, particularly those who are not Christians.  It is just this sort of extremist, absolutist ideological rigidity that "Muslim" jihadists rely on to justify their actions.
If the pursuit of all religions is not to know what God would have us do (and not do) is not the purpose of religion then I don't know what is. I don't speak for God, nor have I tried to enforce my beliefs on others, either here or more importantly in my personal life. I don't however apologize for those beliefs or feel pressured to change them because society has chosen a different course. What's interesting here is those who cry intolerance the loudest are often the most intolerent. I have not asked you to change your way of thinking but simply to allow me to have my own. I have not called for violence, or rejection from friends, society and employment because your beliefs differ from mine. Yet, that has happened right in this thread to me. I have not called you any names or labeled you but based on a difference in beliefs, you have done so to me. I am not in any way hostile to gay people. I simply believe what they are doing is wrong. What you are saying is that I must change my views, my very beliefs to conform to societal norms or be labeled hateful and compared to those who perpetuated mass murder.

We have come full circle back to the beginning of the discussion. What did Daniel Murphy say that was wrong? He said he didn't support the gay lifestyle. Apparently that makes him homophobic, or hostile to all gays. If his personal conduct toward gay people was hostile I would join with you in condemning the man. But I have read no evidence of such behavior. What you are saying is that words matter. That even disagreeing with homosexuality causes pain and suffering. I do not disagree that it can be hard for anyone to feel shunned by society. My own religion has been mocked on this board. Yet, I didn't see a single person come to my defense or call out that person for making hateful statements that were abusive. So what happened? Are disagreements and open hostility okay if you agree with it? But they are abhorrent only if they are against the right minority? As a Mormon, or to correctly state it, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints I am used to intolerance, bigotry, hatred and ridicule. It rolls off my back. But I do find the double standard somewhat revealing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 25, 2018, 08:29:33 am
What did Daniel Murphy say that was wrong? He said he didn't support the gay lifestyle.

But what in the world is the gay "lifestyle"?

How is it that the preference of one gender of sex partner over another constitutes a "lifestyle"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 25, 2018, 08:57:32 am
https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2018/8/25/17780294/cubs-daniel-murphy-trade-homophobia-non-apology-blechhhh
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 25, 2018, 09:31:57 am
There are places in the world where Christians (fundamentalist or otherwise) are persecuted for their religion. To suggest that is the case in the U.S. is absurd. And to equate the discomfort you feel when people criticize your beliefs to the very real physical and deep mental harm (even death in too many cases) that members of the LGBTQ community suffer to this day in the U.S., as a direct result of the bigotry toward them, often justified by religious beliefs, shows just how deep your "love" for them is.

And this trope about people who complain intolerance being the most intolerant reflects a refusal to recognize of the differences involved, whether willful or not.  Intolerance of people for who they are, based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, nationality, etc, is fundamentally different from refusal to tolerate words or actions that are hurtful and harmful to others. Surely anyone who truly follows the teachings of Jesus can make that distinction.

Jon Greenburg has what I consider to be a fair and balanced article on Murphy and his comments. It recognizes the seriousness of them without blowing them out of context, and he recognizes the apparent progress Murphy is making in his attitudes


https://theathletic.com/487381/2018/08/24/i-would-hope-that-you-would-root-for-the-cubs-daniel-murphy-addresses-his-past-words/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 25, 2018, 10:19:18 am
If I am understanding you Ron, you are saying bigotry, abuse and hatred toward a minority is okay if it isn't as bad as it is toward gay people? And you are also saying if I don't accept homosexuality then there is no place for me in society accept at the fringes. Yet I am the intolerant one?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 25, 2018, 10:33:51 am
If I am understanding you Ron, you are saying bigotry, abuse and hatred toward a minority is okay if it isn't as bad as it is toward gay people? And you are also saying if I don't accept homosexuality then there is no place for me in society accept at the fringes. Yet I am the intolerant one?

That perfectly matches my reading of his comment.

Ron, how is it that Robb's position is "intolerant" of gays?

Look, Robb, and most Christians firmly and as an absolute fundamental tenett of their belief that I, as an atheist, am a sinner who will be eternally damned.... and, if you are a Christian, YOU also believe that.

But I don't recall him suggesting that I should be stoned to death for it, or beaten to death on the street as I am leaving a bar, or denied employment.... and I also don't recall him saying that any of those are the way to treat someone who is gay.

He has said he believes homosexual conduct is a sin, because he thinks the god he believes in condemns it.... which is the very same reason Christians condemn my atheism.

When, Ron, was the last time you ripped into anyone's "intolerance" of atheism because they believed as a basic tenet of their Christian faith that atheists, because they do not embrace Jesus as their savior, are going to spend eternity in hell?

Am I misreading anything there?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 25, 2018, 11:20:29 am
If I am understanding you Ron, you are saying bigotry, abuse and hatred toward a minority is okay if it isn't as bad as it is toward gay people? And you are also saying if I don't accept homosexuality then there is no place for me in society accept at the fringes. Yet I am the intolerant one?

I really am beginning to think you are willfully misunderstanding (and mis-stating), what I have written, as well as the meaning of words like bigotry and abuse (and apparently even hatred).

Please give me examples of bigotry, abuse and hatred toward Christians in this country, starting with comments on this board. Not just criticism of your characterizations of how wrong homosexuality is, or criticisms of how your beliefs affect other people through their (unintentional) support for an environment of hostility toward gays or other members of the LGBTQ community.

You are obviously entitled to your own interpretation of the Bible, and to your own beliefs. But you should not expect others to passively accept statements that (at least) suggest your views about the Bible are somehow superior to others.  The issue is how those beliefs affect other people. And when statements are made unequivocally that God is against homosexuality that isn't a matter of having personal beliefs. There were people who had beliefs that black people were not human, and based that on scripture. It was the articulation of those beliefs that led to slavery all that followed.  It was the belief that semites were inferior to Christians that led to the Holocaust.  The fact that citizens who held and articulated those beliefsfdid not personally enslave or harm black people in this country, or commit atrocities in Germany doesn't remove their complicity.

And are you simply unaware of the devastating harm that bigotry toward members of the LGBTQ community have endured, and if you are aware of that, do you still dare to compare in any way the discomfort Christians undergo for their faith in this country?  Seriously?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 25, 2018, 12:20:47 pm
And are you simply unaware of the devastating harm that bigotry toward members of the LGBTQ community have endured, and if you are aware of that, do you still dare to compare in any way the discomfort Christians undergo for their faith in this country?  Seriously?

Where did he make such a comparison?

Please give me examples of bigotry, abuse and hatred toward Christians in this country, starting with comments on this board.

Cletus.

Are actual quotes from his comments even needed?

.... support for an environment of hostility toward gays or other members of the LGBTQ community.

I have seen NOTHING in Robb's comments which supported "an environment of hostility toward gays or other members of the LGBTQ community."

Could you perhaps point me to them?

You are obviously entitled to your own interpretation of the Bible, and to your own beliefs. But you should not expect others to passively accept statements that (at least) suggest your views about the Bible are somehow superior to others...   And when statements are made unequivocally that God is against homosexuality that isn't a matter of having personal beliefs

An interesting interpretation of Robb's comments which were actually rather different --
If the pursuit of all religions is not to know what God would have us do (and not do) is not the purpose of religion then I don't know what is. I don't speak for God, nor have I tried to enforce my beliefs on others, either here or more importantly in my personal life.

And...

You are obviously entitled to your own interpretation of the Bible, and to your own beliefs. But you should not expect others to passively accept statements that (at least) suggest your views about the Bible are somehow superior to others.  The issue is how those beliefs affect other people. And when statements are made unequivocally that God is against homosexuality....

And
Some have decided there is no God. Some have said he only meant it was wrong thousands of years ago and due to man now being okay with it, he should be too. Then there are those like me who simply don't understand all of it, but trust him more than they do their own knowledge and understanding and believe it will all make sense beyond mortality.

But despite what Robb actually wrote, you continue...

There were people who had beliefs that black people were not human, and based that on scripture. It was the articulation of those beliefs that led to slavery all that followed.  It was the belief that semites were inferior to Christians that led to the Holocaust.  The fact that citizens who held and articulated those beliefsfdid not personally enslave or harm black people in this country, or commit atrocities in Germany doesn't remove their complicity.

So now Robb is a genocidal slaveowner?  Did he really personally dispense the zyklon gas in the showers at Dachau?

Damn.... he's a real bast*ard.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 25, 2018, 01:03:12 pm
Are you gay Brjones?

You seem to be awfully invested in this conversation for someone who dont have a dog in it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 25, 2018, 01:12:45 pm
Please give me examples of bigotry, abuse and hatred toward Christians in this country, starting with comments on this board.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism_in_the_United_States



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 25, 2018, 01:28:02 pm
What did Daniel Murphy say that was wrong? He said he didn't support the gay lifestyle.

You answered your own question. The term "gay lifestyle" is problematic and offensive. Period. It implies a immoral choice when the vast majority of gay and lesbian people are just living their life the only way they can if they want it to be fulfilling. It's basically telling a gay person, "You may think you're living the only way you can without feeling unfulfilled on a daily basis, but you're wrong. I know what you're feeling better than you do." It's dehumanizing. And as Ron has said, being so dismissive of a teenager's identity like that can have devastating consequences.

If I am understanding you Ron, you are saying bigotry, abuse and hatred toward a minority is okay if it isn't as bad as it is toward gay people? And you are also saying if I don't accept homosexuality then there is no place for me in society accept at the fringes. Yet I am the intolerant one?

Here's the difference--your belief is a choice. Maybe not your religious faith itself...but it's a choice to hold the specific belief that you "don't agree with the gay lifestyle." There are many religious people--including Mormons--who reject the idea that sexual orientation is chosen and that it's immoral. In just about every faith tradition I'm aware of, this is not a core tenet that must be held to be accepted into that faith. On top of that, psychologists and experts on human sexuality almost unanimously agree that sexuality is not a choice.

Your choice to insist that being gay is a chosen "lifestyle" despite the claims of psychologists, other subject matter experts, and (most importantly) the vast majority of people who experience same sex attraction is intolerance towards LGBTQ people. Calling that choice out for being demonstrably hurtful is not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 25, 2018, 01:33:00 pm
That is a stupid question Dusty.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 25, 2018, 01:43:32 pm
I dont see how its stupid.

If there's nothing wrong with it then there's nothing to be ashamed of.

Its not like Dave would allow us to heckle him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 25, 2018, 01:52:17 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism_in_the_United_States





There certainly is a history of anti-catholicism in this country, for the most part driven by other Christians," so I hardly think that constitutes being anti-Christian.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 25, 2018, 01:55:46 pm
The older I get, the more I think Bill Maher has it right--that organized religion does more harm than good.

In religions, people take defenseless children and beat dogma into them, telling them that this is the way it IS, and so many of them grow up blindly following a set of rules established centuries ago whether it makes sense or not.  Because it's what God wants.  It says so right here.

Personally, any time someone justifies something by quoting the Bible, their credibility in my eyes resets to zero.

I admire you, Ron, for trying, but I think it's a waste of time.  The good news is that organized religions seem to be slowly dying out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 25, 2018, 01:59:27 pm
Are you gay Brjones?

You seem to be awfully invested in this conversation for someone who dont have a dog in it.

I don't happen to be gay. Of course I wouldn't be scared to say it if I was because as you said, there's nothing to be ashamed of.

As I said earlier, I have volunteered with a church youth group for years. I have seen first hand how damaging it can be for LGBTQ teenagers who have to deal with homophobia. It doesn't matter if it's unintentional and not malicious (like Robb) or if it's from someone having no empathy for other people (like you). It sucks. I have also heard stories from older friends who have been rejected or ridiculed for being gay and no longer have relationships with some of the most important people in their lives. That sucks too.

I have a dog in this fight because I'm not a sociopath--I care about other people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 25, 2018, 02:52:20 pm
Are you gay Brjones?

You seem to be awfully invested in this conversation for someone who dont have a dog in it.

When growing up in  a Christian environment, I was taught compassion, empathy and to be supportive of those were shunned.  These principles are apparently foreign to your version of "Christianity.:




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 25, 2018, 03:32:08 pm
As I said earlier, I have volunteered with a church youth group for years. I have seen first hand how damaging it can be for LGBTQ teenagers who have to deal with homophobia. It doesn't matter if it's unintentional and not malicious (like Robb) or if it's from someone having no empathy for other people (like you). It sucks.

So how is it that they "have to deal with" either?

They actually do not.


blindly following a set of rules

Religion is not a "set of rules" which are blindly followed, but a set of beliefs.  And nothing in Robb's comments have indicated following a "set of rules," but instead following a set of beliefs.


I dont see how its stupid.

How about because A) it is none of your business, B) because it makes absolutely no difference to the discussion, and C) appears to assume that only gays are going to be offended by homophobic comments?

If some here were to be critical of white racism, would you ask if they were black?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 25, 2018, 04:09:21 pm
Once again you all are conveniently forgetting the part where I said I have gay family members and had a gay man help me out in a situation that he didnt have to.

I may not agree with their choices but I have never mistreated one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 25, 2018, 04:35:39 pm
I may not agree with their choices but I have never mistreated one.

The entire point of this entire conversation is Ron, me, and others pointing out that this sentence is literally a way you can mistreat gay people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 25, 2018, 04:36:39 pm
Once again you all are conveniently forgetting the part where I said I have gay family members and had a gay man help me out in a situation that he didnt have to.

I may not agree with their choices but I have never mistreated one.


Yeah.... you have just told them that they are going to burn in hell.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 25, 2018, 05:15:13 pm
The entire point of this entire conversation is Ron, me, and others pointing out that this sentence is literally a way you can mistreat gay people.

With that punctuation, I am going to exit the Politics and Religion thread and return to the relatively noncontroversial baseball threads.  I suspect nothing substantially new is going to be said.  Once again, brjones, thanks for thoughtful contributions on this subject.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 25, 2018, 08:22:01 pm
The entire point of this entire conversation is Ron, me, and others pointing out that this sentence is literally a way you can mistreat gay people.

Well that's just where we'll have to agree to disagree then because the whole point of my stance is that I do think it's a choice and that God wouldnt let a child be born that way.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 25, 2018, 08:51:57 pm
We're not going to agree to disagree because there's nothing to disagree about in my last post. You don't have to like it, but you are being disrespectful to gay people when you say that homosexuality is a choice. That's just a fact.

I will agree that this conversation isn't going anywhere with you and there's no real reason to continue talking about it, though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 25, 2018, 09:08:14 pm
We live in a world where people want to be offended and you're asking me to back off my religious views to not offend a group that I feel is living a sinful life.

I wont do that.

Im done as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 25, 2018, 09:32:59 pm
I also noticed that the majority of posters on this board want you to believe Christianity is a fad of the past.

I also thought by the consensus of this board that Donald Trump who I did not vote for didnt have a chance and you saw how that went.

I just now looked up the percentage of people in the United States who believed in God and it's still 3/4 of the population.

The currency of this country also says "In God We Trust" on it,when you go to court you have to swear on the bible,and our pledge of allegiance also says "one nation under God".

I also noticed that two members of this board who I know are religious never once commented in this discussion.

They're smart.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on August 25, 2018, 09:40:37 pm
Just Pray  The  Gay Away! works every time
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 25, 2018, 09:52:56 pm
Dusty, you are an excellent representative of the christian faith.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 25, 2018, 10:11:13 pm
I appreciate that Cletus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 26, 2018, 09:57:36 pm
As usual, Cletus was being sarcastic, but had absolutely no reservations about the fact that his post was not only disrespectful to Christians, but deliberately meant to be.  It takes a real hypocrite to deliberately offend others, at the same time he complains about being offended himself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 27, 2018, 10:11:33 am
The irony is rich
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 27, 2018, 01:13:22 pm
"Christian"

Janzen has been all to hell since he came back.

If he has saved his money properly I believe with his issues I'd hang em up,take care of myself,and bang Dominican beauties for the rest of my days.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 27, 2018, 02:23:44 pm
Yeah, the word irony doesn't really do it justice.  Mega-Irony?  Ultra-Irony?  Irony-cubed?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 27, 2018, 03:03:44 pm
I didnt propose that Kenley bang Dominican studs did I Br?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 27, 2018, 03:14:57 pm
Any maybe...just maybe you all are grasping for straws and taking my posts just a tad too serious.

I meant every word I said in this thread and have even stronger feelings on the subject but chose not to expose you all to a hell,fire,and brimstone sermon but I wasnt aware that every word of my posts had to be 100% serious.

No. I was aware with this sensitive crowd.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 27, 2018, 03:39:57 pm
I wasn’t being sarcastic. Dusty is an excellent Christian and he keeps proving it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 27, 2018, 03:49:45 pm
I dont long to be accepted by those who choose to live and believe differently than me.

Im sorry.

I also believe if I dont stand up for what's right then my God wont stand up for me.

With that said Im done with this thread.

Im here to talk baseball.

Every one of you can put me on ignore and I can still read and give my opinions.

That's totally fine by me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 27, 2018, 03:56:28 pm
Why would a omnipotent creator of the universe need to you stand up for it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 27, 2018, 04:03:48 pm
Ezekiel 2:1

And he said to me, “Son of man, stand on your feet, and I will speak with you.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 27, 2018, 04:12:01 pm
Oh. That’s as banal as I’d expect from a real Christian.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 27, 2018, 06:37:27 pm

.... With that said Im done with this thread.


And a scant 14 minutes later --

Ezekiel 2:1

And he said to me, “Son of man, stand on your feet, and I will speak with you.”

What a tease....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 27, 2018, 06:39:48 pm
Any maybe...just maybe you all are grasping for straws and taking my posts just a tad too serious.

I meant every word I said in this thread....

~sigh~
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 27, 2018, 06:41:27 pm
As usual, Cletus was being sarcastic, but had absolutely no reservations about the fact that his post was not only disrespectful to Christians, but deliberately meant to be.  It takes a real hypocrite to deliberately offend others, at the same time he complains about being offended himself.

When did Cletus complain about being offended himself?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 27, 2018, 06:42:34 pm
Oh. That’s as banal as I’d expect from a real Christian.

Cletus, in YOUR definition, what is "a real Christian"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 27, 2018, 06:44:55 pm
I didnt propose that Kenley bang Dominican studs did I Br?

You proposed that Jansen commit what the Bible calls adultery. That is condemned in the Bible far more often and far more clearly than homosexuality (including in the ten commandments).

So I don't think you really care about biblical sexual ethics. I think you use Christianity as a cover so you can play the victim when people call you out for your own beliefs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 27, 2018, 07:00:24 pm
You proposed that Jansen commit what the Bible calls adultery. That is condemned in the Bible far more often and far more clearly than homosexuality (including in the ten commandments).

So I don't think you really care about biblical sexual ethics. I think you use Christianity as a cover so you can play the victim when people call you out for your own beliefs.

Damn... how dare you say that about a self-proclaimed good Christian?

You, sir, are clearly a sinner and are going to burn in hel*l!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 28, 2018, 10:01:06 am
Brutal

https://abc7.com/bullied-9-year-old-killed-himself-after-coming-out-at-school/4067760/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 28, 2018, 11:49:07 am
That's horrible Blue. As one of the bigger kids in my school I made it my mission in life to stop bullying. But one person or even many tragedies doesn't stop kids from engaging in this kind of behavior. You can make it illegal, you can teach them not to, but unfortunately I don't think there is an answer.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 28, 2018, 01:18:30 pm
At least 50% of those who bullied him, thought he was making a choice and an action against god. They were taught that from a young age.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 28, 2018, 05:43:39 pm
Brutal

https://abc7.com/bullied-9-year-old-killed-himself-after-coming-out-at-school/4067760/


WTF is a NINE YEAR OLD doing "coming out"?  If it is appropriate for a 9-year-old to "come out," would it also be appropriate for a 9-year-old to announce to the world that they are straight?

I am sorry this happened.  I am sorry he was bullied.  He shouldn't have been and anyone aware of it should have taken steps to stop it, but if there is any blame here it is in the parents or teachers who somehow convinced a fourth grade kid to announce to the world that he was gay, at an age before he likely actually even knew, and then apparently did nothing to help him cope the bullying.

Yes we should stop bullying whenever we can, but as a society we would be much better off to focus more attention of helping kids learn how to cope with being bullied than with stopping the bullying.

EVERYONE at some time is going to be bullied.

EVERYONE.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 28, 2018, 06:06:01 pm
I don't recall ever being bullied. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 28, 2018, 06:25:58 pm

WTF is a NINE YEAR OLD doing "coming out"?  If it is appropriate for a 9-year-old to "come out," would it also be appropriate for a 9-year-old to announce to the world that they are straight?

9 years old is right around the beginning of kids exploring their sexuality.  It’s very immature but you can start to see kids begin working out their feelings at the age. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 29, 2018, 07:51:36 am
I don't recall ever being bullied. 

Then either your perception of bullying or your memory are very poor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 29, 2018, 07:58:55 am

WTF is a NINE YEAR OLD doing "coming out"?  If it is appropriate for a 9-year-old to "come out," would it also be appropriate for a 9-year-old to announce to the world that they are straight?

I am sorry this happened.  I am sorry he was bullied.  He shouldn't have been and anyone aware of it should have taken steps to stop it, but if there is any blame here it is in the parents or teachers who somehow convinced a fourth grade kid to announce to the world that he was gay, at an age before he likely actually even knew, and then apparently did nothing to help him cope the bullying.

Yes we should stop bullying whenever we can, but as a society we would be much better off to focus more attention of helping kids learn how to cope with being bullied than with stopping the bullying.

EVERYONE at some time is going to be bullied.

EVERYONE.

I'm kinda with you on this one.  Bullies have always been around.  I think the difference is now snow flakes teach kids to be snow flakes instead of standing up to the bullies.  They want them to be the victim because it's OK to be the victim and it's not their fault for being the victim.  That's BS in my opinion.  Stand up to the bully and DON'T be a victim.  Refuse to be a victim.  DON'T allow the bully to victimize others.  That is what I was taught.  Just my $0.02.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 29, 2018, 08:31:05 am
I don't know if it is a pack mentality, or a product of how they were raised but the profile of kids who bully has always been fascinating to me. Everybody is bullied at some point whether verbally or physically or both. It is a matter of life. Most everyone has done some bullying whether they realize it or remember it. What is the cause? My number one theory is that bullies are compensating for a deficiency in their own lives. Thus, driven by their own inadequacy, they make themselves feel better by making someone else feel worse. Did the kids at this boy's school really care whether he was gay or stupid or ugly? I doubt it. They simply saw it as an opportunity to increase their standing in the hierarchy by joining the herd in casting him out. I would imagine there were christian kids in the crowd, atheists, non-denominationals, members of my faith and quite possibly quite a few who are regularly bullied themselves regardless of what they are taught at home. Like it or not school is survival of the fittest. To place blame on this boy's treatment on a specific group is probably a case of seeing what you want to see. Yes, it is sad, but perhaps we should look into why it is that bullied kids see suicide as their only out when an inevitable part of life, being bullied for being different in any way, happens.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 29, 2018, 09:00:45 am
Victim blaming...always a go to move. Nice.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 29, 2018, 09:12:58 am
As a long time educator, I'm concerned that on one hand what some are calling bullying is simple teasing that we all had to learn to handle as kids.  On the other hand, the web has made some of that teasing and taunting to go over the top.  WJ, how do you stand up to a bully that hides behind the anonymity of the net? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 29, 2018, 10:40:08 am
Go Blue, were you attempting to add to the conversation or fire darts from the ramparts? Is it possible to have an adult conversation any more?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 29, 2018, 10:55:12 am
Six paragraph bloviation doesn’t inherently suggest adult conversation. Pithiness is generally much better. I don’t know what common ground we will find since I find most of your opinions and stances incredulous. I think several people have asked you what you mean by gay lifestyle and you haven’t responded. So that’s disingenuous.

In any case...My comment was directed at the maga moron squealing about “snowflakes”

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 29, 2018, 11:02:04 am
Also the boy was told to go kill himself after coming out. The mental gymnastics on display trying to understand what went on here is crazy. Urging someone to kill themselves because they’re different goes far beyond bullying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 29, 2018, 11:52:54 am
Quote
WJ, how do you stand up to a bully that hides behind the anonymity of the net?

You ignore it.  You don't take the bait.

Ala...

Quote
My comment was directed at the maga moron squealing about “snowflakes”

or you tell them to bite me and leave it at that.

BTW I think the moran meant mega.  :)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 29, 2018, 12:53:15 pm
No he meant maga, and he nailed it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 29, 2018, 01:13:55 pm
You ignore it.  You don't take the bait.


Good grief.  You're an adult.  Try to remember what it was like when you were a teenager and you were worried about your appearance, who liked you and who didn't, and all the self-conscious decisions you made.  The teenage brain is in it's final stages of development, and just ignoring attacks is totally unrealistic.  But that is the only advice we can give kids because we don't have to tools to deal otherwise.

I'd like to start a business: Revenge-R-Us, hire us to track and destroy online bullies.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 29, 2018, 01:15:09 pm
No he meant maga, and he nailed it.

I guess he got that wrong too then.  I am not of Indian ethnicity nor am I anywhere near priestly.

Definition of maga
plural -s
: a member of the priestly caste among the Sauras of India
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 29, 2018, 01:17:15 pm
Good grief.  You're an adult.  Try to remember what it was like when you were a teenager and you were worried about your appearance, who liked you and who didn't, and all the self-conscious decisions you made.  The teenage brain is in it's final stages of development, and just ignoring attacks is totally unrealistic.  But that is the only advice we can give kids because we don't have to tools to deal otherwise.

I'd like to start a business: Revenge-R-Us, hire us to track and destroy online bullies.

The question was, "WJ, how do you stand up to a bully that hides behind the anonymity of the net?"

Remembering back to when I was a teenager there was no net.  You confronted a bully.  My answer was regarding today's internet warriors.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 29, 2018, 01:29:11 pm
Maga = Make america great again.

maga moron = a trump flake. so like i said, he nailed it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 29, 2018, 01:33:35 pm
Oh...  Sorry.  Hard to keep up with the different petty name calling from the left lately.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 29, 2018, 02:10:13 pm
Quote
Stand up to the bully and DON'T be a victim.  Refuse to be a victim.

This is why there are school shootings.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 29, 2018, 06:12:38 pm
Victim blaming...always a go to move. Nice.

Have you always had problems with reading comprehension, is this a new difficulty for you, or perhaps a onetime thing?

NO ONE has blamed the kid who committed suicide.  NO ONE has blames the victims of bullying for being bullied.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 29, 2018, 06:14:18 pm
Go Blue, were you attempting to add to the conversation or fire darts from the ramparts? Is it possible to have an adult conversation any more?

With some folks it is not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 29, 2018, 06:18:15 pm
Good grief.  You're an adult.  Try to remember what it was like when you were a teenager and you were worried about your appearance, who liked you and who didn't, and all the self-conscious decisions you made.  The teenage brain is in it's final stages of development, and just ignoring attacks is totally unrealistic.  But that is the only advice we can give kids because we don't have to tools to deal otherwise.

There ARE no other tools.   And we as adults need to teach kids how to use them.  Instead most of us focus our efforts on trying to avenge the bullying or to track down the bully and explain to them how that is not "being nice."

We as a society are focusing are primary efforts in the wrong place.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 29, 2018, 06:22:11 pm
Maga = Make america great again.

maga moron = a trump flake. so like i said, he nailed it.

No.... most likely he absolutely missed it, in every possible way.

This is why there are school shootings.

No.  Standing up to a bully is not even remotely close to coming to a school to shoot people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 29, 2018, 06:24:45 pm
Article from The Athletic: A lesbian's guide to rooting for the Cubs with Daniel Murphy

https://theathletic.com/494008/2018/08/29/a-lesbians-guide-to-rooting-for-the-cubs-with-daniel-murphy/

Quote
I wish I didn’t have to explain that what he said is odious, painful and cruel, but in my experience in talking about Murphy with Cubs fans over the past few days, it has become clear that I do. Being gay is not a lifestyle. You can’t disagree with something that someone just is. You can’t love someone while simultaneously denying them acknowledgement of a fundamental part of who they are.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ray on August 29, 2018, 06:47:35 pm
It all starts at home on both sides of the bullying issue, to me. Part of it is folks just dont give kids attention they need.  I've taught my little boy bullying is bad and he loathes it.  My son was in first grade last year and I had a mom thank him and me because he always stops the other kids from bullying her son.  He also got into a scuffle(which I do wish hadn't happened) trying to stop a different kid from being bullied.  I've taught him to treat others as he wants to be treated and he does.  I'm just not sure, in this digital age, parents are as close to their kids as they used to be.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 29, 2018, 07:08:35 pm
Well done Ray. As a father of 8 daughters I can say girls can be more effective than boys at stopping bullying. My girls stepped in more times than can be counted to stop boys from bullying and the boys listened. Girls can be even more cruel at times too so they can be a positive influence among their peer groups in stopping the behavior. My 4th daughter noticed a special needs boy in the lunch room sitting all by himself so she went and had lunch with him. They struck up a friendship and he never sat alone again. She became his shield against the nasty things kids sometimes say. The principal even made sure they were in the same class together the rest of grade school. You can me mock religion or blame it for all our societal ills, but it was the religious teachings she had heard all her life that caused her to think of what her Savior would do in that situation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 29, 2018, 09:38:23 pm
You can me mock religion or blame it for all or societal ills, but it was the religious teachings she had heard all her life that caused her to think of what her Savior would do in that situation.

I am not mocking religion, or blaming it for any ills, but it was YOU teaching which influenced your daughter.  Not religious teachings.  In grade school is is highly unlikely that she even really has a meaningful understanding of Jesus as her savior or a concern about what Jesus would think.

YOU, on the other hand, it would appear she knows and loves and wants to please.

YOU, at least in her mind, were much more likely he savior than some Biblical abstraction.  Your teaching, and your values, and your concerns shaped your daughter.

Take the credit which is due.

Take a bow.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 29, 2018, 09:55:40 pm
Article from The Athletic: A lesbian's guide to rooting for the Cubs with Daniel Murphy
"You can’t love someone while simultaneously denying them acknowledgement of a fundamental part of who they are."
https://theathletic.com/494008/2018/08/29/a-lesbians-guide-to-rooting-for-the-cubs-with-daniel-murphy/

So a Christian who says condemn the sin, but love the sinner would be lying?

If a person is a rapist or murderer or **** or liar or drug addict thief or Cardinal fan or adulterer (and they so regularly engage in such conduct that it is clearly "a fundamental part of who they are), and you condemn such conduct, you could not love them?

brjones, I know this is not your wording, but merely something you have posted from someone else, but my questions remain, regardless who might have written it originally.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 30, 2018, 09:32:35 pm
Awesome

https://twitter.com/mbdchicago/status/1035348652095664128
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 16, 2018, 09:24:54 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoIhgYtVQGU&feature=share
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on September 17, 2018, 09:34:06 am
be weary of statisticians bearing numbers
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 17, 2018, 09:38:50 am
Unless they support your point of view.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 17, 2018, 08:27:31 pm
Unless they support your point of view.

But the figures do NOT support my point of view.

I not only did not vote for Trump, and despite my opposition to Hillary would have voted for her over Trump if my vote were to have decided the outcome, but I more than once commented that Trump would reintroduce assassination into the realm of serious political discussion if he were to win.

But now he HAS won, and anyone ignoring the economic figures in that video is doing so as a political zealot whose position is not at all related to what is actually happening and is instead strictly partisan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on September 20, 2018, 07:43:45 am
But now he HAS won, and anyone ignoring the economic figures in that video is doing so as a political zealot whose position is not at all related to what is actually happening and is instead strictly partisan.

Is it difficult painting with a brush that broad? 

I'm skeptical of any figures anyone presents.  I was a math and business major in college and I have worked for an actuarial consulting firm for the last 25 years.  I know how to cherry pick numbers.  It has nothing to do with partisan politics.  I wonder why they started at 2012.  Why not start back with Bush to show the effects of the recession and the recovery.  I think their just picking 2012 as a starting point is the partisan politics.  And this administration has not been know to provide accurate or truthful information (yes that is a partisan take).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 20, 2018, 08:15:16 pm
So if you believe numbers where cherry picked and distort reality, what numbers do you think should be used?

I am not disputing that cherry picking happens and that data can be distorted, but merely pointing out that such a thing CAN happen does not mean in any particular instance that it DID.

What do you believe was cherry picked, and what other data do you suggest someone should consider?

As I have pointed out, I am NOT a fan of Trump.  Please show me how that data is not favorable for him or that accurate data would show disappointing results.  If you can show it, I will more than eagerly embrace it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on September 21, 2018, 08:11:43 am
Let's take for instance the first one I googled:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PNFIC1

That graph of Real Private Non-Residential Fixed Investment looks nothing like the graph they showed probably because it goes back more than just the last 4 years of Obama's presidency.  If you read my post again, my main problem was cutting off all the graphs at 2012.  If you want to show any real economic trends you have to go back more than 6 years.

Plus citing "optimism" is not a factual basis.  Its subjective to the person answering the question. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: grrrrlacher on September 21, 2018, 08:17:06 am
Here's another good graph from that site which uses the US Bureau of Economic Analysis as the source which is the same as the presentation you linked.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/B009RX1Q020SBEA

That one is for Structures which again they cherry picked 2012 as the starting point.  You can't say that Trump started with a worse economic situation than Obama.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 22, 2018, 03:20:53 am
Let's take for instance the first one I googled:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PNFIC1

That graph of Real Private Non-Residential Fixed Investment looks nothing like the graph they showed probably because it goes back more than just the last 4 years of Obama's presidency.  If you read my post again, my main problem was cutting off all the graphs at 2012.  If you want to show any real economic trends you have to go back more than 6 years.

Plus citing "optimism" is not a factual basis.  Its subjective to the person answering the question. 

Actually optimism IS important economic data, and has been reported and addressed as such for more than 50 years, and, more importantly, was not even remotely close to being the focus of his comments -- it roughly 45 seconds of more than 7 minutes of detailed data analysis.

But as to what appears to be your central complaint about the data, you might want to consider what the data was presented for, and what his comments were responding to.  If you look at the video at roughly 2:30 in, where he is responding to a question from a reporter about Obama's recent claims that the current economic data is simply a continuation of the economic picture of the nation during his (Obama's) administration.  He says, "You know, one of the hypothesis floating around about the economy lately is that the strong economy that we're seeing is just a continuation of recent trends, and since we're the nerds at the White House, we decided that this is a testable trend."

Testing that "continuation of recent trends" claim (the claim Obama and his supporters have been making) involves looking at RECENT trends, not looking back at the last 50 or 100 years.  Looking back at the last six years seems perfectly normal, and appropriate, for that purpose.

You also wrote that "You can't say that Trump started with a worse economic situation than Obama."  On that point you are certainly correct.... of course neither I in my comments here, nor Trump's economic advisor anywhere in the video, make that claim, or even suggest it, meaning your comment is a straw man claim.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 22, 2018, 11:41:36 am
A long and tough read but one that’s worth the time.  If you ever wonder why women don’t come forward when they are assaulted, read this and understand that this is not uncommon.  Perhaps the degree to which this woman was ignored and belittled is uncommon but the larger idea that a woman is not given the benefit of the doubt in theses cases is common.  Hopefully the #metoo movement will help bring this to an end.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/opinions/arlington-texas/?utm_term=.0e345224f983
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 23, 2018, 03:05:00 am
A long and tough read but one that’s worth the time.  If you ever wonder why women don’t come forward when they are assaulted, read this and understand that this is not uncommon.  Perhaps the degree to which this woman was ignored and belittled is uncommon but the larger idea that a woman is not given the benefit of the doubt in theses cases is common.  Hopefully the #metoo movement will help bring this to an end.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/opinions/arlington-texas/?utm_term=.0e345224f983



blah, blah, blah.... And we find another collection of rationalizations to explain away the obvious, and to do so in a manner which really has no direct application to the facts at hand.

Instead of trying to somehow make the reaction to Ford's claims a plebiscite on the mistreatment of women or on the "Me Too" movement or on r@pe, let's try to focus on the specifics of the allegation at hand.

The problem with Ford's allegation is not even remotely close to just being that she waited more than 30 years to voice it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on September 23, 2018, 03:13:27 am
(https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/42374595_10212664191699051_3744915228152823808_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&oh=977529bb16d21eb33ab036bd67fb2ca0&oe=5C2E5B2C)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2018, 11:55:09 am
VOTE!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2018, 12:42:35 pm
I have 3 times today.  Going out for a 4th.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 01, 2018, 10:42:48 pm
People whohave  seen the video of the Saudi prince giving a high five to Putin:  Notice how the Crown Prince pats their clasped hands with his LEFT hand?  What's up with that?  I though Arabs never touched anyone with their left hands, that it was a taboo.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on December 03, 2018, 12:04:52 pm
Think once you start murdering journalists everything else goes out the window
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on December 03, 2018, 12:47:30 pm
Putin's hands are constantly covered in ****, so it makes sense to use his left hand.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 03, 2019, 04:31:15 pm
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/longtime-democratic-alderman-in-chicago-charged-in-federal-extortion-probe
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 03, 2019, 04:45:06 pm
We need a third party. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 03, 2019, 05:03:35 pm
Aren't the two we have doing enough damage?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 01, 2019, 10:46:24 pm
The Ricketts family won't pay for anyone better than Brad Brach, and now they're doubling down on this guy.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/cubs-todd-ricketts-expands-trump-fundraising-role/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 01, 2019, 10:54:46 pm
They are making it very difficult to support the cubs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on February 02, 2019, 07:55:18 am
Fortunately, we have Theo Epstein - not Todd Ricketts - leading the Cubs!

Theo has done a rather solid job for Cub fans the past four or so years...don't give up on 2019!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on February 02, 2019, 09:02:17 am
The Ricketts family won't pay for anyone better than Brad Brach, and now they're doubling down on this guy.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/cubs-todd-ricketts-expands-trump-fundraising-role/

They are making it very difficult to support the cubs.

I generally stay way clear of this topic.  But I feel a need to set the record straight here. I live in Chicago and I am a liberal Democrat who has a long history of political activism. I abhor the politics of Joe, Pete and Todd.  I'm not sure what Tom's exact politics are, other than that he's a conservative Republican who just game $25,000 to Bill Daley's campaign for mayor. Since becoming involved with the Cubs he has generally steered clear of politics. Laura Ricketts is a very liberal Democrat who was fund raiser for Obama and many other liberal candidates and causes. 

The only members of the Ricketts families actively involved with the Cubs are, so far as I can tell, Tom, Laura and Todd, with Todd not as involved either of the other two, and obviously Laura less involved than Tom. 

So if anybody really wants to base whether they support the Cubs based on their political leanings, things are more complicated than it may first appear. Especially to people who don't live in Chicago and who are not very familiar with politics in our city.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 02, 2019, 09:36:51 am
They are making it very difficult to support the cubs.

If you stop supporting/shopping at places who donate to candidates you dont like, you'll find yourself not patronizing 90% of things around.

We stopped shopping at Publix due to their political support for for certain things here in Florida, it has been difficult to say the least as its the dominate grocery store chain in Florida.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 02, 2019, 10:15:35 am
Oh, no!  We can't lose Birdbath.  We already lost Cletus.  What will we do?  I'm assuming Birdbath will go to the Cardinals, BlueJays, or Orioles...let's go with him!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 04, 2019, 11:34:56 pm
The Ricketts family won't pay for anyone better than Brad Brach, and now they're doubling down on this guy.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/cubs-todd-ricketts-expands-trump-fundraising-role/

Joe is a real piece of ****

https://twitter.com/mlbyahoosports/status/1092581406620839937
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 05, 2019, 05:28:51 am
That's strange I read on this board that racism is only a phase white men go thru in their youth. They grow out of it!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 09:15:13 am
That's strange I read on this board that racism is only a phase white men go thru in their youth. They grow out of it!

What is the "That" you reference?

And when is it you thought you read anyone here writing that "racism is only a phase white men go thru in their youth. They grow out of it"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 05, 2019, 10:02:58 am
Here it is GoBlue, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piwaBO6U43U
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 05, 2019, 11:00:20 am
Imagine being shocked that an old mormon was a racist.  That's almost as ridiculous as thinking racism is mostly gone. I guess since you think black people can wear the magic underwear now that it's all good. It's not.
I have moved my answer to this topic. First, who said that my grandparents are mormon? They hate the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter=Day Saints. Second, give me an indicator that our society is still racist. We obviously can't have a discussion about it because nobody will listen to the other side. They want to keep their own indoctrination intact. Third, why bring my religion into it? Perhaps it's because the one true bigotry still allowable today is anti-religion bias.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 05, 2019, 11:07:47 am
GoBlue, it is disappointing, although indicative of our society today that you wouldn't listen to a black man make the case that racism isn't a problem today. I listen to liberal points of view all day long which only strengthens my beliefs and values. You have said racism is alive and well across society today because you say it is so. I have a different opinion. Is my opinion an affront to you? If so then provide me with the stats or studies that show that black people in America are less advantaged than white people. Access to education is easier for black americans, most crime today against black people is committed by other black people, we overwhelmingly elected and reelected a black president. With affirmative action companies today are scrutinized in hiring practices on the diversity of their workforce. I could go on and on. The point I am making though, because I know it is about to be distorted, is that although individuals in this country are still racist, as a society we are moving past it. When the oldest generation dies out I think most of the remnants of our bigoted past will die with them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2019, 11:21:45 am
First of all, this isn’t just an American problem. Secondly it isn’t just an issue with black people. I took issue with you saying racism is almost gone. That it has lessened in this country  as more of the old whites have died, doesn’t mean it’s on the verge of disappearing. It is still a huge problem globally and will remain so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 11:31:52 am
The POC perspective is not a monolith, so yes, you've found one of the few black voices arguing that identity politics is a sham. This is the equivalent of finding one scientist who disagrees with anthropomorphic global warming and therefore declaring it a hoax. You will always be able to find educated, informed individuals on both sides of every issue, and it's important to allow those who disagree with our perspective to inform our views. But it is pure fallacy to reflexively adhere to those perspectives that simply confirm our own bias, and we should be especially careful when the overwhelming number of experts hold opinions contrary to our own.

As Elder suggests, outcomes associated with the breakdown of the family unit aren't great. But the notion that racism is ancient history - "it's 2015!" Elder says - is simply laughable and completely undermines Elder's credibility. Slavery ended only 150 years ago. There were people living into the 1970's who themselves suffered as slaves. Slavery began in this country in 1619 and was not abolished until 1865. Black and brown people have been slaves for more of our history than not, and it will not be until the year 2111 that the black and brown community will have enjoyed as much history as free people as they have suffered as slaves. You think the long-standing and systemic oppression, the denial of rights, of property ownership, of simple income, of basic human dignity might have any fraying effect on the family unit? And while slavery was abolished in 1865, that hardly meant that persons of color enjoyed equal treatment from that point on. MLK was killed just 50 years ago for advocating for basic civil rights for people of color. Jim Crow laws were in effect only 50 years ago. Literally a third of the population of the US and nearly half of the voting population has first-hand, lived experiences of these times as oppressor and oppressed. You don't just change a law and magically transform the hearts of people or erase the impact of abuse.

There is deep, permeating societal and cultural trauma that our country must deal with, and that conversation does not begin by erasing the histories and experiences of black and brown people for being too far in the past to matter. It takes more than a few decades of improved (though not equal) social standing to undo the damage of centuries of abuse and oppression.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 05, 2019, 11:33:13 am
I agree Blue that racism will never die. I have seen racism in every direction in my life and have to imagine it will never go away entirely. I don't know that we can ever eradicate poor behavior completely as a society. However, in this country systemic racism is mostly a thing of the past and will only continue heading in that direction in the future imho. Feel free to disagree with me, that statement is more observation than statistical. As far as global racism goes, I agree the world is far behind this country in shunning racism. Bigotry of all kinds has always existed throughout history and probably always will. I would love to live in a utopian star trek future where we have moved past such things, live in peace and have replicators that make all of our food tasty and healthy. I doubt we will see it in our lifetimes though and am not sure what the US can do about global racism. I can't believe you are onboard with an interventionist regime like we tried under GWB. I certainly am not. I think we lead by example, and other than a blip here and there we are and will.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 11:33:26 am
Meanwhile, the current President was literally elected by preying upon the anger, despair, and, yes - racism - of millions of poor and blue collar whites, rising to prominence on the absurdity and racism of the birther conspiracy theory (a white candidate for President will literally never be asked to produce their birth certificate, meanwhile people are already crying foul on Kamala Harris); stoking racial anxiety about immigrants, labeling them as rapists and warning of terrorists in their midst (meanwhile the OVERWHELMING majority of terrorists in this country are young, white males); and associating with known white supremacists/nationalists and relying upon their base to carry him to the White House.

As the powerful class, it is to the benefit of the collective white conscience to believe we are in a post-racial society, but this could not be further from the truth. In an environment while black and brown people are disproportionately incarcerated, impoverished, underpaid, etc., there are systemic issues of racism that *must* be acknowledged. It is within this context that the party of the Southern Strategy is increasingly old, white, and male.

Racism is nowhere near gone, and it is clear evidence of the white privilege that you and I both enjoy that we could imagine it so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on February 05, 2019, 11:36:19 am
tico - too many big words.  Break it down for the simple minded like me.  I mean come on man.  reflexively? 

Knee Jerk would have worked...   :)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 05, 2019, 11:45:14 am
However, in this country systemic racism is mostly a thing of the past and will only continue heading in that direction in the future imho.

I encourage you to look further at the criminal justice system. Take a look at how the death penalty is levied across the country.

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/race-death-row-inmates-executed-1976#Vic

Take a look at the chart labeled - Persons Executed for Interracial Murders in the U.S. Since 1976. The criminal justice system continues to hold different standards for different races of criminals. If you are white and you kill a black man, you might go to jail. If you are non-white and kill a white, you will be executed. Exceptions do occur, but by and large this is how it plays out.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 05, 2019, 11:49:33 am
Thanks Tico, I think I agree with much of what you are saying, although you might be making assumptions that simply don't apply to me. I didn't listen to Elder's interview to confirm my bias. I was frankly shocked at some of the numbers he quoted. Where I do agree and where you might swept under the rug a little too quickly is the breakdown of the family unit and its impact on all households. Increased crime and poverty follow single parent households, that's not opinion, that's backed up by study after study. This article takes its sources from the latest census and is not a conservative news outlet by any means. http://lib.post.ca.gov/Publications/Building%20a%20Career%20Pipeline%20Documents/Safe_Harbor.pdf  Of particular interest:
40% of all live births in the US are to single mothers.

90% of welfare recipients are single mothers.

70% of gang members, high school dropouts, teen suicides, teen pregnancies
and teen substance abusers come from single mother homes.

As far as the feeling that the reason so many black households are single parent households is some kind of residual effect of slavery, during slavery more black children were born and raised under a roof with their biological mom and dad than they do today. I don't think cause and effect works there. You can see the precipitous decline of two parent households, white and black, start with the advancement of the welfare state under Lyndon Johnson. I volunteer, care for and give money to help the poor in addition to the tax money I pay being used to help them and do so willingly, I do know though the debilitating effect of long-term welfare on those able to work. When the government steps in and marries the single parent household there is little motivation to ever divorce. Is that a racist belief? Or realistic? What if my belief spans all races? To me this is the conservative belief and it isn't racist or demeaning or even judgemental. It is the view that people be given the human dignity that comes with earning your way in life and deincentivizing people from marrying the government thus taking way their dignity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 05, 2019, 12:00:18 pm


90% of welfare recipients are single mothers.



This is not true.

A majority (59%) of SNAP households with children were single mother households. Only 15% received cash benefits from TANF.22 Though a small percentage, they represent more than 90% of all TANF families.

59%
RECEIVED FOOD STAMPS
15%
RECEIVED TANF CASH BENEFITS
Among children with single mothers, 45% get food stamps and 55% don’t. Roughly two thirds received free or reduced-price meals. Only 8% of children in single mother families received TANF.17

Even for those who did receive assistance, the amount was far less than the minimum they’d need to to stave off hardship — like hunger, homelessness, and utility cut-offs.

TANF benefit levels for a family of three, as of 2016, were less than 30% of the poverty line in 33 states and the District of Columbia — and above 50% in none.

https://singlemotherguide.com/single-mother-statistics/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2019, 12:09:45 pm
Ah so now we pivot to the myth of the welfare queen. That was predictable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 12:11:19 pm
GoBlue, it is disappointing, although indicative of our society today that you wouldn't listen to a black man make the case that racism isn't a problem today. I listen to liberal points of view all day long which only strengthens my beliefs and values. You have said racism is alive and well across society today because you say it is so. I have a different opinion. Is my opinion an affront to you? If so then provide me with the stats or studies that show that black people in America are less advantaged than white people. Access to education is easier for black americans, most crime today against black people is committed by other black people, we overwhelmingly elected and reelected a black president. With affirmative action companies today are scrutinized in hiring practices on the diversity of their workforce. I could go on and on. The point I am making though, because I know it is about to be distorted, is that although individuals in this country are still racist, as a society we are moving past it. When the oldest generation dies out I think most of the remnants of our bigoted past will die with them.

Are you kidding?

"You won't listen to a black man make the case..." (I did listen, by the way.)

Robb, the overwhelming majority of black leaders, scholars, public figures, etc., make the case that racism is alive and well. Do you refuse to listen to them? Can you name the POC scholars and leaders who describe the institutional systems of racism that you listen to and disagree with?   

"Provide... the stats or studies..."

You do realize that the *overwhelming* scholarship and study on the matter confirms the existence of institutional racism, correct? Asking that anyone provide you the stats or studies when they are numerous and obvious is the equivalent of flat-earthers demanding proof that the Earth is round. Do your own homework. Period.

"Access to education is easier..."

I don't even know where to begin with this. What do you mean by "access"? Do you mean "access" to worse public school districts as children growing up in impoverished neighborhoods? Do you mean "access" to less-funded and lower-quality colleges and universities, at which blacks and Hispanics are significantly concentrated compared to the more-selective and elite colleges enjoyed by whites? And if all of this "access" is real and effective, then why do whites hold bachelors degrees at significantly higher rates than POCs? Perhaps it's because 42% of whites enroll in college/university, when only 34% of blacks/Hispanics do, and this "access" you talk about isn't a real thing?

"Most crime today against black people is committed by other black people..."

Is it some kind of revelation that people are more likely to commit crimes against the people we live with? I doubt you're arguing that we need to find solutions to the gentrification problems that are pushing POC communities out of their neighborhoods and increasing segregation.

"we overwhelmingly elected and reelected a black president"

One. One. Black. President. Please do not hold this up as evidence that all is ok. And "overwhelmingly" is a questionable term here. Compared to other modern presidents, all of Nixon, Reagan, H. W. Bush, and Clinton enjoyed higher popular margins, in some cases significantly so. And of course we see the reaction to the Obama presidency in the election of Trump.

"With affirmative action companies today are scrutinized in hiring practices on the diversity of their workforce"

Affirmative Action requires that employers ensure that applicant pools are diverse, with "diverse" meaning reflective of the population of eligible candidates. The regulations explicitly state "Quotas are expressly forbidden...n all employment decisions, the contractor must make selections in a nondiscriminatory manner. Placement goals do not provide the contractor with a justification to extend a preference to any individual, select an individual, or adversely affect an individual's employment status, on the basis of that person's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 12:13:32 pm
Slavery began in this country in 1619 and was not abolished until 1865.

Uh.... not really.

Columbus enslaved native Americans at least by 1495, if not in 1492.

And native Americans had been enslaving native Americans the same as people all over the world had been enslaving each other forever.


Literally a third of the population of the US and nearly half of the voting population has first-hand, lived experiences of these times as oppressor and oppressed.

So who have YOU oppressed?  Or when WERE you oppressed?

Oh, you are not one of the third?

Who on here has been oppressing other folks... and why should the rest of us have to pay for it if any were?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 12:17:47 pm
This is not true.

A majority (59%) of SNAP households with children were single mother households. Only 15% received cash benefits from TANF.22 Though a small percentage, they represent more than 90% of all TANF families.


You and Robb both appear to be playing games with stats.  You want to point to the HOUSEHOLDS, but I suspect Robb was actually talking about the children getting the benefits when he used his 90% figure.

I see no reason to believe you are not both right, but quibbling over the percentages, or how they are calculated misses the point Robb was making.... and it does not seem you disputed it -- our own life choices generally produce the lives we live, not some random chance or even racism.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 12:22:35 pm
(a white candidate for President will literally never be asked to produce their birth certificate


Sure.... other than the fact that it has actually happened with at least two "white candidates."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 12:28:26 pm
I encourage you to look further at the criminal justice system. Take a look at how the death penalty is levied across the country.

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/race-death-row-inmates-executed-1976#Vic

Take a look at the chart labeled - Persons Executed for Interracial Murders in the U.S. Since 1976. The criminal justice system continues to hold different standards for different races of criminals. If you are white and you kill a black man, you might go to jail. If you are non-white and kill a white, you will be executed. Exceptions do occur, but by and large this is how it plays out.

Racism on the part of the criminal justice system is one possible explanation.

Another is that black murders are more likely to have had criminal records and engaged in other conduct, specifically in the murder of their white victims, which made it perfectly appropriate for them to get the harsher sentences than in cases where there was not an interracial murder or the murderer was white.

Ever read "Soul on Ice" or any of Malcolm X's writings, or listen to any of the sh!t from the "Reverend" Farakhan?  Is it really hard to believe that sometimes those interracial black-on-white murders also include a racial animosity, perhaps even an understandable animosity which results in a brutality or conduct in the murder which then makes the death penalty more reasonable?

Or is that possibility simply out of the question.... or at least out of the question when you are LOOKING for racism?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 12:33:13 pm
"during slavery more black children were born and raised under a roof with their biological mom and dad than they do today."

The offensiveness of this argument is stunning. Yes, it is true that "during slavery more black children were born and raised under a roof with their biological mom and dad than they do today."

Because they were owned by white people and didn't have the freedom to leave.

And if they did they would be killed.

A shining example of family values in action and an expression of whole family model we should pine for.

Further, slave "families" remained "unbroken" until the point that the mother, father, or child was sold to another slave owner. A common experience, by the way. Slave "families" remained intact to the same extent that livestock "families" remained intact. Slave "families" served the same purpose of livestock "families": enriching the owner. Slaves were often forced into relationships with others for the pure purpose of copulation, like cows with a prize steer. Gotta multiply the livestock population. Whatever values the slaves might have lived out under their own volition, they had no ability to self-determine. These were not single, whole households with their own autonomy. Men had no paternal rights. Slaves could not legally marry.

"Raised under a roof" is a vile euphemism for the conditions in which slaves lived. Try "**** and murdered in the cotton fields" instead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2019, 12:38:31 pm
"Because they were owned by white people and didn't have the freedom to leave. "

Not entirely true.  Little know fact, the first slave owner in America was a tobacco farmer in North Carolina.  A black man.  Still a very small percentage as the years went on.

Source: https://www.theroot.com/did-black-people-own-slaves-1790895436

How Many Slaves Did Blacks Own?

So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people. In his essay, " 'The Known World' of Free Black Slaveholders," Thomas J. Pressly, using Woodson's statistics, calculated that 54 (or about 1 percent) of these black slave owners in 1830 owned between 20 and 84 slaves; 172 (about 4 percent) owned between 10 to 19 slaves; and 3,550 (about 94 percent) each owned between 1 and 9 slaves. Crucially, 42 percent owned just one slave.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 05, 2019, 12:39:03 pm
Smmfh...

We live in a world that wants to be offended and only celebrates bad news.

Our country isnt as bad as some folks would like you to believe and people arent as bad as they'd like you to think either.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2019, 12:39:14 pm
racism of the birther conspiracy theory (a white candidate for President will literally never be asked to produce their birth certificate,

Chester Arthur, Charles Hughes, Barry Goldwater, George Romney and John McCain all faced citizen questions.  Trump also questioned Ted Cruz's citizenship FWIW.

I think racism is still prevalent in the society.  I think it just isn't limited to older generations.  Denying that racism in the United States hasn't improved, just seems to be an odd argument to make. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2019, 12:40:53 pm
And, btw, long before either whites or blacks were in America, Indian tribes took vanquished tribe people as slaves. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2019, 12:44:12 pm
Chester Arthur, Charles Hughes, Barry Goldwater, George Romney and John McCain all faced citizen questions.  Trump also questioned Ted Cruz's citizenship FWIW.

I think racism is still prevalent in the society.  I think it just isn't limited to older generations.  Denying that racism in the United States hasn't improved, just seems to be an odd argument to make.

Espousing that it’s nearly eradicated and doesn’t impact people is even more bizarre.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2019, 12:47:38 pm
Jewish people have suffered racism for centuries.

In Southern California, not much beats Korean and African American mutual disdain.

Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese aren't very friendly with one another.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 12:53:33 pm
"Because they were owned by white people and didn't have the freedom to leave. "

Not entirely true.  Little know fact, the first slave owner in America was a tobacco farmer in North Carolina.  A black man.  Still a very small percentage as the years went on.

Source: https://www.theroot.com/did-black-people-own-slaves-1790895436

How Many Slaves Did Blacks Own?

So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people. In his essay, " 'The Known World' of Free Black Slaveholders," Thomas J. Pressly, using Woodson's statistics, calculated that 54 (or about 1 percent) of these black slave owners in 1830 owned between 20 and 84 slaves; 172 (about 4 percent) owned between 10 to 19 slaves; and 3,550 (about 94 percent) each owned between 1 and 9 slaves. Crucially, 42 percent owned just one slave.

Yes, there are limited historical oddities, but these are irrelevant; curious answers to a horrifying game of trivial pursuit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 12:54:21 pm
And, btw, long before either whites or blacks were in America, Indian tribes took vanquished tribe people as slaves. 

Yes this is true. And what is the point?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2019, 12:58:13 pm
The point is that the concept of slavery was not original with whites.  So what?  I would argue that they should have been wise enough, compassionate enough, "educated" enough not to have done it.  They rationalized it politcally and religously, to justify it.  But they didn't invent it.  I'm not arguing that they should be held responsible for decades of abuse, but too often it's like they get blamed for its invention.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 01:11:08 pm
No one here is blaming whites for the invention of slavery. I haven't seen anything close to the mention of that idea. No one is talking about the invention of slavery. Slavery predates the USA by millenia, and has been perpetrated by likely every single race upon every other.

This discussion started when it was alleged that racism is a significantly diminished problem in this country, and that whatever challenges the black community faces are of it's own making due to the decay of the black family unit. The evidence for this argument was a video clip claiming slavery was ancient history.

Here's an alternative point of view:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzBaXZI-IWM

And before anyone quibbles with MLK's statement that "no other ethnic group has been a slave on American soil," please reference the interviewer's question about "immigrant" groups in the USA. It is absolutely true that no other "immigrant" (a cruel term to describe the kidnapping and shipping of Africans across the ocean) population has been systematically enslaved on American soil under the auspices of the American government.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2019, 01:25:02 pm
tico, perhaps I've overreacted to other discussions I've had and experiences I've had that made me introduce that argument, but I agree with goblue, racism is a world problem not just a US problem. 

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 05, 2019, 01:28:01 pm
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51zFExbOw9L._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1549394713&sr=1-1&keywords=How+to+lie+with+statistics
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 05, 2019, 01:47:55 pm
Espousing that it’s nearly eradicated and doesn’t impact people is even more bizarre.
I didn't say it was eradicated or that it doesn't impact people. I said this "I agree Blue that racism will never die. I have seen racism in every direction in my life and have to imagine it will never go away entirely. I don't know that we can ever eradicate poor behavior completely as a society. However, in this country systemic racism is mostly a thing of the past and will only continue heading in that direction in the future imho. Feel free to disagree with me, that statement is more observation than statistical."

Are you actually reading my posts Blue or just looking for a reason to fire off another damning reply? I don't know why we can't discuss this without the craziness or mudslinging. I have an opinion based on my own observations and a fair amount of study. You have a different opinion based on the same I assume, that's fine. Have I berated you for your stance? No, I have respectfully disagreed with you or sometimes agreed. If you cannot take the emotion and name-calling out of the discourse, then it evolves into a school yard fight that solves nothing. I appreciate your tone most of the time Tico, we don't often agree but I think you are at least respectful to opinions different than your own. I know it is against human nature and I struggle with it too, but I think even here on this message board we can do better in discussing opinions and belief in a more civilized tone, with understanding and respect. I don't always meet such lofty standards, but I try to.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 01:53:46 pm
Quote from: ticohans
Slavery began in this country in 1619 and was not abolished until 1865.

Uh.... not really.

Columbus enslaved native Americans at least by 1495, if not in 1492.

And native Americans had been enslaving native Americans the same as people all over the world had been enslaving each other forever.


Columbus never set foot in this country (or any part of North America, for that matter). And whatever population of Caribbean and Central American Natives he enslaved, this conversation is obviously about black slavery. What is with this instinct to blurt out, "NOT JUST WHITES!!!!!"?

**** happened. Just cause other people did the same **** doesn't make our **** ok.

And if you're going to play this game of gotcha, at least get your facts straight. It would be much more appropriate to argue my statement that slavery began in this country in 1619 is incorrect because those original African "slaves" were in fact indentured servants due to the fact that their original Spanish captors did them the courtesy of baptizing them after kidnapping them, and the kindly English colonists initially considered Christians exempt from slavery.

And if we're going to get this far into the weeds, it's worth noting that Curt's example of the first slave owner being black is a rather strained argument.

Anthony Johnson, the alleged "first slave owner", was himself an indentured servant who had served his term and "earned" his "freedom" (note that anytime someone needs to earn their "freedom" via years of unpaid labor after having been kidnapped and sold as property in the first place, you have a problem; I'd call that problem "slavery"). Now a free man, Johnson participated in the same systems of indentured servitude that he was previously subject to. Johnson allegedly held one of his indentured servants past the legal term, and one of his neighbors threatened to testify against him. Johnson released the indentured servant in question, who then entered another servitude with the threatening neighbor. Johnson, feeling taken advantage of, brought the case to court, saying if anyone is going to maintain labor rights to the servant in question, it should be him. It's like the two women arguing over the baby before Solomon's court. The court ruled in favor of Johnson, and legally declared the indentured servant as belonging to Johnson. This was in 1654.

Meanwhile in 1640 the Virginia courts declared an individual a slave, and in 1641, Massachusetts became the first colony to officially codify the conditions for legal slavery, which obviously was a part of the economy at the time that demanded regulation. All of this prior to Johnson's legal case in 1654.

If there are slaves, then there are owners. Johnson was not the first slave owner, though he may have been the first slave owner to have his particular rights as owner upheld in the courts.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 02:06:07 pm
Quote from: Jes Beard
So who have YOU oppressed?  Or when WERE you oppressed?

Oh, you are not one of the third?

Who on here has been oppressing other folks... and why should the rest of us have to pay for it if any were?

No, I am not one of the third who lived during the Civil Rights Era and/or while people who were previously enslaved on US soil still lived. And nowhere in my statement of thirds did I suggest that every person in that group of thirds was either oppressor or oppressed. Not sure how one issue follows the other - I made a point of proximity, not participation.

That said, I am happy to talk about the ways I've benefited from and defended systems of white privilege, though I don't think that's a conversation you actually want to entertain. For years, I espoused the conservative talking points about Dems praying on blacks through the entrapment of the welfare state and the erosion of the black family (i.e. the video that Robb posted earlier), argued that slavery was long gone and institutional racism a figment of the victimized black consciousness, etc. The more I read, the more I learned, the more I listened to people different from me, I realized I was wrong, and gradually my eyes were opened to the systemic problems that I see more clearly today.

Finally, who said anything about paying anybody for anything? Reparations has not been a part of this conversation at all. Another Pavlovian response to something not actually being talked about here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on February 05, 2019, 02:21:09 pm
If bigotry is on the wane and not a serious problem today, then please explain the rise of anti-Semitism in the USA---and throughout Europe.  It's getting worse, not better.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46038438

Anti-semitism is integral to all forms of racism. And, the notion that white persons don't have massive advantages living day-to-day in the USA is not a serious argument.  Not every argument is worthy of respect or serious attention.  Moreover, it is the height of pretension for any white person to make a claim like that.  You cannot possibly have a handle on the daily Black experience today---just the routine acts of living and interacting with others. I don't understand what it's like either but I know it's different--and not in a good way for the most part.

Obviously, things are better for minorities compared to many decades ago. But, there is a very big difference between "getting better" and "basically solved."  No, to the latter---and not even close.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2019, 02:28:34 pm
Robb, what mud-slinging? What is it that you think was inappropriate? You said racism is mostly gone. That’s absurd. You also think you’re in position to state that people of color do not or should not feel the effects of it today because of a random interview several years ago with a black guy.

These arguments will always go the same way. You will mention some personal anecdote about having a gay family member or having a black friend which somehow is supposed to convince anyone of something. And then you’ll say how tolerant you are compared to others. This all serves to attempt to disguise some pretty insane (IMO) beliefs. I am never going to convince you of anything. You know that. I know that. It’s a vehicle for you to make your beliefs known. That’s fine, but think on a public message board you’ll receive some blow back to saying **** like homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and black people (disregarding all other races) shouldn’t feel the effects of racism today.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 05, 2019, 02:40:21 pm
If one compares the opportunities and constraints for blacks now vs. at the height of Reconstruction, should we be proud of the progress made over nearly 150 years?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on February 05, 2019, 02:53:06 pm
"Proud" is the wrong word. 

Incremental progress that adds up over a century-and-a-half, yes. 

There is nothing to be proud of when it comes to our history of racism to this day.  Progress is a good thing.  But, using the word "proud" to characterize any of this is a curious use of words.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 05, 2019, 02:54:51 pm
My point was that things haven't changed nearly as much as many seem to believe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 05, 2019, 03:14:03 pm
Quote
But, using the word "proud" to characterize any of this is a curious use of words.

I think that was the point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2019, 03:27:28 pm
My point was that things haven't changed nearly as much as many seem to believe.

So things are basically the same as they were in 50's?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2019, 03:34:04 pm
So things are basically the same as they were in 50's?

He literally made his point, that things haven’t changed nearly as much as some people (who apparently think racism is mostly gone) believe...and you rephrased it to ask if he meant something else?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2019, 03:49:00 pm
He literally made his point, that things haven’t changed nearly as much as some people (who apparently think racism is mostly gone) believe...and you rephrased it to ask if he meant something else?

So Federal Marshals are need to get AA into schools, it is illegal for white people in Nebraska to marry 1/8 AA, Japanese or Chinese people, there are separate water fountains, lynchings occur frequently?  Got it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2019, 03:51:26 pm
Nobody said any of that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 03:59:50 pm
"during slavery more black children were born and raised under a roof with their biological mom and dad than they do today."

The offensiveness of this argument is stunning. Yes, it is true that "during slavery more black children were born and raised under a roof with their biological mom and dad than they do today."

You didn't like that, how about replacing the time reference with "all the way until the mid 1960's, and your comments about that reference ignore the frequent canard that families were regularly torn apart as children were sold into slavery, but, what the hey....

Further, slave "families" remained "unbroken" until the point that the mother, father, or child was sold to another slave owner. A common experience, by the way.

So, wait, first you attack his point, and then you sort of underscore its significance.  THAT was the point -- that even though families were frequently disrupted and torn apart by slave owners, slavery was far less disruptive to the family than the welfare state.  One of those you condemn, and make clear PART of the condemnation is because of the disruption to the family, and the other you seemingly extol, despite it being even more disruptive to the family.

As to your claim that slaves could not legally marry, more than a mild distortion.  MOST marriages at the time, free or slave, were common-law marriages, and no state action of recognition was involved or required.  And slaves WERE recognized as having husbands and wives.  I believe census records sometimes even reflected that.



"Raised under a roof" is a vile euphemism for the conditions in which slaves lived. Try "**** and murdered in the cotton fields" instead.

You REALLY need to read a bit less of Harriet Beecher Stowe and a bit more of the personal accounts of the former slaves themselves.  Slavery is bad no matter how well a slave is treated, but your comments indicate you seem to think all slave owners were Simon Legree.  They were not.  The treatment of slaves was very uneven, with many treated more like family members than anything else.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2019, 04:04:45 pm
So Federal Marshals are need to get AA into schools, it is illegal for white people in Nebraska to marry 1/8 AA, Japanese or Chinese people, there are separate water fountains, lynchings occur frequently?  Got it.

Also are we just going to casually ingnore things like the uptick in hate crimes, continuing efforts to suppress voters and the fact that more prevalent forms of racism aren’t done by those wearing hoods but by those wearing suits?

Old enough to remember when the government was shut down because a monument to racism isn’t being funded.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 04:17:36 pm
You didn't like that, how about replacing the time reference with "all the way until the mid 1960's, and your comments about that reference ignore the frequent canard that families were regularly torn apart as children were sold into slavery, but, what the hey....

So, wait, first you attack his point, and then you sort of underscore its significance.  THAT was the point -- that even though families were frequently disrupted and torn apart by slave owners, slavery was far less disruptive to the family than the welfare state.  One of those you condemn, and make clear PART of the condemnation is because of the disruption to the family, and the other you seemingly extol, despite it being even more disruptive to the family.

As to your claim that slaves could not legally marry, more than a mild distortion.  MOST marriages at the time, free or slave, were common-law marriages, and no state action of recognition was involved or required.  And slaves WERE recognized as having husbands and wives.  I believe census records sometimes even reflected that.



You REALLY need to read a bit less of Harriet Beecher Stowe and a bit more of the personal accounts of the former slaves themselves.  Slavery is bad no matter how well a slave is treated, but your comments indicate you seem to think all slave owners were Simon Legree.  They were not.  The treatment of slaves was very uneven, with many treated more like family members than anything else.




^

There you go folks. That's basically peak white privilege and casual racism there.

"Slavery was far less disruptive to family than the welfare state." "Many treated more like family members than anything else."

I don't know how Jes treats his family, but my general concept doesn't include personal ownership and any lack of rights.

I also don't know how Jes defines "many," but "many" were treated like animals or worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2019, 04:22:15 pm
tico, I think I disagree with Dr. King and you.  The reason I brought up blacks owning slaves and the first slave owner is because too often it is preached that black/white racism was born from slavery.  I don't believe that.  Imagine that slavery never existed in America.  Obviously we would have fewer blacks in our country, but do you really believe that we still wouldn't have some rednecks who hated blacks?  The inhumanity of slavery certainly caused friction, but what about bigotry of white/Mexican?  They were slaves?  What about black/Mexican?  Puerto Ricans have had problems with a lot of other races.  I am mentioning things like this not to justify a position, but in support of what goblue said about it being a world problem.

As an administrator sometimes the toughest relationship issues I've had to deal with is with foreign exchange students when they come from rival cultures.  Japanese and Korean students often conflict.  A student from Pakistan and another from India often is oil and water.  A student from Mexico often conflicts with 2nd generation Mexicans here.  Bigotry, racism, prejudice seems to be an evil ingrained in us and it takes practice and effort to subdue it and contain it.  I'm done.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 04:28:25 pm
tico, I think I disagree with Dr. King and you.  The reason I brought up blacks owning slaves and the first slave owner is because too often it is preached that black/white racism was born from slavery.  I don't believe that.  Imagine that slavery never existed in America.  Obviously we would have fewer blacks in our country, but do you really believe that we still wouldn't have some rednecks who hated blacks?  The inhumanity of slavery certainly caused friction, but what about bigotry of white/Mexican?  They were slaves?  What about black/Mexican?  Puerto Ricans have had problems with a lot of other races.  I am mentioning things like this not to justify a position, but in support of what goblue said about it being a world problem.

As an administrator sometimes the toughest relationship issues I've had to deal with is with foreign exchange students when they come from rival cultures.  Japanese and Korean students often conflict.  A student from Pakistan and another from India often is oil and water.  A student from Mexico often conflicts with 2nd generation Mexicans here.  Bigotry, racism, prejudice seems to be an evil ingrained in us and it takes practice and effort to subdue it and contain it.  I'm done.

Hey Curt, thanks for the reply, but I don't understand where we're in disagreement? I never said it wasn't a world problem. It is! I never said it was a white-only problem. It isn't! MLK didn't state that either. He simply said that the experience of blacks in the US is unique because of unique history of slavery of blacks in the US. This says literally nothing about the history of racism/slavery in any other culture, time, or place.

I've argued against the idea that racism is no longer a major problem in the US, and I've argued against the idea that the challenges of the black community has nothing to do with the history of racism in this country.

Is there something else you're reading in my posts? As I stated in the first response to this idea of racism as a world problem: racism/slavery existed millenia before the USA. Likely every race has enslaved every other race at some point in history.

I honestly don't understand the point you are making in the context of this discussion. What are you hearing me say?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 04:41:25 pm
Re-reading your post, the following line stands out: "too often it is preached that black/white racism was born from slavery."

I don't think anyone has been discussing the roots of racism. I'll say it again, racism/slavery predate the US by millenia. People have been hating and enslaving people for as long as there have been people, and there are no people immune from this disease.

We *have* discussed the effects of both racism and slavery, which are visible still today in our nation. Racism has to exist in order to enslave someone in the first place. And if the power dynamics were reversed, and Africans had been the advanced trading society with superior military force, I fully expect that we'd be lamenting the systemic issues of black privilege and the echoes of our own ancestors' experiences in the cotton fields.

The terms "white privilege" and "systemic racism" are not pejorative or normative of whites as a monolithic ethnic group, they are descriptive of a particular history and current environment in this country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2019, 04:45:21 pm
tico, nobody here has "preached that black/white racism was born from slavery."  At least if someone did, I missed it.  Where I've heard it the most is in cultural diversity courses that teachers are now required to take.  Even the minority students in the class had another name from the class, "White Anglo-Saxon males are responsible for all the world's problems."  I'm with you.  I don't think we're not in basic disagreement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 04:49:16 pm
I don't think we're not in basic disagreement.

A triple negative? Amazing :)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2019, 05:01:13 pm
A triple negative? Amazing :)
LOL  When I wrote that I stopped to think a couple of times because I was trying hard to be clear.  Guess I overthunk it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 05, 2019, 05:11:11 pm
That's strange I read on this board that racism is only a phase white men go thru in their youth. They grow out of it!

I don't remember reading that.  Can you provide a link to a post?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 05:21:49 pm
No, I am not one of the third who lived during the Civil Rights Era and/or while people who were previously enslaved on US soil still lived.

Having been alive at the same time someone else who had once been a slave had still been alive scarcely qualifies as having been a victim of oppression.  You said a third of the population TODAY were victims of oppression or oppressors.  I think your math needs serious work.

And nowhere in my statement of thirds did I suggest that every person in that group of thirds was either oppressor or oppressed.  Not sure how one issue follows the other - I made a point of proximity, not participation.

Here is what you wrote: "Literally a third of the population of the US and nearly half of the voting population has first-hand, lived experiences of these times as oppressor and oppressed."  That is not a "proximity" argument.  That is a claim that LITERALLY a third of the population themselves lived it -- not "proximity," and certainly not second-hand hearing about it from great-aunt-Matilda telling about how Massa beat her, but that was a claim of "first-hand lived experiences."

This is an example of a big part of the part of the problem with these discussions.  Those claiming this nation has seen massive improvement to the point that racism is no longer the major problem it once was have their comments completely misread and distorted into claims of denial there is any problem, and those doing the distorting equally distort what they themselves have said and insist that what they wrote is not what they wrote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 05:22:35 pm
I don't remember reading that.  Can you provide a link to a post?


He didn't do it for me.  Perhaps he likes you better.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 05:30:33 pm
Racism has to exist in order to enslave someone in the first place.

No.  it doesn't.  Blacks in Africa to this day enslave blacks in Africa.  Romans enslaved much of the population of most of the people they conquered.  The same with the Greeks and most other ancient civilizations.  Here in the desert southwest, the Utes enslaved the Navajo, who also enslaved the Utes.  Sacajewea was enslaved by a neighboring people who attacked her village, and in the excellent book "1,000 AD" the authors explain how in England just more than 1,000 years ago it was common for parents suffering thru a famine, or even just running short on food before a new year's crops would begin to come in, to sell their own children into slavery.

The idea that racism and slavery are inseparable, that the latter could not exist without the former, which is what you claimed, is nonsense, utter and complete and obviously false nonsense.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 05:46:54 pm
^
There you go folks. That's basically peak white privilege and casual racism there.

"Slavery was far less disruptive to family than the welfare state." "Many treated more like family members than anything else."

I don't know how Jes treats his family, but my general concept doesn't include personal ownership and any lack of rights.

I also don't know how Jes defines "many," but "many" were treated like animals or worse.

And ^^ is an example peak stupidity.

It is remotely possible that if "white privilege" existed that a short passage might illustrate it, or might indicate that a person enjoyed the privilege, but the passage most certainly would not BE it.

And let's ignore the entire question of what does or doesn't constitute privilege, white or otherwise, whether it even has a meaningful definition, whether that definition would or wouldn't apply, whether an "black privilege" exists, or whether any of it makes any difference in a discussion of whether racism in this country is or is not as serious a problem as it has been in the past.  At the moment I am simply addressing the comment, and how stupid it is.


"Slavery was far less disruptive to family than the welfare state." "Many treated more like family members than anything else."

Disruption of a family unit is generally measure by the number or frequency of disruptions -- of people being removed from the family and families being broken up.  This has nothing to do with how someone is treated, but instead how often the disruption happens.  And slavery WAS less disruptive to the family than the welfare state.

"Many treated more like family members than anything else."

I don't know how Jes treats his family, but my general concept doesn't include personal ownership and any lack of rights.

Instead of just spouting the liberal claptrap you have bought into, try, as I suggested before, actually reading some of the narratives of many of the former slaves.  There were dozens, if not hundreds, recorded in the 1930's and they are now available in a series of books, Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project 1936-1938, you can find them on Amazon and get them fairly inexpensively in digital form.

I won't really expect an apology from you if you do bother to read them.  I doubt you would have that in you.

I also don't know how Jes defines "many," but "many" were treated like animals or worse.

Nothing I wrote ever suggested otherwise.... and you know that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 05:54:21 pm
Finally, who said anything about paying anybody for anything? Reparations has not been a part of this conversation at all. Another Pavlovian response to something not actually being talked about here.

I give up.  Who DID say "anything about paying anybody for anything"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2019, 06:32:27 pm
Also are we just going to casually ingnore things like the uptick in hate crimes, continuing efforts to suppress voters and the fact that more prevalent forms of racism aren’t done by those wearing hoods but by those wearing suits?

Old enough to remember when the government was shut down because a monument to racism isn’t being funded.

Hate crimes totals are lower than they were in the 90’s.

Is voter suppression worse now or in the 50’s? 

Again this doesn’t mean things are perfect and that there still isn’t a large amount of room for improvement. Saying that there hasn’t been a dramatic improvement is a really weird argument.  Jackie Robinson didn’t break the color barrier in MLB until 1947. While Jason Heyward still has to put up with racist fans, I think he has a lot easier than Jackie Robinson.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 06:35:25 pm
What is the point you are trying to make, Jes? Some slave owners were kinder than others? Sure, fine. Some Nazi concentration camp guards were kinder than others, too. I’m sure the Jews appreciated those kindnesses in between all the ovens and gas chambers.

If you are honestly ignorant of the overwhelming evidence of the atrocity of slavery, then, as I said to Robb, do your own homework. I’m not going to argue a flat-earther out of their ignorance, and I’m not going to argue a grumpy old man out of his racism.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2019, 06:44:04 pm
Hate crimes totals are lower than they were in the 90’s.

Is voter suppression worse now or in the 50’s? 

Again this doesn’t mean things are perfect and that there still isn’t a large amount of room for improvement. Saying that there hasn’t been a dramatic improvement is a really weird argument.  Jackie Robinson didn’t break the color barrier in MLB until 1947. While Jason Heyward still has to put up with racist fans, I think he has a lot easier than Jackie Robinson.

P2 said it hasn’t improved nearly to the degree that some think. That’s true when people are suggesting it’s a non-issue today and mostly gone. Nobody ever said it hasn’t improved since the 1950’s.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 06:44:57 pm
So if a fan boos Jason Heyward for making 160 million dollars and hitting like Ryan Theriot does that make him racist?

Good god, no, it’s not racist. Calling him a “n i g g e r” is.

What is with the absurd false equivalencies in this thread?!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 05, 2019, 06:46:17 pm
I erased my post because I didnt want to get involved in this but I was too late.

Tico saw it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2019, 06:52:15 pm
I give up.  Who DID say "anything about paying anybody for anything"?

Umm... ...

“and why should the rest of us have to pay for it if any were?”

- Jes “some-slaves-were-treated-like-family” Beard
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 07:41:14 pm
Columbus never set foot in this country (or any part of North America, for that matter). And whatever population of Caribbean and Central American Natives he enslaved, this conversation is obviously about black slavery. What is with this instinct to blurt out, "NOT JUST WHITES!!!!!"?

Could you point to anything I wrote which even suggested that Columbus ever set foot in a country which did not exist until more than 250 years after his death?

Could you point to anything I wrote which amounted to an instinctive blurting out of "NOT JUST WHITES!!!!!"?

Just as you did in much of your discussion of Johnson, which I assume was directed more at Curt than me since I made no mention of him, I was simply correcting a factual error on your part.... and in your response above you ignore the next sentence -- "native Americans had been enslaving native Americans the same as people all over the world had been enslaving each other forever."

Your claim, the claim to which I was responding, really had nothing to do with racism.  It was instead that "Slavery began in this country in 1619 and was not abolished until 1865."  Well, the reality is that NOTHING being "in this country in 1619," because "this country" did not really exist.  The colonies were part of England, and England had had slavery since before Rome conquered it.  So my comment was much more generally related to "the new world."  You want to chastise me on my mention of Columbus in response to your reference to "in this country," which impressive considering the fact that I did not try to chastise you by pointing out that "this country" did not exist in 1619... but, what the hey.


Just cause other people did the same **** doesn't make our **** ok.

And if you're going to play this game of gotcha, at least get your facts straight....

(note that anytime someone needs to earn their "freedom" via years of unpaid labor after having been kidnapped and sold as property in the first place, you have a problem; I'd call that problem "slavery").


Just cause other people did the same **** doesn't make our **** ok.

Is there ANYTHING I have ever written to suggest that it was?

Now, is there anything which *I* have done, or which anyone in this forum has ever done, which in any way would make slavery, of anyone anywhere, ever, OUR ****?

I enslaved no one.  No one in my family ever enslaved anyone, or at least not after the different branches of the family tree reached America (not too sure about before that).

So just how is slavery in any way MY ****?


And if you're going to play this game of gotcha, at least get your facts straight....

Yeah..... unlike you with your reference to Columbus never setting foot in this country which did not exist during his lifetime (and ignoring the reference to the native Americans immediately after that), I am not sure who was playing "gotcha" here.  Pointing out a factual misstatement of fact is not quite the same as playing "gotcha," but then perhaps that is a game you play, so I might be wrong there.

(note that anytime someone needs to earn their "freedom" via years of unpaid labor after having been kidnapped and sold as property in the first place, you have a problem; I'd call that problem "slavery")

So it sounds as if even the date you have provided for the first slave owned by Europeans in the colonies was not correct BY YOUR STANDARDS.  You wrote "in 1640 the Virginia courts declared an individual a slave, and in 1641, Massachusetts became the first colony to officially codify the conditions for legal slavery."  But indentured servitude in the English colonies predated that, and by the 1630's roughly half of the English colonists were indentured servants, who by your words you are calling slaves.  And within ten years after the founding of Jamestown in 1607 indentured servants (who you quite clearly are calling slaves) began arriving there, well before the 1640 date you offered.

But, again, slavery in the Americas, and in particular with the geographic land area now occupied by the United States, or even more specifically within the territory controlled briefly by the Confederate States of America, long predated the arrival of any Europeans.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 07:42:47 pm
Umm... ...

“and why should the rest of us have to pay for it if any were?”

- Jes “some-slaves-were-treated-like-family” Beard

So pointing out that some slaves were treated like family members is somehow referencing reparations?

REALLY?

That one is bizarre.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2019, 07:47:06 pm
By what degree has it improved is my question? It seems Robb was the only one that mentioned it and he has back off that statement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 07:49:13 pm
If you are honestly ignorant of the overwhelming evidence of the atrocity of slavery, then, as I said to Robb, do your own homework. I’m not going to argue a flat-earther out of their ignorance, and I’m not going to argue a grumpy old man out of his racism.

I am not the one needing to do any homework here.  I notice you have not commented on  the Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project 1936-1938, but I somehow would guess you not only have not read them (I have), but that you will rest smugly in your assurance that your impression is right and everyone else is wrong and never consider reading them.

As to your calling me a racist.... you are very sad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 05, 2019, 07:58:48 pm
I don't remember reading that.  Can you provide a link to a post?

Robb and a couple others suggested a while back when haders racist posts popped up on Twitter from his youth.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 05, 2019, 08:23:56 pm
Robb and a couple others suggested a while back when haders racist posts popped up on Twitter from his youth.


Really?

Here are Robb's four posts on the matter:
Perhaps he didn't delete the tweets because he forgot about them. I can't remember anything I posted last year let alone 6 years ago. I am all for accountability for your actions but I am also inclined to not crucify someone for being stupid as a 17 year old. If he now shows signs of this behavior then he should pay the consequences, if not then perhaps we should allow young men room to grow and mature.

I am sure Deeg that you didn't do anything stupid when you were a teen that you wouldn't want broadcast to the world. Thankfully, we didn't have Twitter or even access to the internet when I was a teen, (Al Gore hadn't invented it yet).  I hate to throw a biblical reference at anyone here but sorry, it applies, "He who is without sin among you, let him cast a stone first." Now, if his behavior at this time in his life reflects the words in his tweets I would be more willing to pick up a rock. But from what his teammates say, he is a good kid who shows no signs of believing the words in his tweets. I am inclined to let people grow and mature and better themselves and celebrate the growth instead of pointing fingers at the place from which they came. Is everything forgivable? Certainly not. But he didn't commit a crime, he was stupid. Now after 6 years of growing he appears to not be as stupid. I think that is a good thing. But string him up, by all means if it makes you feel better.

But Curt, if they think these things as a 17 year old they are forever irredeemable though, so why even try?

So is that a passive aggressive way of calling me a racist? I thought this was a discussion of the issue at hand? This is the real problem our country faces today. We cannot discuss our differences of opinion without it devolving into name calling, the favorite of course is racist. You have no idea of my background, my friends and family, my choices in life both good and bad and yet, because I committed the crime of disagreeing with you, you infer I am a racist. For one who comes across as intelligent this is quite frankly just lazy.

So in which one of this is it that Robb "suggested" "that racism is only a phase white men go thru in their youth. They grow out of it!"?

Is this an example of problems with reading comprehension or problems with memory?

Or perhaps just a desire to take a swipe at someone whose politics do not align closely with yours?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on February 06, 2019, 05:25:13 pm
Just one more comment on the state of racism today -- Though it is easy to address the issue in abstractions and feeling and based on what this person or that person says about its existence, and you can always look to figures in the criminal justice system to support either the claim that racism is alive and well and that minorities, blacks in particular, are treated like sh!t or to support the claim that the disparity in arrests and convictions and sentencing is strong evidence that behavior and lifestyle choices is the cause of any difference one might find.

But relatively neutral and objective data does exist, and that data -- jobless rates for blacks being at all-time record lows, high school graduation rates/college enrollment rates/college graduation rates for blacks all up, and average earnings and income for blacks rising more sharply than they are rising for whites, as is also the case for the improvements in each of those other areas.

Is racism gone?

Of course not, but those pretending that massive improvement has not been made in this country, or that racism is less a problem in this country than in most others, have to do one heck of a lot of pretending.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 06, 2019, 10:48:21 pm
Bluejay, what statement did I back away from? This conversation has gone in so many directions I don't know what you were referring to.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 08, 2019, 05:01:37 pm
https://www.axios.com/vanessa-tyson-justin-fairfax-sexual-assault-ff9978cd-a657-42c0-931b-73667be4ff8b.html

Marisa FernandezFeb 6

Vanessa Tyson details sexual assault allegation against Justin Fairfax
Vanessa Tyson, the woman who alleges Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax sexually assaulted her in 2004, released a statement Wednesday detailing her memory of the incident and rebuking his claims that the encounter was consensual.

"I cannot believe given my obvious distress, that Mr. Fairfax thought this forced sexual act was consensual. ... After the assault, I suffered from both deep humiliation and shame."

Details: Tyson, a professor at Scripps College in Claremont, California, said Fairfax kissed her after walking back to his hotel room during the Democratic National Convention in 2004, and that while it was surprising, it was "not unwelcome" and she kissed him back. Tyson alleged that even though she "had no intention of taking [her] clothes off or engaging in sexual activity," Fairfax pulled her toward his bed and forced her to perform oral sex on him.

After the encounter, Tyson said she avoided Fairfax the rest of the convention. She said she did not speak of the assault for years and that she suppressed her memories.
In October 2017, she saw a picture of Fairfax in an article about his campaign for lieutenant governor of Virginia. "The image hit me like a ton of bricks," she said.
Only then did she decide to tell close friends of hers, who were voters, about the assault.

Earlier this week, Tyson hired the same law firm that represented Christine Blasey Ford for her sexual assault claims against then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 19, 2019, 05:14:47 pm
Jacinda Ardern for President in 2020.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 07, 2019, 12:49:30 pm
670 The Score
Verified account
@670TheScore
Theo Epstein on GOP fundraiser event being held at Wrigley Field this weekend: "It's a private venue. People have the right to host events here, especially the owners. I've hosted events here too on the other side of the political spectrum. It's a free society and private venue."

The Ricketts are evil
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 07, 2019, 12:59:34 pm
Not evil.  Politically misguided.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 07, 2019, 01:10:01 pm
I just think it is funny that Ricketts hosting a political fundraiser is news and they are evil.  Theo hosting a political fundraiser at Wrigley doesn't get mentioned in the press.

Both sides are politically misguided.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 07, 2019, 01:14:15 pm
Doing anything to help continue the trump admin and policies is evil.  There are concentration camps with children dying on the border. This is not acceptable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 07, 2019, 01:18:27 pm
There are many who disagree with progressive politics. Are they misguided or simply of a different opinion?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 07, 2019, 01:20:53 pm
Those same "concentration camps" were separating families at the border during the Obama admin. We're you calling him evil then?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 07, 2019, 01:25:56 pm
Doing anything to help continue the trump admin and policies is evil.  There are concentration camps with children dying on the border. This is not acceptable.

I won't be voting for Trump again.  The Democrats are mostly likely going to nominate someone I can't stomach either, so they won't get my vote either. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 07, 2019, 01:35:05 pm
Hopefully you live in a state where that **** doesn’t matter. If not, voting for anyone other than the Dem is like voting for trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 07, 2019, 01:41:11 pm
My electoral college vote is in play and it isn't like voting for Trump. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 07, 2019, 02:06:25 pm
This is the thread for it so Ill say it.

Its not so much that I like Donald Trump as it is I dislike the people who dont like him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 07, 2019, 04:05:06 pm
I have no problem with people hating Trump. I didn't vote for him, don't like him and think that he has lowered the dignity of the office about as far as it can go. I can however separate my utter disgust for the man with the policies he enacts. Among those I agree with are at least trying to do something about the flood of illegal immigration that is driving down wages, taxing social programs and adding to crime in our country. I agree with lowering the tax burden on corporations to match or at least get close to the rates of other countries. I agree with lowering the regulatory burden on businesses which has lead to a historic unemployment rate. I like conservative justices on the Supreme Court because I don't believe in legislating from the bench. I also like much of the foreign policy positions being taken, especially renegotiating the horrible trade deals of both republican and democrat administrations of the past. So am I a MAGA wearing Trump forever fan? Not at all, but I do like his actual policies in many areas, and so do much of the country. The question in 2020 will be whether enough people who feel like me can hold their nose to vote him in again wanting more of the policies but less Trump. If he simply stopped Tweeting and pretty much just shut his mouth, he would probably be easily re-elected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 07, 2019, 04:15:26 pm
So, you guys are cool with an admin and policies that result in concentration camps full of kids in which some are dying.  Unsurprising, I guess.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 07, 2019, 05:56:04 pm
They wouldnt be in concentration camps if they'd follow the law or stay in their home country.

If I kill somebody and I go to prison the police didnt put me there.

I did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 07, 2019, 09:05:10 pm
Those same "concentration camps" were separating families at the border during the Obama admin. We're you calling him evil then?

Good god this is a steaming pile of horseshit. The two administrations have taken diametrically opposed positions on the border and families. Robb, you desperately need to check your facts here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on June 07, 2019, 09:05:50 pm
nasty  nasty  nasty
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 07, 2019, 09:25:10 pm
Good god this is a steaming pile of horseshit. The two administrations have taken diametrically opposed positions on the border and families. Robb, you desperately need to check your facts here.

Yeah, it's one of many Trump lies that Fox News, conservative talk radio, and right wing propaganda sites have spread.

https://www.npr.org/2019/04/09/711446917/fact-check-trump-wrongly-states-obama-administration-had-child-separation-policy
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/04/more-family-separation-spin/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/09/us/politics/fact-check-family-separation-obama.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/10/trump-digs-false-claim-that-he-stopped-obamas-family-separation-policy/
https://www.apnews.com/91e9489c7f434099a987bed7defd3f1d
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/09/politics/fact-check-trump-claim-obama-separated-families/index.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/9/18303439/trump-blame-obama-family-separations-debunked
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/was-law-separate-families-passed-1997/
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-trump-child-separation-meme/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 07, 2019, 09:25:39 pm
Actually Tico it is you who needs to check the facts. I know it is hard finding media who doesn't slant your way because 98% does. But the truth is out there. You can find it.

And I was able to respond in a rational, non-hysterical manner. If you wish to have a conversation with me, I would appreciate you doing the same.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 07, 2019, 09:51:01 pm
Actually Tico it is you who needs to check the facts. I know it is hard finding media who doesn't slant your way because 98% does. But the truth is out there. You can find it.

I'm genuinely curious...if your premise that the media is inherently biased is correct (which I don't think it is*) and 98% of the media reports stories one way, why do you automatically accept that the 2% who spin the story in a different way is correct? It's conspiratorial thinking...I don't know how you come to the conclusion that the 2% is has the correct perspective without bringing in your personal bias.

* Fox News has been the top rated 24 hour news network for years (decades?) now, and conservatives always make sure you know that. Conservatives own talk radio. It's contradictory to claim you have the most popular and influential media sources on two of the three biggest media platforms (internet is the third and biggest, obviously) and to also claim your voice is being disregarded.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 08, 2019, 01:08:00 am
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/media-bias-left-study/

If you don't think the majority of the media is left leaning and biased then you are either not paying attention or your confirmation bias has rendered you blind to it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 08, 2019, 05:09:32 am
Actually Tico it is you who needs to check the facts. I know it is hard finding media who doesn't slant your way because 98% does. But the truth is out there. You can find it.

And I was able to respond in a rational, non-hysterical manner. If you wish to have a conversation with me, I would appreciate you doing the same.

If you are really concerned about finding the truth, listening to trump and conservative media, led by Fox, is a bad idea.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 08, 2019, 08:28:33 am
It was nice while it lasted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 08, 2019, 09:26:57 am
It was nice while it lasted.

What? Our nice country?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 08, 2019, 09:57:47 am
What? Our nice country?
The lengthy period where there were no posts in this topic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 08, 2019, 10:11:04 am
The lengthy period where there were no posts in this topic.

Perhaps you can not click on the thread?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 08, 2019, 12:44:29 pm
Actually Tico it is you who needs to check the facts. I know it is hard finding media who doesn't slant your way because 98% does. But the truth is out there. You can find it.

And I was able to respond in a rational, non-hysterical manner. If you wish to have a conversation with me, I would appreciate you doing the same.

Saying "horseshit" does not constitute hysteria or a lack of rationality, so you can drop the condescension. If you don't like the language, I would hope that you have far more revulsion for what the Trump administration has done to families at the border. Your faith demands it of you.

Br already posted 10 or so links from different sources fully debunking this lie. Ignoring those and then asking that others search the internet to back up your own point of view is dismissive and lazy. Please post a single source factually documenting that Obama's administration enforced full criminalization of border crossings and separated families at anywhere near the rate that Trump has.

Were children held during the Obama administration? Yes, they were. I know this. But these cases happened with *far* less frequency, and only in instances of the individuals crossing being suspected of a serious crime or *actual* child trafficking, as opposed to being on the wrong side of an imaginary line. That's the difference, and it's an *enormously* significant one.

So no, the two administrations did NOT have the same policies, and the Obama administration did NOT separate families in the way the Trump administration has.

And finally, the "well he did it too!!!" argument should be reserved for toddler spats.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 08, 2019, 12:57:19 pm
Im in the right thread so I can post this...

Trump admin. is rejecting requests from US embassies to fly the rainbow #pride flag on embassy flagpoles during June, LGBT Pride Month, three American diplomats tell @NBCNews. https://t.co/Wf7NH7EGjq
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 08, 2019, 12:59:05 pm
Trump is also rolling back fuel economy clean air standards and removing California right to regulate emissions in there own state as of monday.  fight expected to go to the supreme court, and will test if the EPA can even regulate "green house gases". Currently the US government's official position is there is no climate change, and these standards are "fake news".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 08, 2019, 01:54:14 pm
Im in the right thread so I can post this...

Trump admin. is rejecting requests from US embassies to fly the rainbow #pride flag on embassy flagpoles during June, LGBT Pride Month, three American diplomats tell @NBCNews. https://t.co/Wf7NH7EGjq

Is this an example of you not liking trump but disliking the people opposed to him?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 08, 2019, 02:16:10 pm
The truth is this is an example of me starting to like him.

I have no problem with people sleeping with whoever they feel like sleeping with.

My wife's best friend is a gay veterinarian.

My problem is people trying to push that it's acceptable and normal to my 5 year old son.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on June 08, 2019, 02:36:39 pm
You also had some very fine people on both sides
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 08, 2019, 02:45:33 pm
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1137051097955102720

That person there, the one who thinks the moon is a part of mars... no really. thinks we should roll back clean air standards...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 08, 2019, 03:01:14 pm
Was it wrong when Obama did it? If I saw one post from either you or BR at that time I would believe your so - called moral outrage. You are upset because Trump did it more? Or is it that you hate anything the man does , even if the previous guy did it too and you didn't say a word. I never said Trump and Obama's policies were exactly the same nor that they both separated families at the same rate. I said they both did it and none of you noticed or if you did you didn't say a word. So I have to conclude that your issue is not as much with the policy but with the side that implemented it.

As far as my request that you look up your facts I certainly am lazy when it comes to tracking down every source and linking them for you. You can care enough to find them or not. I am not going to change your mind and you're not changing mine. My point in speaking up in the first place is in reply to so many of you here who think everyone around you and on this board are in lockstep with the liberal left. Many good and wonderful people voted for Obama and I respect that even though I disagreed with them. I can disagree with them without a vitriolic, completely emotional response like I receive here nearly every time I speak up. And yes, being told my point of view is horsesh*t qualifies.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 08, 2019, 03:20:29 pm
The truth is this is an example of me starting to like him.

I have no problem with people sleeping with whoever they feel like sleeping with.

My wife's best friend is a gay veterinarian.

My problem is people trying to push that it's acceptable and normal to my 5 year old son.

You can teach your kids whatever awful thing you want. But, it is normal and acceptable and I think the government has a role in promoting this.  The government was part of marginalizing this community for too long and now they have to help turn around the despicable attitudes held by people like you. Flying a pride flag is just about the least they could do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 08, 2019, 04:00:55 pm
Was it wrong when Obama did it? If I saw one post from either you or BR at that time I would believe your so - called moral outrage. You are upset because Trump did it more? Or is it that you hate anything the man does , even if the previous guy did it too and you didn't say a word. I never said Trump and Obama's policies were exactly the same nor that they both separated families at the same rate. I said they both did it and none of you noticed or if you did you didn't say a word. So I have to conclude that your issue is not as much with the policy but with the side that implemented it.

Robb, when a parent commits an actual crime and is taken into custody, they are necessarily separated from their children. This is a part of the way our justice system works, and while it sucks for the kids, there is no clear issue of morality in the separation, presuming the parent taken into custody is actually processed quickly, etc. You know these things. I don't know why I have to spell this out for you. That's what happened under Obama with true criminals at the border, and that's why you didn't hear anyone say anything about it. Trump is doing something entirely different, and you know it. Your logic is the equivalent of justifying your own cold blooded murder because your neighbor killed someone in self defense once. These are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT SITUATIONS.

And you can back the hell up with suggesting that my concern is "so-called moral outrage." You ask if I'm upset because "Trump [did] it more?" No, IT'S ABOUT THE POLICY OF FORCIBLY CRIMINALIZING ALL UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS AT THE BORDER. I'm upset because our racist, xenophobic president is cruelly and heartlessly separating poor families who have done nothing other than being on the wrong side of an arbitrary line drawn in blood. This is CLEARLY about policy, and you are being willfully ignorant to suggest otherwise.

"He did it first" is infantile. Your faith demands more of you than this unflinching defense of cruel policies. If Jesus ever said anything about the poor, the immigrant, the stranger, it is that we are to welcome them. He also said a thing or two about millstones and necks regarding people that hurt children.

Your faith demands more of you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 08, 2019, 04:15:39 pm
The bottom line is that Robb thinks people trying to enter the US to seek asylum is a crime worthy of breaking up a family.  And, I’m quite sure he’s been told to think this by leaders of his faith.  That’s the way it works.  He’s not allowed to think for himself. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 08, 2019, 07:58:49 pm
LOL, Jack you seriously have no clue what I'm told and what I believe. Your ridiculous assertions are a great reason why the conservatives on this board don't speak up. They know the left will simply attack them personally. My problem is I just don't care enough or have the time to keep this up with all of you. The only reason I spoke up is to be the voice of those who represent the other side of thinking that is so easily shouted down here. Most just bite their tongue as should I. But every once in a while patience alludes me,
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 08, 2019, 08:15:02 pm
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1137051097955102720

That person there, the one who thinks the moon is a part of mars... no really. thinks we should roll back clean air standards...

So you read that to mean that Trump thinks the moon is part of Mars?  If you were not determined to play gotcha, you would know that he was saying that going to the moon again should not be our final goal, but merely part of our overall goal of going to Mars.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 08, 2019, 08:35:17 pm
LOL, Jack you seriously have no clue what I'm told and what I believe. Your ridiculous assertions are a great reason why the conservatives on this board don't speak up. They know the left will simply attack them personally. My problem is I just don't care enough or have the time to keep this up with all of you. The only reason I spoke up is to be the voice of those who represent the other side of thinking that is so easily shouted down here. Most just bite their tongue as should I. But every once in a while patience alludes me,

I get it, you’re the voice speaking out in favor of concentration camps full of kids.  And, I know you are a slave to your religion and incapable of independent thought.  You do whatever the old **** in SLC tell you to do. This particular line where you are very concerned about trump but still manage to support everything he does is right out of their playbook.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 08, 2019, 10:45:47 pm
I would respond with facts and reason to you but to what end? You don't deserve another thought. I'm done here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 09, 2019, 08:36:04 am
Twistbaway Dave p.

He actually says we should not go to the Moon but the moon is still a part of what nasa should do according to you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 09, 2019, 09:32:20 am
If you listen to the context, he is saying that going to the moon is not the ultimate goal, but merely the first step in the ultimate program of going to Mars.  But you are going to believe whatever satisfies the template you have created.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 09, 2019, 12:54:06 pm
I would respond with facts and reason to you but to what end? You don't deserve another thought. I'm done here.

Oh what a shame. I was looking forward to the facts and reason that justify concentration camps full of children and in conditions so poor that many are dying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 09, 2019, 01:42:11 pm
They made that decision.

Nobody made that for them.

If I break the law Ill be punished too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 09, 2019, 03:48:18 pm
Oh what a shame. I was looking forward to the facts and reason that justify concentration camps full of children and in conditions so poor that many are dying.

You obviously know nothing about concentration camps.  By the way, How many children have died in what you call concentration camps?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on June 12, 2019, 06:36:12 pm
Doing anything to help continue the trump admin and policies is evil.  There are concentration camps with children dying on the border. This is not acceptable.

Neither is your rhetoric.

"Concentration camps" is a phrase with a meaning, and that meaning includes being unable to leave.  All of those crossing the border illegally and housed by the government are free to leave at any time... so long as they also leave the U.S.  They are NOT "concentration camps," and that ignores the bullshit claim of "children dying" in them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on June 12, 2019, 06:43:48 pm
I have no problem with people sleeping with whoever they feel like sleeping with.

My wife's best friend is a gay veterinarian.


No reason to have any problem with gay veterinarians.

Gay vegetarians, on the other hand....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on June 12, 2019, 06:46:54 pm
You can teach your kids whatever awful thing you want. But, it is normal and acceptable and I think the government has a role in promoting this.

Government should be promoting homosexuality and transgenderism?

PROMOTING?

Yeah, there are times it is appropriate to refer to something as a steaming pile of horseshit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on June 12, 2019, 06:51:29 pm
So you read that to mean that Trump thinks the moon is part of Mars?  If you were not determined to play gotcha, you would know that he was saying that going to the moon again should not be our final goal, but merely part of our overall goal of going to Mars.

Oh, c'mon, if you want to take playing gotcha away from him and actually look at policy positions and their effect, what is he going to have to pis$ and moan about?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on June 12, 2019, 07:25:50 pm
Robb, when a parent commits an actual crime and is taken into custody, they are necessarily separated from their children. This is a part of the way our justice system works, and while it sucks for the kids, there is no clear issue of morality in the separation, presuming the parent taken into custody is actually processed quickly, etc. You know these things. I don't know why I have to spell this out for you. That's what happened under Obama with true criminals at the border, and that's why you didn't hear anyone say anything about it. Trump is doing something entirely different, and you know it. Your logic is the equivalent of justifying your own cold blooded murder because your neighbor killed someone in self defense once. These are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT SITUATIONS.

And you can back the hell up with suggesting that my concern is "so-called moral outrage." You ask if I'm upset because "Trump [did] it more?" No, IT'S ABOUT THE POLICY OF FORCIBLY CRIMINALIZING ALL UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS AT THE BORDER. I'm upset because our racist, xenophobic president is cruelly and heartlessly separating poor families who have done nothing other than being on the wrong side of an arbitrary line drawn in blood. This is CLEARLY about policy, and you are being willfully ignorant to suggest otherwise.

"He did it first" is infantile. Your faith demands more of you than this unflinching defense of cruel policies. If Jesus ever said anything about the poor, the immigrant, the stranger, it is that we are to welcome them. He also said a thing or two about millstones and necks regarding people that hurt children.

Your faith demands more of you.


So, tico, would Jesus have left the kids in the hands of NON-family members who were using the kids solely for the purpose of getting preferential treatment after illegally entering the U.S.... even when often kids transported by non-family members end up being sex-trafficed?
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/dna-tests-reveal-30-of-suspected-fraudulent-migrant-families-were-unrelated

As to a "POLICY OF FORCIBLY CRIMINALIZING ALL UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS AT THE BORDER," this might be a foreign concept to someone who supported DACA, but the president does not make law, a president is supposed to ENFORCE the law.  CONGRESS makes the law.  The particular law at issue here is
8 U.S. Code § 1325. Improper entry by alien
(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325

Congress passed the law in 1952, and it was signed into law by Truman.  It has been amended once since then, in 1996, with that amendment signed into law by Clinton.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 12, 2019, 09:32:14 pm

No reason to have any problem with gay veterinarians.

Gay vegetarians, on the other hand....

In fairness, ANY vegetarians are problematic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 12, 2019, 10:21:07 pm
"Vegetarian" is an old Comanche Indian word for "bad hunter."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 10, 2019, 03:52:45 pm
The CURRENT County Assessor, Fritz Kaegi, is a reformer who replaced a pretty sleazy hack, Joe Berrios.  Todd Ricketts has no legitimate excuse for not following the law in informing authorities he had replaced a dilapidated house with a mansion.  Whether Berrios looked the other way or whatever is beside the point. It is inconceivable that Ricketts hired an incompetent attorney, but if he did, given his knowledge and connections in Chicago, that would be pretty strange.  I doubt he'll get criminally prosecuted, but I'm guessing he'll have to pay back assessments and a fine.


But this discussion really belongs somewhere else, whether in politics and religion of Under the Bleachers.

A couple of quotes from the linked article

"The village approved the building permit in September 2007 and sent the details to the New Trier Township assessor’s office, said Lisa Roberts, Wilmette’s assistant community development director. That November, the permit details were sent to the county assessor, said Leonard Shifflett, the deputy New Trier Township assessor."

"Ricketts’ properties had been reassessed that year, and FortCamp, Ricketts’ attorney, filed an appeal with the county Board of Review asking to lower the assessment on both the property that contains the new house and the adjoining property that contains the side yard.  FortCamp noted that the side yard had been assessed as though a home were still there, but the house had been razed and the land was now vacant, meaning its value was significantly less.

FortCamp also argued that the property containing the Ricketts’ house should have its assessment cut, citing what he said were other similar houses in the neighborhood that had lower assessed values per square foot.

"In his appeal paperwork, FortCamp told the review board that the Ricketts’ house was 96 years old and was 2,534 square feet. That, however, is the age and size of Ricketts’ old house, not the new one that had been completed three years earlier. In addition, the photo of the house FortCamp submitted with his appeal was of Ricketts’ old house that had been torn down, not the new home.Based on the materials that FortCamp submitted, the review board lowered both the value of the side yard and the property with the Ricketts’ home. That resulted in a relatively small property tax savings for Ricketts."

"The assessor’s office doesn’t have the staff to inspect all properties every three years, however. A recent audit by the International Association of Assessing Officers concluded that with the current staffing levels at the Cook assessor’s office, it would take 31 years to reinspect all of the county’s 1.8 million parcels. The association recommends reinspection of all parcels every four to six years."

"In the Ricketts case, James Houlihan was assessor in 2007 when the building permit information was sent to the office but not recorded. Under his successor, Joe Berrios, no inspection of Ricketts’ home was done during reassessments in 2013 and 2016. The same was true during this year’s reassessment under Kaegi."

The attorney submitted false documents in the appeal.  The assessor was notified, but it wasn't recorded.  They are understaffed.  Yeah Ricketts will pay his back taxes and a fine.

I can only compare it to Nebraska.  My house has been photographed 3 separate times from the outside in the 10 years I have lived there.  Google Maps likely does a better job of updating stuff in Chicago.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on July 24, 2019, 01:11:45 am
Holy crap.... One of the key attorney's on the Mueller investigation team had previously represented the guy who helped set up Hillary's home email server, and then later used a hammer to smash and destroy some of her mobile devices AFTER they had been subpoenaed.  AND that attorney is expected to be with Mueller when Mueller testifies before Congress.
 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mueller-will-appear-with-lawyer-who-represented-the-clinton-aide-who-set-up-email-server
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 04, 2019, 12:06:20 pm
It’s really a shame we don’t have more guns in this country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 04, 2019, 01:36:20 pm
They’re blaming video games again. Jesus Christ
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 04, 2019, 01:41:16 pm
They’re blaming video games again. Jesus Christ

Oddo already blamed Jesus Christ.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 04, 2019, 01:47:10 pm
They’re blaming video games again. Jesus Christ

Japan is lucky they don’t have any video games.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 04, 2019, 01:48:42 pm
Japan is lucky they don’t have any video games.

Lot of countries with no PlayStation apparently

https://twitter.com/keithedwards/status/1157740352838742016?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 04, 2019, 07:09:04 pm
If the 2nd amendment is dog **** then treat it like its dog **** and get rid of it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 04, 2019, 09:28:25 pm
Would going after ammunition be an easier/faster way to make the shootings more difficult?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 04, 2019, 09:38:40 pm
Ammunition and weapon regulation wouldn't hurt, but reducing the hateful rhetoric would help more.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 05, 2019, 12:05:48 am
The total number of gun deaths has actually been on a decline.

People are allowing emotional reaction to shocking events to shape their opinion as to what policy should be.  And they are inclined to make foolish decisions as a result.

Just to put things in perspective:

(https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/67648946_1063676403831022_5936043865663340544_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&_nc_oc=AQmXDBGnVwB6jOlqwT_XiRJDiJUROyHlJ7EWneNJr7SYGMFB5_axhVREgr_tvQ_jc84&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&oh=f058aa27fc8c842a469cf6b000d86c9a&oe=5DA01A7D)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 05, 2019, 08:39:25 am
It’s **** stupid that we allow people to own guns. But, we’ll never get rid of the 2nd Amendment so the federal government should impose a massive tax on guns and ammo, at least 100,000%, and make it virtually impossible for anyone to buy a new gun or any new ammo.  Couple that with a $500B buyback program and a huge percentage of the guns in circulation will be gone and not replaced.   Use some of that $500B to buy and destroy the ammo and, in the end, gun use will decline sharply and the gun violent, most of which is via handgun, will decline as well.  This problem can be solved.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 06, 2019, 06:33:07 am
Yep.  That should work.  There would be no more guns in the U.S.  I got an idea! 

Lets take the same stance and actions on drugs.  That will solve all the problems.

Oh wait...




It must be nice to live in your delusional world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 06, 2019, 06:37:16 am
Please elaborate on your plan to keep the guns from Mexico out of the criminals hands in the Unites States with your liberal open the southern border ideas?  You know when you eliminate ICE.

I really am interested in knowing what your plan is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 06, 2019, 07:20:44 am
Actually it’s guns from the US that are going into Mexico and Canada you racist mouthbreather

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/the-flow-of-guns-from-the-u-s-to-mexico-is-getting-lost-in-the-border-debate
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 06, 2019, 08:07:08 am
If I thought strict gun control would stop this madness I would be all for it. It is beyond sad that I have to give my six year olds and 12 year year old girl talks about what to do in a an active shooter situation. The problem is, strict gun control simply takes weapons out of the hands of those who are trying to protect themselves. The criminals are criminals because they don't obey laws. The data from Australia is that their crime rates, including murder, were unchanged after removing guns. Major cities like Chicago have the strictest gun laws in the country, yet have the largest homicide and gun violence rates.

According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, violent crime has been declining steadily since the early 1990s.
The 2011 homicide rate was almost half of the rate in 1991, and according to the Pew Research Center, the 2013 gun-related death rate was half of the rate in 1993.
The number of nonfatal firearm crimes committed in 2011 was one-sixth the number committed in 1993.
In the past few years, there have been minor increases in certain types of violent crimes, mainly in large metropolitan areas. However, these increases are nowhere near those seen in the 1990s and are largely related to gang activity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 06, 2019, 08:18:49 am
In my opinion the real problem with mass shooters is media. In a rush for ratings they swoop in on a mass shooting, diving into the life and motives of the shooter/s to let us know the why. As if we are entitled to that information. This is precisely why these people do these heinous acts. For the most part they are young men who have been ostracized by society, mental illness is quite often involved, and they are crying out for attention. If they pull off a mass shooting with enough victims they will now get the attention they so desperately seek. Foxnews, CNN and MSNBC  are the most to blame for giving them the notoriety they are seeking. Commit a single murder and nobody nationally will notice. Kill 10 and you'll be famous. There should be a rule/law/agreement/whatever to not publish the name of the shooters. Their personal information, their motives, manifesto or whatever should be sealed. I realize it is impossible to not report when so many have been killed but instead the focus should be on the victims. Networks don't publish the names of under-age victims of crime. This should be added to what they will not publish. I think many of these disturbed people would find another less deadly way to get noticed if they knew these restrictions were in place. The problem is, which network will start this? Can this be legislated considering the 1st amendment? I doubt it. I hope they figure this out and give it a try. Removing guns from the mentally ill has to happen, but even that won't stop these things from happening. If driving a Uhaul through a street fair will make someone famous, they'll do it without ever touching a gun.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 06, 2019, 08:35:14 am
Yep.  That should work.  There would be no more guns in the U.S.  I got an idea! 
Lets take the same stance and actions on drugs.  That will solve all the problems.
Oh wait...

It must be nice to live in your delusional world.

There are major differences between drugs and guns and the effect of legislation to control/ban either.  I am not saying Cletus is sane, reasonable or that his suggestion would be Constitutional, but government regulation of illegal drugs does virtually nothing to reduce their supply or use, while similar regulation of firearms or ammo could (if Constitutional and put into effect) have a major effect at reducing the number or availability of either.

Cletus's world is not delusional because his ideas on gun control would not be effective if implemented.  He is delusional because he is a socialist who believes socialism would "work" to make the world a better place.  Of course since Cletus is rather open in his intense hatred of anyone who does not agree with him, and since his idea of making the world a better place might well include killing off a quarter to half of the population and then imposing rigid government controls on pretty much all aspects of the remaining population, including mandatory birth control to limit population, in his mind perhaps socialism would "make the world a better place."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 06, 2019, 08:52:41 am
In my opinion the real problem with mass shooters is media. In a rush for ratings they swoop in on a mass shooting, diving into the life and motives of the shooter/s to let us know the why. As if we are entitled to that information. This is precisely why these people do these heinous acts. For the most part they are young men who have been ostracized by society, mental illness is quite often involved, and they are crying out for attention. If they pull off a mass shooting with enough victims they will now get the attention they so desperately seek. Foxnews, CNN and MSNBC  are the most to blame for giving them the notoriety they are seeking. Commit a single murder and nobody nationally will notice. Kill 10 and you'll be famous. There should be a rule/law/agreement/whatever to not publish the name of the shooters. Their personal information, their motives, manifesto or whatever should be sealed. I realize it is impossible to not report when so many have been killed but instead the focus should be on the victims. Networks don't publish the names of under-age victims of crime. This should be added to what they will not publish. I think many of these disturbed people would find another less deadly way to get noticed if they knew these restrictions were in place. The problem is, which network will start this? Can this be legislated considering the 1st amendment? I doubt it. I hope they figure this out and give it a try. Removing guns from the mentally ill has to happen, but even that won't stop these things from happening. If driving a Uhaul through a street fair will make someone famous, they'll do it without ever touching a gun.

I share your concerns, but not only would the solution you propose (and which I have also) violate the First Amendment, it would be entirely ineffective because of the decentralization of media today.  Social media and file sharing or link sharing, mean that even if all of the major broadcast outlets agreed to broadcast nothing about the nutjobs, it would almost immediately be out there.  In the case of the El Paso shooter, for instance, *I* have already shared a link to the full text of his "manifesto."  So long as people want to know, it is going to be provided.

Now, two other points addressing what is needed to reduce the number of such incidents --
1) Once more both of the attacks this past weekend were in gun free zones.
2) Of the 27 worst mass shooter incidents, in 26 of them the shooters were not raised in the homes of their biological fathers, with most raised in homes without any father.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 06, 2019, 10:29:06 am
The cognitive dissonance in this thread is stunning. The dualistic thinking in this thread is frightening.

Do we have a culture problem? Yes! Do we have a gun problem? Yes! Not only are these things *not* mutually exclusive, they *reinforce* each other.

Should we work to change the culture that influences so many of these terrorist events? Yes! Can we also enact simple, common-sense reforms that would reduce the frequency of these incidents while attempting the long, hard work of culture change? Yes! It's not either/or, it's BOTH/AND. TA-DAA!!!

"The problem is, strict gun control simply takes weapons out of the hands of those who are trying to protect themselves. The criminals are criminals because they don't obey laws."

If the argument is that laws are only a hinderance to "good' people, and "bad" people are just going to break them anyway, then why have any laws at all? Seriously. If this is the argument, then you need to have a serious proposal as to why any law, law enforcement, government, etc., should exist. Period. Until you can make the latter argument, the former does not stand.

Further, these white supremacist terrorists are *not* hardened criminals operating deep in the belly of international gun trafficking operations. They are racist, lonely, disaffected men who often have no clue how to navigate normal society, but can easily and anonymously purchase any number of weapons of war via THE **** INTERNET. The Dayton shooter - who killed 9 people, wounded another 27, and fired at least 41 rounds in THIRTY TWO SECONDS - would *never* have gotten his hands on a weapon capable of that kind of carnage if he had to navigate a weapons black market.

"The data from Australia is that their crime rates, including murder, were unchanged after removing guns."

Good grief, no, this is not true. Australia's murder rate has dropped almost 40% since 1996 and is now at its lowest recorded levels in 25 years. Total homicide incidents have dropped, use of firearms in homicides has dropped, and gunshot wound as cause of death has dropped. Not sure of the source of these absolutely terrible talking points, but here are the trends from the Australian govt: http://crimestats.aic.gov.au/NHMP/1_trends/

Also, Australia didn't "remove guns." They still have guns - lots of them!!! In fact, there are almost as many privately owned firearms in Australia as there were *before* the 1996 legislation. They did outlaw certain semi-automatic rifles, and have a clear and rigorous licensing system by which different types of firearms can be purchased and owned. Gun control is *not* an all-or-nothing proposition, and most of the posts here in this forum imply that.

"mental illness is quite often involved"

I'm not even going to bother getting into how problematic this statement is. But if mental illness is a serious driver of violent hate crimes, how does this square with the argument that stricter gun control laws won't help because "criminals gonna criminal"?

The US is not unique in its culture. Its not unique in having broken families, angry young men, white supremacy, video games, racism, eroding religious institutions, bullying, sensationalist media, mental illness, drag queens, or whatever other cause (legitimate or not) that one might associate with mass shootings.

It is unique in two things: the prevalence and ease-of-access to firearms, and the frequency of mass shootings. To virulently argue the two are not related is a total and complete breakdown of rational thinking.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 06, 2019, 11:58:55 am
Tico, I find you to be an intelligent contributor to this board in most cases. I appreciate your counters to the post I made above. But like Wmljohn and Cletus before, the rancor makes it impossible to have a real discussion. You seem to be able to defend your positions with data and well thought opinion, why so much emotion? On every topic? I would love to have this discussion with you, present my side and hear yours. Is that possible or should I not bother?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 06, 2019, 12:17:18 pm
Let's talk about strict gun control and homicide rates for a moment. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.
    The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.

    The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.

    Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”

    Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.

    Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
    According to research compiled by Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.

    Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, ****, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.

    It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

If you would like to understand the conservative way of thinking, any weapon ban scares us. Why? Because the first thing a government does before taking away the rights of the citizenry is confiscate the weapons. Lennin and Stalin did it, Hitler did it, Hussien did too. The right to bear arms was not seen by the founders as a right to just self protection and hunting, it was a right to keep the government in check. If the citizens have arms, even semi-auto rifles with high capacities, they are more likely to be able to keep the government from forcibly removing our rights. Not more than 50 miles from here that scene played out a few years ago in a dispute between a rancher and the BAU. Hundreds flocked to the ranch, bringing their guns and prevented the government from tyranny. That may sound horrible to you, but I was glad to see it. If you dealt with the BAU as most of us in the west who own land do, you would understand just how tyrannical our government can be. Our government was founded by those who gathered arms and rose up to throw down an oppressive government. What was the first thing the British did? Try to confiscate the arms of the colonials in Lexington and Concord.

All that being said, do I anticipate a war against our government? Of course not. I love this country, and despite it's ongoing issues this is the greatest country on earth. But if the forces of tyranny take over and take away my freedom, I will do whatever I have to, as the founders intended.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 06, 2019, 12:27:11 pm
The right to bear arms was not seen by the founders as a right to just self protection and hunting, it was a right to keep the government in check. If the citizens have arms, even semi-auto rifles with high capacities, they are more likely to be able to keep the government from forcibly removing our rights.

A fully automatic weapon is going to do jack squat against the US military. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 06, 2019, 12:40:15 pm
A fully automatic weapon is going to do jack squat against the US military. 

  Absolutely true.  I've heard that counter-argument before, but it assumes something.  It assumes that the US military would support a tryranical and unConstitutional government.

I don't have a gun.  If guns are removed from out country, it won't affect me personally.   But the nutjobs will then resort to pipe bombs, pressure cooker bombs, anthrax, germ warfare, chemical discharge, dirty bombs...  hate is actually more inventive than good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 06, 2019, 12:58:17 pm
I don't have a gun.  If guns are removed from out country, it won't affect me personally.   But the nutjobs will then resort to pipe bombs, pressure cooker bombs, anthrax, germ warfare, chemical discharge, dirty bombs...  hate is actually more inventive than good.

To some extent sure, but pipe bombs and pressure cooker bombs require more skill and can just as easily blow up the bomb maker.  Biological, chemical and dirty bombs are going to require a lot more technical knowledge, skill and equipment than what an individual can pull off, you would need a nation state to pull that off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 06, 2019, 01:01:49 pm
The people around here that support guns dont give a **** how many people have to die as long as they get to keep theirs.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on August 06, 2019, 01:03:27 pm
And no I dont support guns.

We need extremely strict gun control as in one per home that never leaves the home and automatic weapons should be outlawed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 06, 2019, 05:09:17 pm
Automatic weapons are outlawed and have been for quite some time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 06, 2019, 05:14:30 pm
The automatic weapon loopholes have also existed for quite some time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 06, 2019, 07:46:20 pm
Tico, I find you to be an intelligent contributor to this board in most cases. I appreciate your counters to the post I made above. But like Wmljohn and Cletus before, the rancor makes it impossible to have a real discussion. You seem to be able to defend your positions with data and well thought opinion, why so much emotion? On every topic? I would love to have this discussion with you, present my side and hear yours. Is that possible or should I not bother?

Robb, first, thanks for the sincerity of this post. I hear it, and I appreciate it. Really. If you take nothing else from the rest of my post, please take away this first point.

Second, I was careful to keep personal attacks out of my initial post. I believe I did - if there is somewhere you felt personally attacked, I apologize. That said, what you perceive as "rancor" is instead full-throated anger and grief, and for that I will not apologize, nor do I think it necessary for conversations to be devoid of emotion in order to be thoughtful, significant, and civilized. I remain committed to respectful conversation, but will not temper my emotions where they do not cross the line into disrespect. Again, if you felt I was disrespectful, I apologize. But I do not apologize for places where my emotion may have simply made you uncomfortable. In face-to-face conversation, we have an infinite number of body language tools with which to round out our communication. That doesn't exist on the internet, and so I use and will continue to use vocabulary, punctuation, and formatting to add emphasis in the places where my body would add emphasis were we face-to-face. It's my best attempt to bring my whole person into the limitations of this medium.

Third, at this point, I think it is neither useful nor do I wish to do a deep dive into data. The very first data point you offered - that Australia's homicide rate has not dropped since the institution of the 1996 gun control legislation - was meaningfully and factually false. In responding to my correction of your misstatement, you pivoted to the idea that the legislation "appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends." This is, again, meaningfully and factually false. Homicide rates in Australia have dropped nearly 40% since the 1996 legislation. This is not a "statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends." You *are* correct in stating that homicide rates were dropping before the legislation was passed, but you have attempted to fillet this real, significant data so many different ways that I cannot put any stock in your argument about attribution. That is not personal; I do not think you are attempting to mislead. I think you are sincere and sincerely wrong, and at some point, an attempt at a statistical conversation is untenable when we see completely different things in the data to begin with. No reason for either of us to waste breath here.

Further, per my original post, this isn't about just guns. It's guns AND culture. Talking about murder rate trends in Australia based on legislation passed two decades ago (without reference to other regional, cultural, and economic trends within Australia during that time, etc.) as though there are clear conclusions that can be drawn for any other continent, culture, or country is, frankly, over both of our pay grades. That is, unless you happen to be an anthropologist with a good handle on statistics whose expertise is the relationship between gun control and crime rates over the past 30 years. If you are, then I'm willing to hear you out on a statistics argument.

So where does that leave us? Again, I appreciate the sincerity of your post and your invitation to dialogue. If this country is going to move forward, we have to find a way to dialogue with the other side. But as this tiny little message board exchange has shown, the issue is too big. And that's a valuable lesson. Because we aren't going to solve this problem in one fell swoop. Instead, I think it best to find the places where there is agreement and move forward on that basis. (Side note: right now, sitting on McConnell's doorstep is real, bipartisan gun control legislation that the majority of Americans support. But the Republicans won't pick it up because of politics. This is a vile, contemptible position that deserves every ounce of our public scorn and outcry.)

So where is it that we agree? Where can we begin to build a bridge based on the proximity of our opinions? Do you agree that automatic weapons should be outlawed as they currently are? If so, surely we can both agree that the kinds of magazine and stock modifications that practically turn semi-auto weapons into automatics should be outlawed, and anyone purchasing or selling these modifications should face stiff repercussions. Legislation like that might not have prevented the Dayton shooting, but it absolutely would have minimized the number of casualties and wounded. (Regarding the trope of "if you outlaw guns, they'll just get a knife" a knife doesn't kill 9 and injure another 27 in 32 seconds so we can put that straw man to bed.) That's a change worth making, and one that does nothing to infringe upon 2nd Amendment rights as most citizens see them.

Do you agree with President Trump that red flag legislation should be passed (thank you Trump for publicly supporting this common sense legislation!!!)? If you do, there's another plank to put up on the bridge, and another law that would have meaningfully limited or eliminated the impact of the Dayton shooting, as the shooter appears to have shown any number of violent tendencies.

Do you agree with the vast majority of Americans that universal background checks should be instituted? Wonderful, the bridge grows larger.

Do you think that cars are reasonably regulated in such a manner that significantly benefits public safety without infringing upon your rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? If so, would it not be a reasonable suggestion to pursue similar regulation for firearms, including licensure, insurance, and limitations of operation based on ability and need? Perhaps you don't think this reasonable, but if you do, again, the bridge spans a further gap.

How about cool-down periods?

How about the boyfriend loophole?

"Gun control" is neither a simple nor a singular issue, and gun control advocates are not so simplistic so as to assume there's a magic switch to be flipped that would solve our problems. And yes, even with better gun control there will still be tragedies. But there are very simple legislative reforms that would absolutely have made a difference in the recent shootings without any significant infringement on 2nd amendment rights as the majority of Americans see them. If you can agree to the above items, this is where our energies should be focused, rather than the impossibly amorphous issue of gun control writ large.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 06, 2019, 09:27:47 pm
A fully automatic weapon is going to do jack squat against the US military. 



You are wrong, quite wrong.  SEMI-automatic weapons routinely cause major problems against the US military in the Middle East, and the U.S. has little hesitation to aggressively use shocking force and violence there, force and violence which would not likely be used against the citizenry here because of the public reaction which would result, as well as the outright refusal of much of the military to carry out the orders.  But if you are arguing that the true spirit of the Second Amendment would allow private citizens to possess the same level of weaponry as the military, well I have to agree with you there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 06, 2019, 09:29:10 pm
The automatic weapon loopholes have also existed for quite some time.

Really?

What "loopholes" are you imagining exist?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 06, 2019, 09:47:18 pm
The people around here that support guns dont give a **** how many people have to die as long as they get to keep theirs.

You are absolutely wrong, and you are also ignoring the fact that the gun death rate in this country has been falling for years.

You are also ignoring the fact that every genocide for the last 165 years has followed the disarming of the group which ended up targeted in the genocide, and that would literally take 3,000 years of a ten person a day mass murder shooting EVERY DAY for each of those 3,000 years before we would reach the number of people killed in any one of the three worst genocides of the last 165 years.

I have been a gun rights supporter for decades, but have only personally had a gun which you often hear anyone urge be banned for a few months, so the idea that those supporting guns are only doing it to keep theirs is utter nonsense.

We need extremely strict gun control as in one per home that never leaves the home...

So no hunting.  And those living near heavily wooded areas who now may arm themselves even to work their own property should just give up their land to wildlife.... or perhaps smile as a bear, wolves or mountain lion eats them.  Target practice would be pretty much impossible, unless you either have a range in your basement or want to shoot up your walls.  And the person (often a woman) who has reasonable fear of attack while outside their home I guess should either never leave their home of accept being beaten, robbed, **** or killed.

Your approach will also have just made the entire nation a gun free zone, meaning any criminal would know with a very high level of confidence that no one he approaches on the street or anyplace other than in their home is going to be armed.  You will have just made everyone less safe, and remarkably increased the risk of the very mass shootings you seemingly want to avoid.  (Virtually every mass shooting has been in a gun free zone.)

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 06, 2019, 09:49:20 pm
The cognitive dissonance in this thread is stunning. The dualistic thinking in this thread is frightening.

Do we have a culture problem? Yes! Do we have a gun problem? Yes! Not only are these things *not* mutually exclusive, they *reinforce* each other.

Should we work to change the culture that influences so many of these terrorist events? Yes! Can we also enact simple, common-sense reforms that would reduce the frequency of these incidents while attempting the long, hard work of culture change? Yes! It's not either/or, it's BOTH/AND. TA-DAA!!!

"The problem is, strict gun control simply takes weapons out of the hands of those who are trying to protect themselves. The criminals are criminals because they don't obey laws."

If the argument is that laws are only a hinderance to "good' people, and "bad" people are just going to break them anyway, then why have any laws at all? Seriously. If this is the argument, then you need to have a serious proposal as to why any law, law enforcement, government, etc., should exist. Period. Until you can make the latter argument, the former does not stand.


Speaking of cognitive dissonance....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 06, 2019, 10:45:46 pm
Side note: right now, sitting on McConnell's doorstep is real, bipartisan gun control legislation that the majority of Americans support. But the Republicans won't pick it up because of politics. This is a vile, contemptible position that deserves every ounce of our public scorn and outcry.

I genuinely don't know what supposedly bipartisan legislation you are talking about, but thank goodness for Mitch McConnell.

The Senate is SUPPOSED to slow down the legislative process, and overwhelming support for something in no way means it is either good or Constitutional.  There was overwhelming support in this country in 1942 to send Japanese Americans to concentration camps.  There was overwhelming support in this country in 1956 to maintain segregated schools.  There was overwhelming support in this country in 1830 to violate treaties with the Cherokee and other native American people and to forcibly relocate them.


So where is it that we agree? Where can we begin to build a bridge based on the proximity of our opinions? Do you agree that automatic weapons should be outlawed as they currently are?

This could be fun.  No, I do not agree that automatic weapons should outlawed as they now are, so we can probably skip the questions about magazines and stock modifications.


Do you agree with President Trump that red flag legislation should be passed (thank you Trump for publicly supporting this common sense legislation!!!)? If you do, there's another plank to put up on the bridge, and another law that would have meaningfully limited or eliminated the impact of the Dayton shooting, as the shooter appears to have shown any number of violent tendencies.

The devil is in the details.  I suspect I would support much less here than you would.  There are already procedures for civil commitment for someone who poses a risk of harm to himself or others.... and no one even attempted.



Do you agree with the vast majority of Americans that universal background checks should be instituted? Wonderful, the bridge grows larger.

Nope.  The bridge is not getting anywhere.


Do you think that cars are reasonably regulated in such a manner that significantly benefits public safety without infringing upon your rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

No, I don't, but cars are not only not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, they are not absolutely essential to protect against tyranny.

If so, would it not be a reasonable suggestion to pursue similar regulation for firearms, including licensure, insurance, and limitations of operation based on ability and need? Perhaps you don't think this reasonable, but if you do, again, the bridge spans a further gap.

No, it wouldn't.  The power to impose such regulations would simply allow government to identify every gun owner for purposes of confiscation, but also to slowly regulate away any meaningful resistance to tyranny.  Such regulations would absolutely gut the very purpose of the Second Amendment.

How about cool-down periods?

How about the boyfriend loophole?

I'm unfamiliar with either, but would assume opposition.



"Gun control" is neither a simple nor a singular issue, and gun control advocates are not so simplistic so as to assume there's a magic switch to be flipped that would solve our problems. And yes, even with better gun control there will still be tragedies. But there are very simple legislative reforms that would absolutely have made a difference in the recent shootings without any significant infringement on 2nd amendment rights as the majority of Americans see them. If you can agree to the above items, this is where our energies should be focused, rather than the impossibly amorphous issue of gun control writ large.

But, since you are pretending to be interested in looking for areas of agreement AND proposals which might actually reduce the number of mass shootings and the gun death rate (as if deaths from other causes are irrelevant), how about the following:

1) Elimination of gun free zones -- nearly all mass shootings are in gun free zones since the shooters know they are very unlikely to encounter resistance before police arrive and can therefore rack up the kind of death toll that will get them news coverage and in their warped mind thereby give purpose and significance to their utterly worthless existence.

2) Allowing school teachers concealed carry on school grounds -- only after appropriate training, and without students allowed to know who, when, or if any teachers were armed.

3) National reciprocity for Concealed Carry Permits.

4) Similar to what is done in Switzerland, mandatory firearms training for all citizens, with annual refresher training and with a military issue semi-automatic rifle in every home.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 06, 2019, 11:10:14 pm
Jes, any person who would compare the movement for reasonable, limited, and life-saving gun control to the systemic racism that gave way to segregation, concentration camps, and genocide makes a mockery of both the historic injustice perpetrated against persons of color and the present grief of a nation in the face of domestic terrorism.

Further, given your standing before the law, I have zero respect for and even less want of your legal perspective on any manner.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on August 06, 2019, 11:22:08 pm
Imagine caping for Mitch McConnell.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 06, 2019, 11:45:36 pm
Tico, as I mentioned about red flag laws, the devil is in the details.
https://www.alloutdoor.com/2019/07/29/colorado-now-worst-red-flag-law-around/

As to my "standing before the law," what?  I have lost my license to practice law.... meaning my "standing before the law," is the same as yours -- neither of us are lawyers.  None of what I wrote dealt with any legal advice.

Jes, any person who would compare the movement for reasonable, limited, and life-saving gun control to the systemic racism that gave way to segregation, concentration camps, and genocide makes a mockery of both the historic injustice perpetrated against persons of color and the present grief of a nation in the face of domestic terrorism.

Could you perhaps point to where I did "compare the movement for reasonable, limited, and life-saving gun control to the systemic racism that gave way to segregation, concentration camps, and genocide"?  Seriously, where did I compare the two... at all?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 07, 2019, 12:34:48 am
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_156504586776499.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=1.5&w=525)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 07, 2019, 06:17:51 am
Anti gun people.  It's simple.

I have a right.

You have a right.

I choose to exercise my right.

You choose not to exercise your right.

You don't like me exercising my right.

You want to take my right away because you choose not to exercise your right and you don't like me legally exercising my right.

Maybe there is a right that you have and we can trade.  You take my right and I can take your right but I get to choose which right you have that I don't want you to have anymore.  How about you give up free speech?  You are no longer allowed to express your opinions anymore.  I will give up my right to own a gun if you give up your right to free speech.  Your pursuit of happiness perhaps?  OH OH OH...  Your freedom of religion?  You can only worship me from now on.  Maybe I won't allow you to own property.  You can give that all to me now thank you.

Does that work for you?  It should be.  I mean in your mind it is so simple to give up rights because it fits your idea of the world.  Why on gods green earth would anyone disagree with you that giving up the right to keep and bear arms isn't the right thing to do?  It just make so much sense to just do away with that right because you think it's not a good right to have.

It's simple.  Right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 07, 2019, 07:59:51 am
Thanks Tico, I appreciate your comments and thoughtful reply. After this discussion I paid a little more attention to a few other boards I frequent and found there even more vitriol. Even someone voicing opinions on a line-up or when a pitcher should be removed or who should be called up were met with slander and name-calling. It reminds me of a movie where the entire world had retreated to their homes, only interacting with each other digitally. When that network went down they didn't know how to function or interact face to face. They had become so violent and lacking morals or compassion that they eventually killed each other off until the last two had to decide to perpetuate the race or give in to their conditioned "upbringing." I know that is an extreme view of our society and was meant to make a point, but are we headed in that direction right now?

Having 5 daughters in their early 20's it is scary to meet some of the young men they are friends with. These guys can't hold a conversation, don't call them on the phone. Text or snapchat is the way they communicate, if at all. They don't know how to plan a date. "Let's hang out," is their idea of a good time. Worse still, most of them are addicted to ****, which objectifies women to the point they barely see them as human. They look at my daughters and see body parts, not a person. God has been removed from the public square, persona non grata everywhere but in church and the home. Millennials are less interested in God or commandments or morality than any generation before them and then we wonder why.

This is a religion and politics thread so I am going to put one scripture here. Matt 24:10-12, And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. 11. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
This is what I see in our society today, which brings us back full circle to the violence over the weekend. The core of the problem is not the method of destruction, it is the heart of the perpetrators, who with hate in their hearts lost the natural empathy we have as humans, as children of God. You cannot fix this with legislation, you cannot ban this behavior. We as a society have rejected God, and having sowed we shall reap our reward. I hope I am wrong, and that we turn away from this path, but that hope is without hope, if you catch my meaning. Again Tico, thanks for your reply.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 07, 2019, 08:02:29 am
*Sigh*

No, it’s really not simple at all, wml, and I believe you know that.

Limitations already exist to your ability to “bear arms”, so please don’t pretend like this is something new. Or do you also believe you should have the right to own any kind of weapon, up to and including nuclear warheads?

If you actually believe the things you’ve posted above, then your construct of what the 2nd amendment means was taken away long ago, and you’re arguing a fantasy.

If you’re aware of the absurdity of your post, then it’s simply a bad faith argument.

So, whether delusional or bad faith, your statement above does not deserve any kind of critical response, other than to be called out for the nonsense that it is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 07, 2019, 08:14:47 am
How demented do you have to be to think there is not enough religion in American culture?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 07, 2019, 08:15:44 am
And, addicted to ****? How do you know that?  That sounds suspiciously like some BS coming from the old **** in SLC.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 07, 2019, 08:35:46 am
Robb, I understand why you bring faith into the discussion. So many great humanitarians, reformers, and peacemakers throughout history have found motivating conviction in their faith. Please, allow your faith to provide similar motivation to action.

While I respect your inclusion of faith in this discussion, I am disappointed that you did not respond to any of my bridge-building questions, so let’s make this even more concrete:

Thinking about your daughters, let’s say one of them ends up dating one of the men you describe. Let’s say that he posts violently racist things online, including threats to massacre individuals of certain minority groups. Let’s say that after she discovers these things and ends the relationship, he savagely beats her.

Should that man have the right to purchase a high-powered, semi-automatic weapon online, along with a +100 round magazine? Or, as a clear danger to society who has demonstrated the capacity for extreme violence, under the “well-regulated” provisions of the 2nd amendment, should this man be prohibited from purchasing weapons that will amplify his capacity for destruction?


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 07, 2019, 08:36:12 am
I keep forgetting to put you on ignore, thanks for the reminder! :)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 07, 2019, 08:52:54 am
Tico, absolutely not. I do not believe the mentally ill or those who have exhibited violent behavior should have access to any guns. Not just rifles, but handguns, shotguns or whatever. That would be an area of agreement between us. I think the reason many conservatives balk against what would be considered "common sense" reforms is due to a lack of trust. What are the motives behind the legislation? We continue to give away our freedoms one by one for our security. Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

This is what I worry about. I have no problem with laws banning guns from violent convicts or mentally ill, but let's say a very liberal administration comes in believing the second amendment needs to go, but knowing they could never get it past the voters. So they decide that anyone wanting to own a gun is mentally ill. There are probably a few reading this who might feel that already. See how that could worry a conservative? It's not that they don't care about these mass shootings, or that they don't want to "do" something, it's that they worry this is just a step down the inevitable road that leads to the loss of their freedom.  Rahm Emanual, while a member of the Obama administration said, "No crisis should go to waste." With the lurch to the left of the left. Socialism is now being debated again as a real option for our country. Socialism, which has been tried and failed every time. How many have been murdered under the banner of socialism in just the last 2 centuries? Seeing this and knowing the inevitable result, it is hard not to "Cling to my guns and my religion." I don't know what changes that, certainly not a few deranged murderers no matter the weapon they choose.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 07, 2019, 09:29:14 am
The word "right(s)" appears quite often on both sides of this discussion.

I support a first grader's right to become a second grader.  The victims have rights, too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on August 07, 2019, 03:09:01 pm

You are wrong, quite wrong.  SEMI-automatic weapons routinely cause major problems against the US military in the Middle East, and the U.S. has little hesitation to aggressively use shocking force and violence there, force and violence which would not likely be used against the citizenry here because of the public reaction which would result, as well as the outright refusal of much of the military to carry out the orders.  But if you are arguing that the true spirit of the Second Amendment would allow private citizens to possess the same level of weaponry as the military, well I have to agree with you there.

Jes I'm picturing you in the Abrams tank you're saving up for hunting down otto and Cletus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 08, 2019, 06:23:15 am
Quote
*Sigh*

No, it’s really not simple at all, wml, and I believe you know that.

Limitations already exist to your ability to “bear arms”, so please don’t pretend like this is something new. Or do you also believe you should have the right to own any kind of weapon, up to and including nuclear warheads?

If you actually believe the things you’ve posted above, then your construct of what the 2nd amendment means was taken away long ago, and you’re arguing a fantasy.

If you’re aware of the absurdity of your post, then it’s simply a bad faith argument.

So, whether delusional or bad faith, your statement above does not deserve any kind of critical response, other than to be called out for the nonsense that it is.

Your rights to free speech has limitation as well.  Does that mean you should willingly give them up because there are parameters?

The only thing wrong with the question is that you refuse to answer it and want to put parameters around it.

Lets not try to talk above the crowd and pretend to be intellectuals and experts on a subject.  Lets not say your question doesn't deserve a response because it wasn't sophisticated enough for your big brain to ponder it. 

Lets boil it down and get to the core question.

Simple question. 

Would you willingly give up one of your rights that you want?  You think I should willingly give up mine.  Why shouldn't you willingly give up yours?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 08, 2019, 08:33:32 am
The word "right(s)" appears quite often on both sides of this discussion.

I support a first grader's right to become a second grader.  The victims have rights, too.

And as used in the Constitution a "right" is a freedom from government doing something to stop it from happening.

In other words your effort at cute rhetoric is a fail.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 08, 2019, 08:56:55 am
Jes I'm picturing you in the Abrams tank you're saving up for hunting down otto and Cletus.

In the first several decades after the founding of the nation it was not at all uncommon for people to own and have in their personal possession weapons every bit as powerful and deadly as anything the government had.  Homeowners would sometimes have operable cannons in their front yard.  Individuals or businesses owned and operated battle ships.  Even up thru the Civil War, when lever action repeating rifles appeared and clearly outclassed anything else available, the lever action repeating rifles were not only available to private citizens, the Union military refused to buy them for Union soldiers and the only Union soldiers who had them bought them their own pockets.  Gatling guns were also legally available for private ownership.  Until the National Firearms act of 1934, there were essentially no federal restrictions on private weapons ownership, including fully automatic weapons, though prices (a Thompson sub machine gun in 1930 cost the equivalent of roughly $3,000 in 2019 dollars.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 08, 2019, 09:26:27 am
This is what I worry about. I have no problem with laws banning guns from violent convicts or mentally ill, but let's say a very liberal administration comes in believing the second amendment needs to go, but knowing they could never get it past the voters. So they decide that anyone wanting to own a gun is mentally ill.

Bingo.

The Second Amendment exists to assure that the people can resist tyranny.

Give the government a nice procedure and a relatively simple route to declare someone unfit to have a firearm, and anyone likely to resist tyranny will be labelled mentally ill.  I am even betting that some of the "red flag law" proposals would be for hearings and proceedings not open to the public, with the stated goal being to protect the privacy of the person targeted in the proceedings.... but with proceedings and court filings exempt from public view, abuse would be absolutely guaranteed, just as we have seen happen with the FISA court process.

Think back to 1776.... Were not every one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence mentally ill?  And prone to violence?   How about this Thomas Paine guy?  Clearly a dangerous whack-a-doodle nutjob.

Now, combine giving government the ability to do that (have someone quickly and simply declared unfit to have a firearm) with procedures not open to public view and the public would not even be able to tell it was happening. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 09, 2019, 12:22:38 pm
There are some who hate a collaborative or compromising approach.

In that case, those people have to be ignored.  If you come to the table with a my way or highway approach, consult google maps for the closest interstate.  This isn’t “love it or leave it.”  This is if you can’t admit you do not know everything and can’t predict the future, you’re unbending ego isn’t helping. 

What will you negotiate?  Nothing?  Then what use are you?

That’s why things on issues such as gun control do not get done.  One side has been well trained by themselves or groups like the NRA that if you give an inch you give away a country.  So, the majority has to deal with hyperbole and ridiculous emphasis on how people who have been dead for hundreds of years wanted things.

Why?  Why involve people who don’t want involvement?

If you won’t negotiate, I have zero interest in talking.  What’s the point?  I do not want to hear the tape you play for yourself every time a specific topic comes up.  I don’t need spoiled little children in difficult conversations.

Things have to change.  If you refuse that reality, you deserve to be ignored.  I heard you.  You’re point is noted.   

Play with others or go.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 09, 2019, 01:11:43 pm
I agree.  I believe both sides should sponsor an amendment that outlaws the possession of any weapon that is physically able to shoot more than 6 rounds per minute, and also prohibits the Federal Government or any state from prohibiting public ownership or possession of all weapons that meet that requirement.

Both sides give up something get something in return.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 10, 2019, 04:50:56 pm
I agree.  I believe both sides should sponsor an amendment that outlaws the possession of any weapon that is physically able to shoot more than 6 rounds per minute, and also prohibits the Federal Government or any state from prohibiting public ownership or possession of all weapons that meet that requirement.

Both sides give up something get something in return.

Damb good think we could trust other nations to similarly disarm at the same time....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 10, 2019, 05:11:20 pm
There are some who hate a collaborative or compromising approach.

Collaborating with those seeking to disarm you makes no more sense when dealing with a domestic political rival than it does with with an international rival.

There is a reason the word "collaborator" generally carries a negative connotation.

In that case, those people have to be ignored.  If you come to the table with a my way or highway approach, consult google maps for the closest interstate.  This isn’t “love it or leave it.”  This is if you can’t admit you do not know everything and can’t predict the future, you’re unbending ego isn’t helping. 

What will you negotiate?  Nothing?  Then what use are you?

The most use possible in the discussion -- those who will not negotiate, at all, on the issue are obstacles to removing one of our most important and fundamental rights, the right to self defense.  And since the rate of gun deaths overall have actually been in the decline, there is nothing resembling a reason to even consider giving up that fundamental right, particularly when it serves as insurance against the kind of government oppression which can lead to genocide, and enough deaths that 3,000 years of daily mass shooting death tolls of 20 a day EVERY DAY still would not reach the total seen in a single nice genocide.

That’s why things on issues such as gun control do not get done.  One side has been well trained by themselves or groups like the NRA that if you give an inch you give away a country.

You do serve as a good sales pitch for the NRA....


Why?  Why involve people who don’t want involvement?

If you won’t negotiate, I have zero interest in talking.  What’s the point?  I do not want to hear the tape you play for yourself every time a specific topic comes up.  I don’t need spoiled little children in difficult conversations.

Things have to change.  If you refuse that reality, you deserve to be ignored.  I heard you.  You’re point is noted.   

Play with others or go.


Negotiate?

How about we discuss national reciprocity of concealed carry rules, getting rid of gun free zones, allowing teachers to have concealed carry in schools, and mandatory reserve training with semi-automatic weapons in the home for all citizens?

Each of those measures would increase public safety and reduce the number of firearms deaths even further, particularly mass shooting deaths.

If those are your real goals, then start negotiating, and I suspect there would be quick agreement.

If all you really want to do is to disarm the public and make it easier for big government to expand without any resistance, well, lack of agreement is the best thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 10, 2019, 07:18:47 pm
Damb good think we could trust other nations to similarly disarm at the same time....
Since this would not apply to our military, we probably won't have to worry about whether other nations do this or not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 10, 2019, 10:51:31 pm
Since this would not apply to our military, we probably won't have to worry about whether other nations do this or not.

Why not?

If there is recognition of the reason for the Second Amendment, then any such limitation would only make sense if it also applied to government.

At the time of the Second Amendment's proposal and ratification, there were already firearms which would fire 30 rounds a minute.  The Girondoni rifle was probably the best known, since in 1781 in was the standard field issue for the Austrian Empire's infantry, and the Austrian Empire at that time probably had the most powerful infantry in Europe; Jefferson insisted that Lewis and Clark take two of the rifles with them for the purpose of putting on demonstrations for the natives they encountered, all in a perfectly successful effort to scare the sh!t out of the natives and discourage them from challenging the Lewis and Clark team.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 11, 2019, 10:22:49 am
Why not?

If there is recognition of the reason for the Second Amendment, then any such limitation would only make sense if it also applied to government.

At the time of the Second Amendment's proposal and ratification, there were already firearms which would fire 30 rounds a minute.  The Girondoni rifle was probably the best known, since in 1781 in was the standard field issue for the Austrian Empire's infantry, and the Austrian Empire at that time probably had the most powerful infantry in Europe; Jefferson insisted that Lewis and Clark take two of the rifles with them for the purpose of putting on demonstrations for the natives they encountered, all in a perfectly successful effort to scare the sh!t out of the natives and discourage them from challenging the Lewis and Clark team.

As usual, you didn't read my post.

My recommendation was to have a Constitutional Amendment passed.  As all Amendments, it would replace what was written in the original Constitution and it's original meaning, to reflect changed conditions, circumstances, attitudes and desires.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 11, 2019, 11:17:18 am
As usual, you didn't read my post.

My recommendation was to have a Constitutional Amendment passed.  As all Amendments, it would replace what was written in the original Constitution and it's original meaning, to reflect changed conditions, circumstances, attitudes and desires.

No, I DID read it, though I obviously was unaware that today's "changed conditions" has eliminated the prospect of tyranny or an over-reaching or oppressive government and that human nature has changed.

Merely passing a Constitutional amendment limiting guns to those unable "to shoot more than 6 rounds per minute" would not mean the reason for the Second Amendment ceased to exist, and so long as that reason exists, then limiting civilian firearms while imposing no limit on government firearms would be more than mildly foolish.  Perhaps, however, that would not be quite as foolish as the entire proposal to essentially change the Constitution from a framework for government, granting powers to government, dividing those powers between different branches, and then limiting that grant of power by including proscriptions on the exercise of that power in areas which the people wanted to assure could not infringe on personal rights... and to instead make it part of the criminal code, addressing what is or is not a crime.  The only other time the nation has been foolish enough to do that was prohibition.... which did not work particularly well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 11, 2019, 11:57:26 am
At the time of the Second Amendment's proposal and ratification, there were already firearms which would fire 30 rounds a minute, but NONE were readily available to the population, and were certainly not commonly owned.  And there is a great difference between a bulky gun that could not be carried and used by a single person, and an automatic weapon that can be concealed beneath a raincoat.

We already place restrictions on weapon ownership.  Do you think that it should be legal for anyone to own a nuclear weapon, if they can manage to procure one?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 11, 2019, 03:01:30 pm
At the time of the Second Amendment's proposal and ratification, there were already firearms which would fire 30 rounds a minute, but NONE were readily available to the population, and were certainly not commonly owned.  And there is a great difference between a bulky gun that could not be carried and used by a single person, and an automatic weapon that can be concealed beneath a raincoat.

We already place restrictions on weapon ownership.  Do you think that it should be legal for anyone to own a nuclear weapon, if they can manage to procure one?

Yes, I do.

As to there being " great difference between a bulky gun that could not be carried and used by a single person, and an automatic weapon that can be concealed beneath a raincoat," the Girondoni air rifle was readily available to the population (though it was priced beyond the reach of most people, just as the average person now will not want to spend the money an AR 15 would cost) and the rifle was no larger then the black powder rifle Daniel Boone and friends were using.  But the Girondoni was only one such semi-automatic at the time.  Pepper-pot pistols would fire up to a dozen rounds in a single pull of the trigger, and could easily be concealed under a raincoat.

But as to whether the language of the 2nd Amendment should be applied to today's weapons: A) The language itself suggests no limitation for future advances, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers certainly expected technological advances -- they had already SEEN technological advances, such as the Girdondoni rifle; B) The underlying reason for the 2nd Amendment is utterly defeated if the average person is denied the opportunity of owning firearms comparable to those owned by government; C) That kind of argument would be almost instantly seen and labeled as absurd if some tried to apply it to the First Amendment, arguing that "speech" or the "press" would not cover the combination of those with technology, leaving freedom of speech and the press inapplicable to radio, TV, movies, telephone calls, amplified music, the internet, or even books and newspapers printed on high-speed fully automated  presses using flexographic plates.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 11, 2019, 04:27:08 pm
if you say anyone should own a nuclear weapon you are automatically removed from a discussion.  You are not talking in good faith.  I have no time for such nonsense or abject paranoia.  People can’t even properly handle household chemicals or cook chicken.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 11, 2019, 06:19:54 pm
if you say anyone should own a nuclear weapon you are automatically removed from a discussion.  You are not talking in good faith.  I have no time for such nonsense or abject paranoia.  People can’t even properly handle household chemicals or cook chicken.

And if you are contending that anyone here SAID "anyone should own a nuclear weapon," you have demonstrating that you have enough trouble with reading comprehension that it would be pointless for anyone to include you in a discussion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 11, 2019, 08:21:38 pm
But as to whether the language of the 2nd Amendment should be applied to today's weapons: A) The language itself suggests no limitation for future advances, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers certainly expected technological advances -- they had already SEEN technological advances, such as the Girdondoni rifle; B) The underlying reason for the 2nd Amendment is utterly defeated if the average person is denied the opportunity of owning firearms comparable to those owned by government; C) That kind of argument would be almost instantly seen and labeled as absurd if some tried to apply it to the First Amendment, arguing that "speech" or the "press" would not cover the combination of those with technology, leaving freedom of speech and the press inapplicable to radio, TV, movies, telephone calls, amplified music, the internet, or even books and newspapers printed on high-speed fully automated  presses using flexographic plates.
A The fact that the second amendment carries no limitation for future changes is meaningless, since that language disappears when the second amendment is eliminated of changed.
B The average person is already denied the opportunity of owning firearms comparable to those owned by government.  Hence the prohibition of owning a nuclear weapon, which has not been overruled by the courts.
C The new amendment can be written in such a way that changes the wording of the first amendment, as well as the second.

Only an idiot would believe that ordinary people should be allowed the right to possess nuclear weapons, just as only an idiot would believe that freedom of speech allows for yelling fire in a crowded theater.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 11, 2019, 11:38:20 pm
A The fact that the second amendment carries no limitation for future changes is meaningless, since that language disappears when the second amendment is eliminated of changed.

While that is true, it is also irrelevant since I was responding to this from you:
At the time of the Second Amendment's proposal and ratification, there were already firearms which would fire 30 rounds a minute, but NONE were readily available to the population, and were certainly not commonly owned.  And there is a great difference between a bulky gun that could not be carried and used by a single person, and an automatic weapon that can be concealed beneath a raincoat.

B The average person is already denied the opportunity of owning firearms comparable to those owned by government.  Hence the prohibition of owning a nuclear weapon, which has not been overruled by the courts.

Other than fully automatic weapons, the average person is not denied the opportunity of owning hand held firearms comparable to those owned by the government... and the court decisions allowing those restrictions are misguided.

C The new amendment can be written in such a way that changes the wording of the first amendment, as well as the second.

Again, a new amendment COULD be written to say almost anything, regardless how foolish or misguided that might be.... but my C, just as my A and my B were not related to your imagined Constitutional amendment, but instead to  this from you:
At the time of the Second Amendment's proposal and ratification, there were already firearms which would fire 30 rounds a minute, but NONE were readily available to the population, and were certainly not commonly owned.  And there is a great difference between a bulky gun that could not be carried and used by a single person, and an automatic weapon that can be concealed beneath a raincoat.
That language even appeared in my response.  No reason it would have been addressing your imagined Constitutional amendment, for which there really is no reason -- gun deaths have been declining pretty steadily now for about 30 years.


Only an idiot would believe that ordinary people should be allowed the right to possess nuclear weapons, just as only an idiot would believe that freedom of speech allows for yelling fire in a crowded theater.

I would have no objection to revising the Second Amendment to allow restriction of private possession of WMD, but in the absence of an amendment, so long as a person can carry it ("bear" it), I think the Second should be applicable.

As for shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater, nearly everyone very familiar with First Amendment law knows that that language was some of the worst in any of Holmes' opinions, particularly because the First Amendment is still applicable to shouting "Fire" in that crowded theater.  Government can criminalize the SHOUTING in the crowded theater, but not the content of what is said.  In other words it is the shouting which can be criminalized for creating a disturbance -- Disorderly Conduct or Disturbing the Peace -- but the language used, saying "Fire" can not be criminalized under the First Amendment.  Stand up and loudly yell anything in a crowded theater and you will face the exact same charges (though the police or DA is way more likely to prosecute for yelling "Fire" than for yelling "Banjo").
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 12, 2019, 07:52:49 am
 Dave:
Do you think that it should be legal for anyone to own a nuclear weapon, if they can manage to procure one?

Jes:
Yes, I do.

Me: This conversation is a waste.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jes Beard on August 12, 2019, 08:53:48 am
Dave:
Do you think that it should be legal for anyone to own a nuclear weapon, if they can manage to procure one?

Jes:
Yes, I do.

Me: This conversation is a waste.

I am trying to recall ANY conversation anyone here has had with you which was not a waste.

Can YOU think of any?

To quote from the play Julius Caesar, "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 12, 2019, 05:29:34 pm
I can't  help wondering if yelling banjo could turn into a really good time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on September 21, 2019, 05:44:39 pm
Anyone alleging that the Girandoni Air Rifle influenced the Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment is an idiot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on September 21, 2019, 06:55:21 pm
The 2nd amendment is dog ****.

Its a shame that Im afraid to send my son to school.

The government just dont have the balls to take the rednecks guns away whether they think they should or not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on October 01, 2019, 04:05:30 pm
Can one of the trumpers in here explain how it is acceptable and legal for a sitting U.S. president to ask a foreign leader to investigate one of his domestic political foes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on October 01, 2019, 08:13:36 pm
He must have learned it from Obama.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 01, 2019, 09:00:23 pm
Yeah, that's about the only "argument" Republicans still have. Assert that Obama did something illegal (he didn't) with no evidence, then use that as justification for their guy abusing his power. Even though we all learned the saying "two wrongs don't make a right" at 4 years old.

The single most unprecendented and divisive political move that happened during Obama's presidency was when Mitch McConnell refused to hold hearings for a qualified Supreme Court nominee. Nothing Obama did contributed to the dysfunction in DC more than that one move by McConnell.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on October 01, 2019, 09:07:26 pm
So when a senator brags about extorting another country on camera a president shouldn't ask them to investigate?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on October 01, 2019, 09:55:43 pm
davebear

What "extortion" are you believing in that is not proven by facts?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on October 01, 2019, 11:06:51 pm
Yeah, that's about the only "argument" Republicans still have. Assert that Obama did something illegal (he didn't) with no evidence, then use that as justification for their guy abusing his power. Even though we all learned the saying "two wrongs don't make a right" at 4 years old.

Two wrongs certainly do not make a right.  But crying foul about a guy you dislike, while ignoring the same action by someone you like is hypocrisy.  I don't recall you screaming when the Obama administration opened an investigation of the Trump campaign even though there was no evidence that it happened, as attested to by the failure of a two year independent investigation to find any evidence for the original claim.

And yet complain when the Trump administration opens and investigation into a crime that the perpetrator openly admitted to in public.

But I agree with Pelosi opening an impeachment hearing.  I would love to see every congressman and senator go on record with a guilty or innocent vote prior to next year's election.  Let the people decide.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 01, 2019, 11:34:19 pm
I am not a "Trumper" and am all on board for impeachment if he commits a high crime or significant misdemeanor, but having read the transcript there simply isn't enough there to constitute anything.

When the left shows the same verve for investigating the sitting vice president using his position to help his son make millions and  who bragged about holding a billion in aid until the prosecutor investigating his son's company was fired on camera.

Imagine if Trump had pulled the same thing. Be consistent, or you are just another hack who only cares about your party's power, not what is right and wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on October 01, 2019, 11:40:01 pm
America has been very very good to you but we need a favor find dirt on Biden
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 02, 2019, 10:31:23 am
The single most unprecendented and divisive political move that happened during Obama's presidency was when Mitch McConnell refused to hold hearings for a qualified Supreme Court nominee. Nothing Obama did contributed to the dysfunction in DC more than that one move by McConnell.

Washington was dysfunctional well before that and for Presidents before Obama.  Each party has gripes about the other party and then they justify their actions by saying, "But the other guy....."  Obama coming in and saying I won, didn't help.  Republicans didn't help.  This has been going on since Reagan and probably before that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2019, 11:50:33 am
The single most unprecendented and divisive political move that happened during Obama's presidency was when Mitch McConnell refused to hold hearings for a qualified Supreme Court nominee. Nothing Obama did contributed to the dysfunction in DC more than that one move by McConnell.
br, Truer words were never spoken


The below goes back to 1828

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/In_memorium--our_civil_service_as_it_was.JPG/450px-In_memorium--our_civil_service_as_it_was.JPG)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on October 02, 2019, 12:18:54 pm
davebear and Robb

It would be preferable if you had the correct facts for your opinion.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/02/correcting-media-error-bidens-ukraine-showdown-was-december/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on October 31, 2019, 11:50:01 am
The demise of Deadspin (and all of Gawker media especially Splinter) is very sad.

Responding here since I think I know where this might be going.

I wasn't a fan of Deadspin's political takes much of time, but yeah they had some talented writers and I enjoyed reading most of their sports takes every day.  Honestly I found myself wishing they'd leave most of the politics aside and stick to sports and ranking trashy fast food items myself, but the new owners it looks like didn't know what they were buying and went completely overboard on how they went about changing things there.  It has been pretty amazing to see how Deadspin has just blown apart the last couple of days.

Splinter, on the other hand, was a total trash website that deserved the death it got. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 31, 2019, 12:00:03 pm
Splinter was one of the most important and vital sites anywhere in media. The constant spotlight they were shining on the absolute filth that is trump, the Republican Party, and their supporters was extremely important work. We need someone to push back aggressively against them and its not good that they are gone.  Go read the Bears board if you want to see the idiocy they fought every day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 31, 2019, 12:57:54 pm
I thought AJ Daulerio killed Deadspin and Gawker a long time ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 31, 2019, 01:36:53 pm
I thought AJ Daulerio killed Deadspin and Gawker a long time ago.

That started them down this path but Deadspin and most of the former Gawker sites were doing ok until today.  Deadspin has nobody working there and I can’t really imagine how they are going to get anyone to fill those spots and keep anything remotely like the spirit of the site alive.  The other sites are probably not long for this world since I doubt many of the writers there want to work for the idiots who are ruining their company. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 01, 2019, 10:05:14 am
This would be a perfect topic for JBN who is now suddenly a political expert.  A whole topic I will AVOID at all costs.  Just remember if he comes back, not every spouse has the same thoughts as their significant other...….. :)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 01, 2019, 10:50:24 am
This would be a perfect topic for JBN who is now suddenly a political expert.  A whole topic I will AVOID at all costs.  Just remember if he comes back, not every spouse has the same thoughts as their significant other...….. :)

If he's interested in discussions about completely insane conspiracy theories between very dumb people, send him to the Bears board.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 01, 2019, 12:12:20 pm
If he's interested in discussions about completely insane conspiracy theories between very dumb people, send him to the Bears board.
He loves to argue I will leave it at that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 01, 2019, 10:06:33 pm
This would be a perfect topic for JBN who is now suddenly a political expert.  A whole topic I will AVOID at all costs.  Just remember if he comes back, not every spouse has the same thoughts as their significant other...….. :)

Bullshite.  NO spouse has the same thoughts as their significant other.

Glad to hear you have had 27 years of wedded bliss.  As a coincidence, I also have had 27 years of wedded bliss.  27 out of 52 ain't bad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 01, 2019, 10:09:39 pm
Bullshite.  NO spouse has the same thoughts as their significant other.

Glad to hear you have had 27 years of wedded bliss.  As a coincidence, I also have had 27 years of wedded bliss.  27 out of 52 ain't bad.
We definitely do not think alike thank the Lord.
I am trying to get him in here to maybe talk this **** with you all so i don’t have to hear it. Lol



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 03, 2019, 11:44:26 am
Quiet weekend. Do you all only post during work hours? :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 03, 2019, 11:53:12 am
Since JBN stopped posting, there isn't much to talk about on this thread.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 03, 2019, 11:54:40 am
Good point. Ugh his political craze is overwhelming to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 03, 2019, 11:56:53 am
If you like, CurtOne can set up a separate thread where we all talk dirty.  The problem will be how do we ban CurtOne from that thread?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 03, 2019, 11:57:49 am
Lol!!! I can only imagine the conversation...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on November 03, 2019, 11:59:29 am
At dave and curts age, dirty talk doesnt mean what you think it does. Its more about kids littering in their lawn and discussing fiber intake.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 03, 2019, 12:22:38 pm
Ah I can relate. Hahahaha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 03, 2019, 12:25:12 pm
At dave and curts age, dirty talk doesnt mean what you think it does. Its more about kids littering in their lawn and discussing fiber intake.

In fairness, fiber outgive is also an important subject.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 04, 2019, 08:41:24 am
Look I am too old recall where everyone is from. But, wondering if it’s as stupid cold Thai early where you all are at as it is here In Illannoys. The only plus for me is I have entered the hot flash stage so I have a built in heater on and off. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on November 04, 2019, 08:42:37 am
We are having our fall here in florida today.. high is 80 low of 65, goes back to summer by Thursday.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 04, 2019, 08:43:14 am
I need to move. This is too much for my old bones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 04, 2019, 10:56:03 am
70s and sunny in the SF area.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 04, 2019, 03:19:44 pm
Look I am too old recall where everyone is from. But, wondering if it’s as stupid cold Thai early where you all are at as it is here In Illannoys. The only plus for me is I have entered the hot flash stage so I have a built in heater on and off. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Got all the way down to 81 here in Florida at this time yesterday.  But it is back to 85 right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 04, 2019, 03:26:10 pm
Jealous. It’s like 59 something here which is a heat wave compared to snow and wind last week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 04, 2019, 03:26:26 pm
50 not 59.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on November 04, 2019, 03:56:23 pm
Got all the way down to 81 here in Florida at this time yesterday.  But it is back to 85 right now.

Where in fl are you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 04, 2019, 10:28:32 pm
North Fort Myers.  It is 78 right now at 11:30 PM.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on November 04, 2019, 10:31:14 pm
76 here. its back to summer tomorrow.

Didnt realize you were in that part of FL, i'm down there every other month for BOCC meetings. Might have to see if i can buy you a beer my next visit down.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 04, 2019, 10:33:46 pm
The good thing about retirement is that you have a lot of time to spare.  I'll buy the first one or two.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 04, 2019, 10:37:30 pm
Very nice 72 here in Illinois.  Not sure what it is outside.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 05, 2019, 08:51:42 am
Very nice 72 here in Illinois.  Not sure what it is outside.
Lol. JBN had not allowed heat yet. I may have to punch him in the face and turn it on anyhow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on November 05, 2019, 02:36:38 pm
Take video...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 05, 2019, 03:43:18 pm
If I can get him to put on his mint green shirt. Hahaha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on November 05, 2019, 09:02:42 pm
I worked in California for an Illinois based company.  We would send California new hires back to Illinois for two weeks training.

They would come back and ask me "why do people live there?"

It really made no sense to them.  I would try to explain issues of family, people staying near what they were used to but nothing would convince them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 05, 2019, 09:54:19 pm
I love Chicago.  I wouldn't move back, however.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 05, 2019, 09:56:16 pm
I have an office just outside of pensacola Florida and jim really wants me to transfer. But I would miss my fam too much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 05, 2019, 11:01:56 pm
Don't mean to interrupt, but this has been the best conversation that's gone on in this topic in years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2019, 11:09:57 pm
Go to hell, JR.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 06, 2019, 12:05:08 am
I mean I have a tendency to spark communications on a regular basis. Jim stopped talking to me years ago so I have a lot of words that need to come out somehow. Especially with the kids all grown and no longer forced to listen to me. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 06, 2019, 07:46:24 am
We're a captive audience.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 06, 2019, 06:04:25 pm
I mean I have a tendency to spark communications on a regular basis. Jim stopped talking to me years ago so I have a lot of words that need to come out somehow. Especially with the kids all grown and no longer forced to listen to me. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I stopped talking to my wife years ago.  It didn't stop her from continuing to talk to me.  What is Jim's secret?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on November 07, 2019, 11:28:44 am
He just pissed me off to the point I refuse to use my oxygen on him unless we are stuck in a car then I talk non stop to him. Hahahah


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2019, 12:42:20 pm
I have a feeling that next fall this topic will be toxic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on November 07, 2019, 03:11:23 pm
I have a feeling that next fall this topic will be toxic.

I am not looking forward to 2020 at all. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on November 08, 2019, 07:43:50 am
Quote
I love Chicago.  I wouldn't move back, however.

DITTO
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on November 08, 2019, 07:49:14 am
When visiting in September we had a big fish fry that my Grandpa does every year.  There was a big conversation that my aunts and uncles were having about what state they were going to move to when they no longer are tied (taking care of grandpa who is 89) to where they are.  Wisconsin for one Aunt & Uncle because my cousins moved there when they got out of college.  South Carolina for another Aunt & Uncle because my cousin moved her family there.  Tennessee for my Cousin and her husband when he retires.  I said they should all move to VA so I don't have to travel to Chicago to visit them.

Everyone is leaving that state.  I guess it's no wonder they have to keep raising taxes on the few who are staying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 08, 2019, 05:31:43 pm
I left 4 years ago and would never move back. I do like going back to visit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on November 11, 2019, 03:23:39 pm
For once I agree with wmljohn.


They should move to VA now because it has the same party in charge of government. You must of had a bad time on election night last week.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on December 20, 2019, 08:06:33 pm
MLB banned some dude for life for doing this but if a soldier does it its OK...

The US Naval Academy and West Point say an investigation found that the hand gestures seen at the Army-Navy game were part of the "circle game" and not a white supremacist symbol https://cnn.it/2ZeDbgb
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 20, 2019, 08:17:03 pm
It’s not ok.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 20, 2019, 09:16:14 pm
A strange article.  If the circle game is not something of racist intent, exactly what IS the game, and why are they punished for playing it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on December 20, 2019, 09:54:04 pm
Ive seen idiots do that to me from time to time and Im certain they didnt mean it in a racist way.

Kinda like flipping your buddy a bird.

You're not really saying F you to them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on December 21, 2019, 08:11:33 am
Quote
It’s not ok.

(https://img.icons8.com/dusk/64/000000/ok-hand.png)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on December 21, 2019, 08:25:35 am
This is not okay. Remove that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on December 21, 2019, 08:55:49 am
Why?  Did you check the link to the png file?  https://img.icons8.com/dusk/64/000000/ok-hand.png

It is a common emote.  Why is it not OK to post it here?  Check your phone.  I am sure its on there as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on December 21, 2019, 10:35:27 am
I see what you deleted.  Why should I die in a fire ****?  Because you got triggered by an OK symbol?

https://www.google.com/search?q=sign+language+for+ok&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiMkJL6lcfmAhWsrVkKHeifDrEQsAR6BAgEEAE&biw=1920&bih=937

Google...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 21, 2019, 11:13:48 am
What a surprise, a white supremacist thinks a white supremacy symbol is no problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on December 21, 2019, 11:34:49 am
Oh crap.  Someone better alert the Buddhists that they are racist so they can change their traditions...

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-V8K34wJ6VU/maxresdefault.jpg)

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f9/43/c1/f943c1f7643f26562a8eae68bcbfbc15.jpg)

These things are no longer acceptable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on December 21, 2019, 11:36:23 am
OMG.  There it is again.  All those people practicing yoga are racists...

(https://cdn5.vectorstock.com/i/1000x1000/21/99/position-of-the-hands-in-yoga-in-meditation-vector-7612199.jpg)

And they have the shocker in there as well.... 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on December 21, 2019, 11:40:27 am
AHHHH!  Buddah himself was a racist!

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/7b/43/84/7b4384953b4e3c4f2007923c42e84dcc.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on December 21, 2019, 12:03:08 pm
After I got off work last night I got behind a car from a lock company that had the symbol on their back windshield and underneath it it said "made you look".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on December 21, 2019, 01:04:59 pm
What a surprise, a white supremacist thinks a white supremacy symbol is no problem.

Cletus is able to ignore actual facts just as well as the Democratic fools that he helped elect to the house.  In spite of the fact that the gesture has been proven to have other possible meanings, he makes his accusation out of nothing other than his prejudice and ignorance.  If lies often enough and loudly enough, there are always a few fools that will believe him.  Otto, for instance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 28, 2020, 09:53:19 pm
johnbill


The symbol is an downward okay sign. Can you shown where on the chart that is?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on January 29, 2020, 09:23:53 am
So it's an OK sign?  Oh an the first picture of the hand position for meditation is what you are looking for.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 29, 2020, 05:08:53 pm
Dershowitz says that Trump can't be impeached because his actions were designed to get him reelected, something Trump believed was in the national interest.  Must have been tongue-in-cheek.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 29, 2020, 05:32:29 pm
Trump will be re-elected.

And this is coming from someone who cares more about Edge coming back to WWE than who's president.

In other words Im unbiased.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 29, 2020, 05:40:11 pm
Dershowitz says that Trump can't be impeached because his actions were designed to get him reelected, something Trump believed was in the national interest.  Must have been tongue-in-cheek.

Presumably some of the Republican senators do not like being treated like idiots. Unfortunately not enough will have the integrity to do the right thing and vote to remove.  It’s really amazing how much **** these people will eat for this guy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on January 29, 2020, 11:50:20 pm
Presumably some of the Republican senators do not like being treated like idiots. Unfortunately not enough will have the integrity to do the right thing and vote to remove.  It’s really amazing how much **** these people will eat for this guy.

In all likelihood we will see more Democratic Senators voting against the impeachment than we will see Republicans voting for it, pretty much the same thing we saw in the House.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 30, 2020, 01:10:20 am
I have never liked Trump, but if this is the standard for impeachment then every President ever should have been impeached.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 30, 2020, 09:58:57 am
As much as I want Trump gone, impeachment isn't appropriate any more than it was for Clinton.  It has nothing to do with actual infractions; it has everything to do with power and SCOTUS.   If re-elected Trump could name 2 or 3 more justices.  I'd prefer the Democrats concentrate on running a candidate we can vote for.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 30, 2020, 10:02:07 am
Trump has blocked 90% of the information that would likely lead to a conviction. Dem's screwed this up by not fighting for subpoena's to the SCOTUS.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 30, 2020, 11:12:04 am
As much as I want Trump gone, impeachment isn't appropriate any more than it was for Clinton.  It has nothing to do with actual infractions; it has everything to do with power and SCOTUS.   If re-elected Trump could name 2 or 3 more justices.  I'd prefer the Democrats concentrate on running a candidate we can vote for.

He's trying to illegally influence the election.  Of course impeachment is appropriate. How can you count on an election that he's trying to cheat as a tool to correct for this?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on January 30, 2020, 12:10:17 pm
He's trying to illegally influence the election.  Of course impeachment is appropriate. How can you count on an election that he's trying to cheat as a tool to correct for this?

I can’t fathom people thinking this is okay. What a time to be alive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 30, 2020, 12:33:11 pm
I can’t fathom people thinking this is okay. What a time to be alive.

A massive amount of power is being transferred to the Executive branch (and that power is very unlikely to ever be relinquished) and it’s being done to benefit Donald Fing Trump - the worst and dumbest president we’ve ever had. It’s unbelievable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 30, 2020, 12:39:51 pm
What bothers me the most is something that has been going on since before Trump:  "What's good for my reelection is more important than what's good for the country."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 30, 2020, 12:54:08 pm
A massive amount of power is being transferred to the Executive branch

Which has been occurring for decades and gets worse with each administration regardless of political party.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 30, 2020, 12:58:25 pm
Which has been occurring for decades and gets worse with each administration regardless of political party.   

It has been going on but the acceleration is alarming.  Look at the arguments being made in defense of trump.  It’s essentially anything goes.  This is alarming and not the way our government is supposed to be structured or run. But, once this president is acquitted, that’s the way it will be from now on.  This is the time and the proper venue to stop this but the Republicans are not going to do the right thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 30, 2020, 03:20:29 pm
This is exactly what impeachment is for.  It's why the founders wrote it into the Constitution.  That people can be made to not think that this is the case is appalling.  Fox News is one of the worst creations in the history of the US.  There's no hell hot enough for Roger Ailes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 30, 2020, 04:56:36 pm
It has been going on but the acceleration is alarming.   

I think because you are on the opposite end of the political spectrum you notice it more.  When President Obama mentioned he had a pen and phone to get around congress did you think that was appropriate?

Look at the arguments being made in defense of trump.  It’s essentially anything goes.  This is alarming and not the way our government is supposed to be structured or run. But, once this president is acquitted, that’s the way it will be from now on.  This is the time and the proper venue to stop this but the Republicans are not going to do the right thing.


I'm not commenting on the impeachment at all, which is why I deleted the other part of your comment and focused on what I wanted. 

What President Trump did was wrong.  He doesn't deserve to be in the office and I wouldn't be hurt if he was removed at all.  Trump is far from the most corrupt President this nation has had, the Republic survived them, it will survive him.  It would be nice if the Democrats could at least nominate somebody decent to run against him, but instead they are picking from a bunch of bozos.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 30, 2020, 05:02:36 pm
I was reading an article the other day that there is one thing the Founding Fathers never reckoned on...the devolving to a 2 party system.   Can you imagine the difference it would have made for both Clinton and Trump had there been 3 or 4 major parties? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 30, 2020, 05:12:54 pm
I think because you are on the opposite end of the political spectrum you notice it more.  When President Obama mentioned he had a pen and phone to get around congress did you think that was appropriate?
 

I'm not commenting on the impeachment at all, which is why I deleted the other part of your comment and focused on what I wanted. 

What President Trump did was wrong.  He doesn't deserve to be in the office and I wouldn't be hurt if he was removed at all.  Trump is far from the most corrupt President this nation has had, the Republic survived them, it will survive him.  It would be nice if the Democrats could at least nominate somebody decent to run against him, but instead they are picking from a bunch of bozos.

He was referring to executive orders which are not great but they didn't start with him and he didn't use them at a very high rate at all.  So, no, I don't think that comment and how he acted on that is in the same universe as trump (to be fair, his use of the EO is not at a terribly high rate either).  And, the impeachment is important because the defense being made which may be ratified by the Senate is that a president can do whatever he wants if he thinks it's in the best interest of the country. Surely you can see how dangerous that is?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 30, 2020, 05:14:07 pm
I was reading an article the other day that there is one thing the Founding Fathers never reckoned on...the devolving to a 2 party system.   Can you imagine the difference it would have made for both Clinton and Trump had there been 3 or 4 major parties?

It turned into a two party system almost immediately. So, maybe they didn't consider that but they sure had an opportunity to change things via amendment if they really thought it was an issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 30, 2020, 06:23:31 pm
He was referring to executive orders which are not great but they didn't start with him and he didn't use them at a very high rate at all.  So, no, I don't think that comment and how he acted on that is in the same universe as trump (to be fair, his use of the EO is not at a terribly high rate either).  And, the impeachment is important because the defense being made which may be ratified by the Senate is that a president can do whatever he wants if he thinks it's in the best interest of the country. Surely you can see how dangerous that is?

He has referring to EO to make his preferred legislative goals by bypassing congress. Executive overreach is always dangerous and I think you kinda proved my point. You where ok with it when you agreed with it.  Trump came up with a poor plan to bully Ukraine into an investigation that didn’t work, because he sucks at his job. This isn’t the first time a President has abused powers for a re-election and really it isn’t close to the worst.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 30, 2020, 06:25:10 pm
Quote
Can you imagine the difference it would have made for both Clinton and Trump had there been 3 or 4 major parties?

Or even ranked voting.  The infant-in-chief wouldn't have made it out of the primary
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 30, 2020, 06:32:45 pm
He has referring to EO to make his preferred legislative goals by bypassing congress. Executive overreach is always dangerous and I think you kinda proved my point. You where ok with it when you agreed with it.  Trump came up with a poor plan to bully Ukraine into an investigation that didn’t work, because he sucks at his job. This isn’t the first time a President has abused powers for a re-election and really it isn’t close to the worst.

Sure, it would be better if EO didn't exist but it does and it's an established part of the process going back to George Washington.  That is not even close to the issue here. The aggregation of power that is about to happen because the Senate is going to tell a president he can do whatever he wants with immunity as long as he thinks it's in the best interest of the country is unprecedented and definitely in serious conflict with the constitution.  And, as far as Trump''s corruption, this is just a sliver of the stuff he's done.  The degree to which he's leveraged his job to boost his business is alone one of the most corrupt things a president has ever done.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 30, 2020, 07:05:01 pm
Quote
and really it isn’t close to the worst.

Name two in the last 100 years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 30, 2020, 07:46:41 pm
Coolidge and Harding
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 30, 2020, 09:24:41 pm
Name two in the last 100 years.

Well Lydan Johnson used the FBI and CIA to spy on the Goldwater campaign.
Nixon used the IRS against political opponents and the Watergate break in.
The FBI going after candidate Trump through the FISA court with flimsy court filings.

Other presidential abuses of power
FDR attempting to stack the Supreme Court and issuing an EO sending Japanese-Americans to interment camps
Truman attempting to nationalize Steel Mills and joining the Korean War without a congressional declaration of war.
I’m sure their are others.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 30, 2020, 11:08:55 pm
It turned into a two party system almost immediately. So, maybe they didn't consider that but they sure had an opportunity to change things via amendment if they really thought it was an issue.
  Whigs were around from 1834 to 1850's.  Federalists only hung around until the 1820's.  Lincoln was nominated by the new Republican Party in 1860 running against 3 other Parties. 

Ross Pierot made a difference as a Third Party guy.  Bloomberg could cause problems in this election.  Teddy Roosevelt caused problems when he ran as the Bullmoose candidate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 30, 2020, 11:13:53 pm
"Trump has so far issued 130 executive orders. By comparison, Obama issued 108 in his first three years."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on January 30, 2020, 11:57:48 pm
He was referring to executive orders which are not great but they didn't start with him and he didn't use them at a very high rate at all.  So, no, I don't think that comment and how he acted on that is in the same universe as trump (to be fair, his use of the EO is not at a terribly high rate either).  And, the impeachment is important because the defense being made which may be ratified by the Senate is that a president can do whatever he wants if he thinks it's in the best interest of the country. Surely you can see how dangerous that is?


The number of Executive Orders is far less significant than the scope of the orders.

Very few Executive Orders compared to DACA, and that was an express and detailed scheme NOT to enforce immigration law, a policy doing the very things Congress refused to do, and to refuse to do what the laws on the books required the president to do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on January 31, 2020, 07:13:07 am
If you think Foxnews is the worst thing to happen to this nation I assume you also hate CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS and NBC, who have pretty much thrown away all pretense and become an organ of the Democratic party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 01:09:51 pm
A few thoughts:

Fully agree with those saying that the expanse of executive power has been happening for decades, and carried forward by both parties. This is not a Trump problem. It's a US politics problem, and a result of the decay in the relationship between the two parties.

Fully agree with Curt that the binary two party system, devolved to this level of partisanship, is not what the founders had in mind, and it will present an existential threat to our system of governance for as long as the two parties behave as they have over the past few decades.

Trump's (and his representatives') behavior absolutely rises to the level of impeachment. It seriously breaks my brain that people would think otherwise:

- Illegally influencing national elections
- Trashing the reputations of extraordinary diplomats & soldiers
- Employing mobster-style intimidation tactics
- Undermining US national security
- Disregarding legally binding subpoenas
- Recruiting the help of foreign adversaries for personal gain
- Using taxpayer funds for personal gain
- Lying before the Senate and the Chief Justice
- Running shadow foreign policy through individuals neither elected nor appointed
- All manner of quid-pro-quos in his personal interest
- Bending vulnerable allies over the barrel
- Never-ending stream-of-consciousness deception
- Constitution-defying power grabs
- Using the DOJ to investigate political rivals
- Obstruction of justice
- Endless cover-ups

Is Trump the first to do these things? No. Will he be the last? Likely not. But the specific events surrounding Ukraine, among many other issues, are *absolutely* impeachable. If you agreed with the Clinton impeachment, and you do not feel the same about Trump, that's a brain-melting level of cognitive dissonance.

If you disagreed with the Clinton impeachment, and on the same grounds you disagree with Trump's impeachment, that's also a brain-melting level of cognitive dissonance. Lying about a blow-job is an entire universe of impropriety away from withholding hundreds of millions of dollars of foreign aid from a vulnerable ally in order to force them to gin up phony allegations against a political rival.

Trump is a criminal. He was before he was elected. He has remained one while in office. And the Republican Party and the Evangelical Church have made a blood-pact with this criminal in a desperate attempt to maintain power, forsaking any semblance of the conservative values they once preached so righteously.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 01:14:12 pm
If you think Foxnews is the worst thing to happen to this nation I assume you also hate CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS and NBC, who have pretty much thrown away all pretense and become an organ of the Democratic party.

No doubt the major cable media outlets, other than Fox, skew left to hard left. That bias created an opening for an outlet like Fox to flourish. In its early years, I think Fox was a very helpful counterbalance to the otherwise liberal media slant. But now, outside of a few principled individuals like Chris Wallace, Andrew Napolitano, and the recently departed Shep Smith, Fox has descended into an Infowars-level propaganda machine, spewing absolute garbage for most of the day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 31, 2020, 01:20:06 pm
Truth trumps (no pun intended) lies.  Bigger lies do not trump lies.  Unfortunately Fox has skidded into the latter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: mO on January 31, 2020, 01:36:40 pm
tico 2020!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 01:37:26 pm
Final point of context, before anyone tries to suggest I'm just some wacko liberal:

- I was raised in a conservative, midwestern, Christian home
- James Dobson, Focus on the Family, Rush Limbaugh: these were institutions that shaped the values of my home as a child
- I voted for Bush over Obama
- I voted for Romney over Obama
- I reluctantly voted for Clinton over Trump; it was a vote against Trump more than it was for Clinton
- I will ENTHUSIASTICALLY vote for whomever the Dems nominate against Trump
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 31, 2020, 01:48:42 pm
Wacko liberal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 01:50:24 pm
Well, I kinda am one now. But that's beside the point. :)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 31, 2020, 02:36:14 pm

Fully agree with Curt that the binary two party system, devolved to this level of partisanship, is not what the founders had in mind, and it will present an existential threat to our system of governance for as long as the two parties behave as they have over the past few decades.

The grass is not always greener on the other side.  Imagine none of three or more partys getting a majority in the Electoral College (a subject for another day).

If no candidate receives a majority of electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote. ... Each Senator would cast one  vote for Vice President.

One vote per state?  Did the founders anticipate the wide variances in population between states like New York and California and Alaska and Nevada?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 02:43:34 pm
Oh, the Electoral College is garbage and needs to be abolished. The notion that an individual could lose the vote by millions and still ascend to the Presidency is inane, and it, along with practices like gerrymandering make it so that only a very few individuals in this country (relative to the whole of the population) have an actual say in our national elections. That's hogwash.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 31, 2020, 02:49:39 pm
Gerrymandering?  A congressional district must be one contiguous piece.  Wasn't it Illinois where a district was in two distinct parts connected by the miles long median of a four lane highway?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 31, 2020, 03:20:29 pm
Oh, the Electoral College is garbage and needs to be abolished. The notion that an individual could lose the vote by millions and still ascend to the Presidency is inane, and it, along with practices like gerrymandering make it so that only a very few individuals in this country (relative to the whole of the population) have an actual say in our national elections. That's hogwash.

Getting rid of the electoral college isn't a great idea either.  The country was founded with multiple ways to prevent straight majority rule, it forces a more national campaign then just focusing on cities.  The error bars on elections are a lot wider than people want to admit, just imagine a full nation wide recount and the mess that would be.

Both political parties use Gerrymandering to protect incumbents it should be done by computers with something close to geometric shape, but that might result in less minorities in congress as a result too. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on January 31, 2020, 03:30:46 pm
You learn where everyone stands by reading this.

Im surprised to see Curt's a democrat.

Once again this is coming from someone who dont care one bit.

If I had to choose one I'd say I was a republican but Im fairly certain I could be swayed.

I would also say if I voted and I wont I'd probably vote for Trump.

I dont believe a man who claims to be a Christian could vote Democrat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 31, 2020, 03:36:34 pm
Getting rid of the electoral college isn't a great idea either.  The country was founded with multiple ways to prevent straight majority rule, it forces a more national campaign then just focusing on cities.   

I'd say it's the opposite.  Because of the electoral college, the vast majority of the campaign will happen in less than 10 states.  And, very large places like CA, TX, IL, and NY will be largely ignored because the EC outcome is pretty much a given. But, 40% or more of the votes in those states will go to the loser of the state.  In a straight popular vote contest, there would be incentive for the candidate who trails in those states to spend time there and try to flip a few percent of the votes.  When every votes counts the same, there is more reason to have a truly national campaign and try to squeeze out an extra point or two in every state especially in close contests like we'll probably have for awhile.  And, if it means more time in highly populated states, well that's where the people are and there no reason at all that living in a desirable place with lots of other people should result in a vote counting less.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on January 31, 2020, 03:37:16 pm
Thank you for not voting
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 31, 2020, 03:45:42 pm
Here is a map of the number of campaign events for Trump, Pence, Clinton, and Kaine in 2016 in each state. Clearly, the electoral college does not create a national campaign.

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/campaign-events-2016
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 31, 2020, 04:00:51 pm
Elimination of the electoral college immediately disenfranchises 70% of the states or more.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 31, 2020, 04:38:44 pm
I think the electoral college disenfranchises voters. Every four years, people in the minority party in 40+ states might as well not vote because their candidate has no chance.

If states started awarding electoral votes proportionally, then maybe it would be workable. But as long as it's winner take all, I think it's a system that doesn't work.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 31, 2020, 06:18:06 pm
I live in Nebraska. It is red as red gets. The apportion the EV with 2 to the winner and 1 for each congressional district. The district I’m in is very much in play on most elections and my vote matters. Other states could follow suit.

People are in Iowa well after the caucuses and if the electoral college didn’t exist no national politician would care.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 31, 2020, 06:24:03 pm
So we should dissolve the Senate also and have a one house bicameral legislature?  After all the 2 Senators from each of the smaller states balance out the big states.  Is that fair?

Most people forget the original intention.  We are the United States.  Each state is, in its way, a sovereign nation.  We, the people, in order to form a more perfect union...etc.  We unite to provide a common defense and regulate commerce.   The smaller less populated states only went along with this concept because the Senate and the electoral college meant they would have a fair voice.   Eliminating would soon be seen like Prohibition.  A huge mistake.  Small chance it will change.  Needs 3/4 of the States to adopt an Amendment.  I see an easy 15 states that would vote no.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 31, 2020, 06:29:14 pm
So we should dissolve the Senate also and have a one house bicameral legislature?  After all the 2 Senators from each of the smaller states balance out the big states.  Is that fair?

Most people forget the original intention.  We are the United States.  Each state is, in its way, a sovereign nation.  We, the people, in order to form a more perfect union...etc.  We unite to provide a common defense and regulate commerce.   The smaller less populated states only went along with this concept because the Senate and the electoral college meant they would have a fair voice.   Eliminating would soon be seen like Prohibition.  A huge mistake.  Small chance it will change.  Needs 3/4 of the States to adopt an Amendment.  I see an easy 15 states that would vote no.
I believe the term is unicameral.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 31, 2020, 06:44:56 pm
So we should dissolve the Senate also and have a one house bicameral legislature?  After all the 2 Senators from each of the smaller states balance out the big states.  Is that fair?

Most people forget the original intention.  We are the United States.  Each state is, in its way, a sovereign nation.  We, the people, in order to form a more perfect union...etc.  We unite to provide a common defense and regulate commerce.   The smaller less populated states only went along with this concept because the Senate and the electoral college meant they would have a fair voice.   Eliminating would soon be seen like Prohibition.  A huge mistake.  Small chance it will change.  Needs 3/4 of the States to adopt an Amendment.  I see an easy 15 states that would vote no.

This is the solution.

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 06:46:28 pm
Getting rid of the electoral college isn't a great idea either.  The country was founded with multiple ways to prevent straight majority rule, it forces a more national campaign then just focusing on cities.

The primary purpose of the electoral college wasn't to force a national campaign into flyover states (as if such a thing existed in the late 18th century). The electoral college was created to ensure that poorly educated rural voters weren't mindlessly swept up by the appeal of a dangerous populist candidate. (Sound familiar?) After all, the founders were terrified of a too-strong executive, having just won liberty from the British monarchy. Further, the system was designed before there were entrenched political parties, and the founders assumed the electors would vote their own conviction as to the best candidate. Finally, it was assumed that each elector's vote would be counted individually, and not bound up in a state bloc.

The electoral college functions nothing like this. In fact, it *enables* the very thing it was designed to prevent. Arguments that suggest the college is worth preserving as one of our founding institutions have no basis in historical fact, as the college itself has devolved to the point of being unrecognizable to the founders' vision.

As br notes, the college could be useful if electoral votes were awarded proportionally, which would also solve for the problem of nation-wide recounts that would otherwise exist in a direct democratic electoral system. This is the only configuration in which I would support the existence of the electoral college.

Both political parties use Gerrymandering to protect incumbents

Absolutely, 100% true.

Elimination of the electoral college immediately disenfranchises 70% of the states or more.

This is such a strange argument: the Presidential election has nothing to do with state enfranchisement. It has everything to do with individual enfranchisement. And in its current format, the electoral college effectively disenfranchises the OVERWHELMING majority of voters. If you're a red vote in a blue state, forget about it, your vote means nothing. Further, if you're a red vote in a red state, your vote ALSO means nothing, since your state was going red no matter what. This is an oversimplification, for sure, but bear with with me: unless you live in Florida, Ohio, or Pennsylvania, your vote (with or against your state majority) hasn't meant anything for the past several decades. That's a HUGE problem, and it's why voter participation in elections is so low. Further, since it's apparently a-ok for candidates to cheat, the current incarnation of the college is an enormous vulnerability, making it much easier for unscrupulous candidates to hack the election.

What special virtue do Floridians possess that their votes should mean more than Texans or Californians? It's absolutely bonkers. It is infinitely more empowering to tell the voters of Montana that their vote means just as much as any New Yorker, rather than their vote literally means nothing at all cause they're not in a swing state. But THIS is the truth of the electoral college, and not the other way around.

Republicans champion the college as a vital electoral mechanism not because it's true, but because it's the only thing giving this far-right incarnation of the party any semblance of relevance. The effective suppression of hundreds of millions of votes is just another means to an end: staying in power over and against the will of the people. This goes against everything this country supposedly stands for. That the Republican Party has become a safe haven for racism and nationalism is its own problem, and if the GOP sees its influence in decline, it is because they have backed themselves into the dark corner of Trumpism. The solution is not to create an artificial sense of balance through the perversion of the electoral college, but instead for Republicans to broaden their base, and find a way to communicate a compelling conservative vision for the country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 07:01:50 pm
People are in Iowa well after the caucuses and if the electoral college didn’t exist no national politician would care.

Politicians don't care about Iowa because of the electoral college so much as for being first in the primaries. If it were late in the primaries, it wouldn't matter at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 07:03:55 pm
By the way, I think it's appropriate to have some safeguards against straight majority rule! The Senate accomplishes this purpose quite well and should remain as is, though I am concerned about the long-term impact of party polarization.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on January 31, 2020, 07:17:12 pm
This is the solution.

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

A "solution" absent a problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 07:22:56 pm
Ron, do you disagree that the current system effectively disenfranchises the majority of voters?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 31, 2020, 07:33:37 pm
Just FWIW...in the 1790 census, there were 3.9 million people in a country with 13 states. Virginia (highest population) had about 13 times the population of Delaware (lowest population).

In 2020, there are about 330 million people in a country with 50 states. California has almost 70 times as many people as Wyoming.

I agree that we need safeguards against straight majority rule. But at some point, the disparity in population by state is going to be so great that having exactly two senators for every state is not going to be functional. I don't know what the solution is...but it's hard for me to see the current situation as just protecting the rights of Wyoming. At some point, you're just redistributing too much of the power to the smaller states.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on January 31, 2020, 07:48:36 pm
This is such a strange argument: the Presidential election has nothing to do with state enfranchisement. It has everything to do with individual enfranchisement. And in its current format, the electoral college effectively disenfranchises the OVERWHELMING majority of voters.

How can you argue that the presidential election has nothing to do with state enfranchisement?  How can you think that the states, which had to ratify the Constitution, and which insisted on a elective process for the Senate which very clearly had to do with state enfranchisement, would not also want state enfranchisement to be an issue in the election of a president as well?  How would that possibly make any sense?


What special virtue do Floridians possess that their votes should mean more than Texans or Californians? It's absolutely bonkers. It is infinitely more empowering to tell the voters of Montana that their vote means just as much as any New Yorker, rather than their vote literally means nothing at all cause they're not in a swing state.

Actually the vote of no individual voter has ever turned a presidential election in our history, and it is exceedingly unlikely that any individual vote ever will, meaning that, by your logic, everyone's vote "literally means nothing."

That, of course, is a very simple-minded way to look at things and not at all the way politicians look at them.

When they run for office they look at how they can cobble together enough votes of enough people (people composing various interest groups) to win the election, and to determine what they need to do once they are in office to stay there.  This is best accomplished when voter's interests and desires are clearly expressed thru their votes, something which is seldom accomplished by voting for a major party candidate, whether that candidate wins or loses.  Voting for third party candidates with clearly established and understood platforms, however, do result in a meaningful vote because they make it very clear what that group of voters wants.

In other words, if you are REALLY concerned about your vote not meaning anything and possibly making a difference, you wouldn't vote for either of the major party candidates anyway.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on January 31, 2020, 07:52:52 pm
Just FWIW...in the 1790 census, there were 3.9 million people in a country with 13 states. Virginia (highest population) had about 13 times the population of Delaware (lowest population).

In 2020, there are about 330 million people in a country with 50 states. California has almost 70 times as many people as Wyoming.

I agree that we need safeguards against straight majority rule. But at some point, the disparity in population by state is going to be so great that having exactly two senators for every state is not going to be functional. I don't know what the solution is...but it's hard for me to see the current situation as just protecting the rights of Wyoming. At some point, you're just redistributing too much of the power to the smaller states.

Yours is a view which only makes sense if you look at the United States of America as more a democracy than a republic.  It was clearly established to be a republic more than a democracy.  It is the United STATES of America, a union of STATES.  It was definitely formed as a result of the states coming together as a union... not a big mob coming together as one.

As to the idea of "redistributing" power to the smaller states, there is no redistribution when the states are simply retaining the power they always have had.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 31, 2020, 08:36:25 pm
It just hit me. Ron Green is Jes Beard. That makes sense. It seemed odd that another lunatic happened across this place.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 31, 2020, 10:48:58 pm
I agree that the power structure has changed greatly over the past century.  But rather than the transfer of power from the legislative branch to the executive branch, I am much more concerned about the power that has been flowing away from each state and up to the central government.  If each state were allowed to govern itself on all issues but foreign affairs and interstate trade, most of the tribalism that has developed over the years would fade away.

Curt is correct.  The original concept of the Constitution was that this was to be an alliance of individual countries ceding foreign relations and internal trade to a national government.  That is hardly what it has become since WWI.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 01, 2020, 08:20:34 am
By the way, I think it's appropriate to have some safeguards against straight majority rule! The Senate accomplishes this purpose quite well and should remain as is, though I am concerned about the long-term impact of party polarization.

Iowa is one of the purple states. They get plenty of attention, because I have to put up with the commercials in the Omaha market. Do the electors proportionally or by house district and that gets rid of a lot of the problems.

Going with a national popular vote will give cities too much power and it is going to make things worse for rural America.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 01, 2020, 08:31:09 am
Whether the US was a compact of independent sovereign states or a new nation with a direct relationship to the people was a fundamental question left unresolved at the time of the constitutional convention. It eventually was settled by the Civil War and the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 17th amendments. Also, any discussion of whether the Electoral College remains normatively desirable must grapple with the fact that one of its animating purposes was the protection of slavery.

The Electoral College is constitutionally required and may or may not be a good thing, depending on one's views of how power ought to be dispersed and how democratic our institutions ought to be. But pointing at original meaning to justify must account for its connection to slavery.

Also, if we are to operationalize the Electoral College as it was originally understood, how can we defend the present-day lack of independence of the electors? The Framers would have fully expected them to exercise independent judgment in 2016 not to put a person like Donald Trump into the presidency.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2020, 08:43:00 am
For those who don't remember, ECF is a Constitutional lawyer.

Thank you for your post.  I'm not sure about the protection of slavery.  Yes, I'm sure that was incentive for the Southern states, but the smaller states who wanted to retain some autonomy also had incentive.

I totally agree with your final point.  The irony is and always has been that the Electoral College was intended to prevent an ass like Trump becoming President.  It failed.  But I would also still contend that our process is not giving us the best choices at the ballot box.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 01, 2020, 09:09:36 am
Totally agree, Curt. The Framers did not fully anticipate the emergence of political parties and the nature and intensity of partisanship. They expected, for example, that members of Congress would first and foremost defend the prerogatives of the institution to which they belonged. They did not anticipate that partisanship would override any such loyalty to such an extent that, for example, not one member of the President's party has expressed disapproval of the executive's wholesale refusal to cooperate in the House's exercise of its constitutional powers of oversight and impeachment. The checks and balances in the Constitution have proved inadequate to overcome partisanship of this sort. I fear that we are down to our last constitutional firewall: the upcoming election. It really ought to be understood for what it is--a referendum on a constitutional order that will enforce some limits on a runaway executive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 01, 2020, 09:13:40 am
On the Electoral College and Slavery, here's a quick summary. As noted near the end, only some belief that protecting the interests of slaveholders was THE driving force behind the Electoral College. But nearly all agree that it was part of the calculus:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/electoral-college-slavery-constitution
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 01, 2020, 10:42:48 am
As a conservative who did not believe Donald Trump's promises would reflect his policies I have been shocked by his presidency. NAFTA was a disaster for our country as was the decision to allow China into the WTO and doing nothing about their unfair trade practices. While the trade war with China hurt the short term, the long term effect is China's economy is hurting bad enough they have come to the table with phase one already signed.  I want conservative justices in the courts, Trump has delivered on that as well.

As a small business owner his tax cut has allowed me to flourish. I hired two new employees last year and this year I am expanding and hiring three more while opening a retail location. His easing of short term health insurance rules has allowed me to afford coverage again and elimination of the penalty saved me tens of thousands.

His fragile ego, lack of decorum, general use of Twitter and bombastic exclamations about his term being the greatest in history along with his questionable morals are the reasons I didn't vote for him, do not and will never respect him. However, I think many here are in for a huge surprise in November. Trump's approval rating the night before the election was 37%. It is now 5 to 7 points higher depending on the poll used. Unless he does something really stupid in the next 10 months I think he is reelected easily.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 01, 2020, 11:03:03 am
Whether the US was a compact of independent sovereign states or a new nation with a direct relationship to the people was a fundamental question left unresolved at the time of the constitutional convention. It eventually was settled by the Civil War and the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 17th amendments. Also, any discussion of whether the Electoral College remains normatively desirable must grapple with the fact that one of its animating purposes was the protection of slavery.

The Electoral College is constitutionally required and may or may not be a good thing, depending on one's views of how power ought to be dispersed and how democratic our institutions ought to be. But pointing at original meaning to justify must account for its connection to slavery.

Also, if we are to operationalize the Electoral College as it was originally understood, how can we defend the present-day lack of independence of the electors? The Framers would have fully expected them to exercise independent judgment in 2016 not to put a person like Donald Trump into the presidency.


Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Virginia the largest slaveholding state at the time of the ratification?  And didn't Virginia oppose the idea of an electoral college?  Didn't some of the very small northern states support it, despite being strongly anti-slavery?  And at the time the Constitution was drafted, was there any real thought it would be abolished?  Wasn't it still legal in virtually every nation, and even still legal in the northern states which generally opposed it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 01, 2020, 11:05:42 am
I agree that the power structure has changed greatly over the past century.  But rather than the transfer of power from the legislative branch to the executive branch, I am much more concerned about the power that has been flowing away from each state and up to the central government.  If each state were allowed to govern itself on all issues but foreign affairs and interstate trade, most of the tribalism that has developed over the years would fade away.

Curt is correct.  The original concept of the Constitution was that this was to be an alliance of individual countries ceding foreign relations and internal trade to a national government.  That is hardly what it has become since WWI.

Though the transfer of power from the legislative branch to the executive branch should be a concern, and the transfer of power from states to the federal government should be an even bigger concern, neither should concern us as much as the transfer of power from the individual to the federal government.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 01, 2020, 11:12:49 am
Totally agree, Curt. The Framers did not fully anticipate the emergence of political parties and the nature and intensity of partisanship.

Again I am asking without knowing the answer, but am genuinely interested in the answer from anyone who does know.

We have all seen claims like this before -- that the founders never expected the emergence of political parties.  But the founders were fairly familiar with history and with at least the English system of government.  Didn't political parties exist at that time in Parliament?  Didn't they even exist in ancient Rome?  If yes in either case, how could the founders have expected the system they created not to do the same thing?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 01, 2020, 11:14:09 am
Whether the US was a compact of independent sovereign states or a new nation with a direct relationship to the people was a fundamental question left unresolved at the time of the constitutional convention. It eventually was settled by the Civil War and the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 17th amendments. Also, any discussion of whether the Electoral College remains normatively desirable must grapple with the fact that one of its animating purposes was the protection of slavery.

The Electoral College is constitutionally required and may or may not be a good thing, depending on one's views of how power ought to be dispersed and how democratic our institutions ought to be. But pointing at original meaning to justify must account for its connection to slavery.

Also, if we are to operationalize the Electoral College as it was originally understood, how can we defend the present-day lack of independence of the electors? The Framers would have fully expected them to exercise independent judgment in 2016 not to put a person like Donald Trump into the presidency.

I don't agree.  The basic issue was the protection of the minority states under a Federal Government.  Slavery was the particular issue at the time, but the underlying motivation was to develop a structure where the larger states (and Virginia was one of them) could not dominate the Federal Government by the ballot box alone). 

They included a number of restrictions to get this done.  The Senate was created to give every state an equal voice regardless of population. 

They created the electoral college specifically to prevent a handful of high-population states from having complete control of the Federal Government.  This issue still exists, even though slavery is no longer an issue.

They specifically enumerated the powers of the Federal Government, giving all other powers to the states.  The destruction of this division over the last century by the courts has done more to transfer power from the states to the Federal Government than any other action to date.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 01, 2020, 11:23:37 am
They did not anticipate that partisanship would override any such loyalty to such an extent that, for example, not one member of the President's party has expressed disapproval of the executive's wholesale refusal to cooperate in the House's exercise of its constitutional powers of oversight and impeachment.

The Legislature has the constitutional right of oversight.  I don't know of anyone that has disputed that.

The Executive Branch has the constitutional right of Executive privilege, which entails the right to keep some conversations between the President and his advisers secret.  Very few dispute that.

When two rights conflict with each other, the constitutional method of resolving that is through the courts.  Does anyone dispute that the House COULD have brought this to the courts and resolved the issue in accordance with the Constitution?  Could the reason that they did not do so be political, rather than constitutional in nature?  I doubt very much that the Administration would have ignored a court order, and if they did, most of the Senators of both parties would have agreed that doing so was an impeachable offense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 01, 2020, 11:23:55 am
Referring to an earlier post

A recent analysis by the CBO projected that the federal budget deficit (deficit as in the difference between federal outlays and revenues) will grow to $1 trillion alone in 2020.

For FY 2019, interest alone on the federal debt is $479 billion. In 1979, total federal government receipts were $463 billion.

By 2025, the cost of servicing our national debt will exceed the cost of our military spending.

Tuesday, January 28, 2020
“Not since World War II has the country seen deficits during times of low unemployment that are as large as those that we project,” said CBO Director Phillip Swagel, who warned that the budget is on an unsustainable path.

In other words, enjoy it while you can.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 01, 2020, 11:29:03 am
Referring to an earlier post

A recent analysis by the CBO projected that the federal budget deficit (deficit as in the difference between federal outlays and revenues) will grow to $1 trillion alone in 2020.

For FY 2019, interest alone on the federal debt is $479 billion. In 1979, total federal government receipts were $463 billion.

By 2025, the cost of servicing our national debt will exceed the cost of our military spending.

Tuesday, January 28, 2020
“Not since World War II has the country seen deficits during times of low unemployment that are as large as those that we project,” said CBO Director Phillip Swagel, who warned that the budget is on an unsustainable path.

In other words, enjoy it while you can.


The tax cut is to blame. One of the dumbest things trump has done and that’s  really saying something. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 01, 2020, 11:31:00 am
Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security say high too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 01, 2020, 11:31:00 am
I agree.  Federal Government spending is the greatest threat to our country, our economy and our welfare that exists today.

Unfortunately, neither party has any interest in ending it because both parties use federal money to buy votes.  If there were a party or person who wanted to fix that, and actually had a chance of winning, I would back them completely.  Until then, there is no practical way to prevent the ultimate disaster that will come.  Those of you that are young enough to live to see it will be the ones to pay the price.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2020, 11:51:06 am
I agree.  Federal Government spending is the greatest threat to our country, our economy and our welfare that exists today.

Unfortunately, neither party has any interest in ending it because both parties use federal money to buy votes.  If there were a party or person who wanted to fix that, and actually had a chance of winning, I would back them completely.  Until then, there is no practical way to prevent the ultimate disaster that will come.  Those of you that are young enough to live to see it will be the ones to pay the price.
  Dave, Dave, Dave.  If such a candidate existed, he'd get impeached.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 01, 2020, 11:59:24 am
Unfortunately, that is what it has come to.  In the meantime, we are left with a choice of what we see as the lesser of many evils.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 01, 2020, 12:00:29 pm
LOL, trump has no interest in balancing the budget, he's all for deficit spending.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2020, 12:21:53 pm
LOL, trump has no interest in balancing the budget, he's all for deficit spending.
  Only to build a wall or have conferences at his hotels and resorts.  Be fair.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 01, 2020, 12:34:44 pm
No pretty much for anything... he has no concerns about the deficit. we should be tightening monetary policy, and shedding debt right now. he's demanding and doing the exact opposite.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 01, 2020, 12:57:29 pm
True for more than oil filters

(http://customerthink.com/wp-content/uploads/fram-768x559.png)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 01, 2020, 01:27:20 pm
He's going to leave a hot mess for whoever comes in next. and that person will take the fall for it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 01, 2020, 02:30:31 pm
I heard that if Trump loses in November, 2020, he might declare the election to be invalid and stay in office.  Afterall, his power is now virtually unlimited.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 01, 2020, 04:47:03 pm
A month ago, I thought Trump was the odds on favorite to be reelected.  With the bungling of the witness/evidence issue by the Senate, I’d rate Trump as the underdog.  Against any of the leading Democratic candidates.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 02, 2020, 09:03:53 am
I think the impeachment attempt has solidified his chances. Those who hate him still do so. But those on the fence see the bungling of the house and their rush to impeach for what it was. Trump's supporters have never loved him more.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 02, 2020, 09:15:44 am
I think the impeachment attempt has solidified his chances. Those who hate him still do so. But those on the fence see the bungling of the house and their rush to impeach for what it was. Trump's supporters have never loved him more.

And I’m sure his latest travel ban bumped him up a few notches in your eyes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: SailorGirl on February 02, 2020, 09:17:42 am
There has to better things to discuss than all this blah. Happy Sunday!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 02, 2020, 09:23:09 am
Totally agree, Curt. The Framers did not fully anticipate the emergence of political parties and the nature and intensity of partisanship. They expected, for example, that members of Congress would first and foremost defend the prerogatives of the institution to which they belonged. They did not anticipate that partisanship would override any such loyalty to such an extent that, for example, not one member of the President's party has expressed disapproval of the executive's wholesale refusal to cooperate in the House's exercise of its constitutional powers of oversight and impeachment. The checks and balances in the Constitution have proved inadequate to overcome partisanship of this sort. I fear that we are down to our last constitutional firewall: the upcoming election. It really ought to be understood for what it is--a referendum on a constitutional order that will enforce some limits on a runaway executive.

This should be pinned to the top of this board. And, it can’t really be discussed enough how terrible Trump has been, how much worse he can and will be, and how important this next election is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 02, 2020, 12:20:34 pm
I heard that if Trump loses in November, 2020, he might declare the election to be invalid and stay in office.  Afterall, his power is now virtually unlimited.

I heard the same thing near the end of the terms of Clinton, Bush and Obama.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 02, 2020, 04:32:38 pm
I think the impeachment attempt has solidified his chances. Those who hate him still do so. But those on the fence see the bungling of the house and their rush to impeach for what it was. Trump's supporters have never loved him more.

Good golly this is a polarized framework. It’s possible to have very dim views of the man, and, more saliently, his presidency, without devolving to a love him or hate him framework. Don’t fall for the cult of personality stuff.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 02, 2020, 04:33:14 pm
I heard the same thing near the end of the terms of Clinton, Bush and Obama.

This is a Trumpian level of “people on both sides.”

None of the other three ever suggested they wouldn’t accept the results of their respective elections, where Trump very openly raised the possibility, and has since “joked” about revoking Presidential term limits.

Further, it is now uncontested (even by leading Republicans) that Trump illegally meddled in both the 2016 and 2020 elections, something none of the other individuals were ever credibly accused of.

It is disingenuous and dangerous to correlate the absurdist notions of tin-foil-hat conspiracy theorists with those credibly worried that Trump may attempt to violate yet another constitutional norm.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 02, 2020, 08:53:20 pm
I despise Trump and what he has made of the Republican Party. I have zero interest in voting for him. Warren and Sanders have proposed spending plans that are going to account for 80% of GDP. If the Democrats put one of those 2 up I will seriously have to consider voting for Trump and that isn’t something I ever thought I would say. Most likely I am voting for a third party, but if the Democrats nominate someone like Buttigieg or Bloombarg I’ll at least give it some thought.

Trump is an idiot and that at least keeps him from doing serious harm.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 02, 2020, 09:11:27 pm

Trump is an idiot and that at least keeps him from doing serious harm.
LOL.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 02, 2020, 09:16:11 pm
I think we’ll be hearing a lot of “I hate trump but...” excuses for why people who think they are decent are voting for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 02, 2020, 09:26:18 pm
I’ve for other people twice already and plan on making 4 votes for other people so try again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 02, 2020, 09:34:06 pm
Apparently, this was up for about 8 minutes until someone gave him a remedial geography lesson. Expect the Kansas/Missouri border to be redrawn in Sharpie tomorrow morning.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EP0gUifU8AA4m-x?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 02, 2020, 09:41:20 pm
I’ve for other people twice already and plan on making 4 votes for other people so try again.

Oh yes, I’m sure you are very independent and open minded. But you’ll just have no choice.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 02, 2020, 09:52:12 pm
I’m going to take time out of my day to vote against in a primary that won’t matter because I dislike the guy that much.  I didn’t vote for him in 2016 and won’t in 2020 outside of 2 possible candidates. The fact that I’d even consider voting for 2 Democrats that I agree with on basically nothing is surprising to me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 02, 2020, 10:06:14 pm
This is a Trumpian level of “people on both sides.”

None of the other three ever suggested they wouldn’t accept the results of their respective elections, where Trump very openly raised the possibility, and has since “joked” about revoking Presidential term limits.

Not accepting the results of the 2016 election, and not wanting to accept what they are afraid will happen in the 2020 election is exactly what the last three years have been all about, from the leaking of the contents of the Steele memo, to the emoluments clause nonsense to the Mueller probe, to all of the deep state efforts, to the impeachment.

Projection can be a b!tch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 02, 2020, 10:26:32 pm
Good golly this is a polarized framework. It’s possible to have very dim views of the man, and, more saliently, his presidency, without devolving to a love him or hate him framework. Don’t fall for the cult of personality stuff.

I think that both Robb and I, among others, have expressed views that disapprove of the man but approve of much of his presidency thus far.  This is hardly a Cult of Personality situation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 02, 2020, 10:26:52 pm
What an idiot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 02, 2020, 10:28:57 pm
It is disingenuous and dangerous to correlate the absurdist notions of tin-foil-hat conspiracy theorists with those credibly worried that Trump may attempt to violate yet another constitutional norm.

Everyone thinks that their particular tin-foil conspiracy theory is actually reality.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 02, 2020, 10:45:02 pm
I think that both Robb and I, among others, have expressed views that disapprove of the man but approve of much of his presidency thus far.  This is hardly a Cult of Personality situation.
Exactly
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 02, 2020, 10:46:32 pm
Good golly this is a polarized framework. It’s possible to have very dim views of the man, and, more saliently, his presidency, without devolving to a love him or hate him framework. Don’t fall for the cult of personality stuff.




Tico, you may have mistaken my meaning, I am not a Trump lover, but I know many. They love the guy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 02, 2020, 11:18:24 pm
Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader
 Quiz: Question   

 Kansas City is in what state?
What an idiot.
Hey, who deleted the Trump congratulating Kansas post?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 02, 2020, 11:33:34 pm
The Super Bowl tweet brjones posted has a time of 7:15 P.M.    Trump is in Florida where the game did not start until around 6:40 P.M.   The game lasted 4 hours and 10 minutes.  Do the math.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 02, 2020, 11:35:40 pm
The Super Bowl tweet brjones posted has a time of 7:15 P.M.    Trump is in Florida where the game did not start until around 6:40 P.M.   The game lasted 4 hours and 10 minutes.  Do the math.
Trump is a prophetic genius!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 02, 2020, 11:46:37 pm
The Super Bowl tweet brjones posted has a time of 7:15 P.M.    Trump is in Florida where the game did not start until around 6:40 P.M.   The game lasted 4 hours and 10 minutes.  Do the math.

Actually he 100% did tweet and delete it, but by all means don't let reality infect your worldview.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/super-bowl/2020/02/02/donald-trump-super-bowl-congratulates-kansas-chiefs-missouri/4642759002/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 03, 2020, 12:02:08 am
The Super Bowl tweet brjones posted has a time of 7:15 P.M.    Trump is in Florida where the game did not start until around 6:40 P.M.   The game lasted 4 hours and 10 minutes.  Do the math.

I pulled that from a west coast account, so 10:15 eastern time. Here's another tweet from 10:15 eastern time with Andy Reid in full celebration mode:

https://twitter.com/ringer/status/1224169441035866114

Maybe it was fake. But if it was, it's really weird that he tweeted basically the same thing a few minutes later (modified for geography), which (I just checked) is still up:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Congratulations to the Kansas City Chiefs on a great game and a fantastic comeback under immense pressure. We are proud of you and the Great State of Missouri. You are true Champions!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 03, 2020, 12:20:21 am
Why’s it such a big deal that Trump may not know which side of the river the Chiefs facilities are located?

Sounds like a bunch of junior high girls getting all worked up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 03, 2020, 01:59:03 am
Good golly this is a polarized framework. It’s possible to have very dim views of the man, and, more saliently, his presidency, without devolving to a love him or hate him framework. Don’t fall for the cult of personality stuff.

It’s disgusting. These people are complicit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 03, 2020, 08:00:28 am
It’s disgusting. These people are complicit.

These people - Robb, CBJ, davebear, Jes, and the rest of the goons on the Bears board - know exactly who and  what they are supporting and they want more. they know about the concentration camps on the boarder, they just saw people from a few more “shithole” countries banned from the US, they saw the restrictions on land mines get lifted, they see all the efforts made to ignore climate change and they want more. These are horrible people and should be treated as such.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 03, 2020, 09:34:38 am
Everyone thinks that their particular tin-foil conspiracy theory is actually reality.

So what part of Trump saying, during the Presidential debate, that he's not sure he would accept the results of the election is tin-foil conspiracy? And what part of Trump saying, multiple times, that perhaps the Constitution should be changed so he could rule indefinitely is tin-foil conspiracy? You do know that of all the world leaders, the ones Trump most regularly expresses admiration and love for are the despotic ones, right? Those who have no term-limit check on their power. Those who are free to leverage the various branches of government to their whim as Trump has.

Do I think Trump will successfully remove term limits? No, but then again, he did just commit blatantly impeachable offenses, all without consequence thanks to the obsequiousness of the Republican Party. So while I don't think these things will happen, do I think that, if it were possible, that Trump would remake the Constitution in his own image? Of course. He's a malignant narcissist.

None of the other presidents mentioned were ever remotely credibly accused of the kinds of behaviors that Trump's party has already admitted and accepted from him.

I repeat: both-sides-ing this issue is disingenuous and dangerous. 

The biggest problem in all this is not that we're at a moral crisis with Trump - though we are. Nor is it that we're at a constitutional crisis with Trump - though we are. It's that we're at an epistemological crisis wherein the standards of fact and critical thinking, how we know the things we know, have been so corroded by Trump's toxic populism and deception that people can no longer see or think clearly.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 03, 2020, 09:46:29 am
I think that both Robb and I, among others, have expressed views that disapprove of the man but approve of much of his presidency thus far.  This is hardly a Cult of Personality situation.

The only actual "accomplishments" of the Trump presidency are his tax cut and his vile treatment of all non-white immigrants.

The tax cut has only served to exacerbate the staggering wealth inequality in the long run, as there are short-term tax benefits targeted at the middle class that fall off after a few years, but the largest cut remains at the top end. It's a con. Meanwhile, the true conservative position doesn't just look at taxes as an isolated issue, but considers taxes in light of government spending. Our deficit continues to explode, and actual economic conservatives should be horrified by Trump's economic policies. The same goes for the "trade wars," which did *not* bring manufacturing jobs back to America, and instead only increased the dependence of farmers on the government for subsidies. How's that for socialism?

And if you favor Trump's immigration policies, you're supporting racism and xenophobia. Period. Sorry if that offends, offense is not my intent, but there is no "gentle" way to frame this issue. If you claim to be a person of any branch of Judeo-Christian faith (true for many Trump fans here), support for Trump's immigration policies is completely irreconcilable with your religion. Period. The Torah and the Bible speak overwhelmingly and without allowance on the responsibility for communities of faith to welcome the stranger and the immigrant; that what you do to the "least of these" you do to Jesus. Trump's (and Stephen Miller's) "America First" vision as expressed in his immigration policies is, quite literally, antichrist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 03, 2020, 09:49:43 am
Tico, you may have mistaken my meaning, I am not a Trump lover, but I know many. They love the guy.

Robb, not saying you (or davep) is a Trump lover, but rather that the framework, the language of love vs hate is the kind of language that fosters cult of personality, which is a VERY real thing with Trump. If the erosion of our ability as a society to speak coherently about truth shows anything, it's that language *matters*.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 03, 2020, 09:54:53 am
Trumpophiles would sooner jeopardize our constitutional system than oppose Trump.  Shockingly, "mainstream" Republican politicians agree by their actions (despite their denials).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 03, 2020, 09:57:33 am
These people - Robb, CBJ, davebear, Jes, and the rest of the goons on the Bears board - know exactly who and  what they are supporting and they want more. they know about the concentration camps on the boarder, they just saw people from a few more “shithole” countries banned from the US, they saw the restrictions on land mines get lifted, they see all the efforts made to ignore climate change and they want more. These are horrible people and should be treated as such.

No, they're not all horrible people. In your zeal to dismantle right-wing fundamentalism, don't fall for the reverse trap. I'm not saying horrible people don't exist - they do. But keep generally clear in your mind the space between the issues and the people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 03, 2020, 10:30:44 am
These people - Robb, CBJ, davebear, Jes, and the rest of the goons on the Bears board - know exactly who and  what they are supporting and they want more. they know about the concentration camps on the boarder, they just saw people from a few more “shithole” countries banned from the US, they saw the restrictions on land mines get lifted, they see all the efforts made to ignore climate change and they want more. These are horrible people and should be treated as such.

I haven't given $1 to Trump or voted for him, how exactly am I supporting him?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 03, 2020, 10:43:43 am
The only actual "accomplishments" of the Trump presidency are his tax cut and his vile treatment of all non-white immigrants.

The tax cut has only served to exacerbate the staggering wealth inequality in the long run, as there are short-term tax benefits targeted at the middle class that fall off after a few years, but the largest cut remains at the top end. It's a con. Meanwhile, the true conservative position doesn't just look at taxes as an isolated issue, but considers taxes in light of government spending. Our deficit continues to explode, and actual economic conservatives should be horrified by Trump's economic policies. The same goes for the "trade wars," which did *not* bring manufacturing jobs back to America, and instead only increased the dependence of farmers on the government for subsidies. How's that for socialism?

And if you favor Trump's immigration policies, you're supporting racism and xenophobia. Period. Sorry if that offends, offense is not my intent, but there is no "gentle" way to frame this issue. If you claim to be a person of any branch of Judeo-Christian faith (true for many Trump fans here), support for Trump's immigration policies is completely irreconcilable with your religion. Period. The Torah and the Bible speak overwhelmingly and without allowance on the responsibility for communities of faith to welcome the stranger and the immigrant; that what you do to the "least of these" you do to Jesus. Trump's (and Stephen Miller's) "America First" vision as expressed in his immigration policies is, quite literally, antichrist.

Just curious if you believe the US should take in all of the world’s 3 billion living in poverty?  Or just those with the means and health to walk to the border.  Is there no place for a sense of order?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 03, 2020, 10:58:34 am
Just curious if you believe the US should take in all of the world’s 3 billion living in poverty?  Or just those with the means and health to walk to the border.  Is there no place for a sense of order?

It isn't a binary choice between Trump and an open border.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 03, 2020, 11:02:06 am
I haven't given $1 to Trump or voted for him, how exactly am I supporting him?

You’re right, you are not in the same class as the rest.  I apologize for including you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 03, 2020, 11:08:10 am
It isn't a binary choice between Trump and an open border.   

Exactly
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 03, 2020, 11:21:25 am
Exactly

For most or at least the most vocal democrats it is, but I take it you are in favor of enforcing existing immigration laws.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 03, 2020, 12:31:53 pm
These people - Robb, CBJ, davebear, Jes, and the rest of the goons on the Bears board - know exactly who and  what they are supporting and they want more. they know about the concentration camps on the boarder, they just saw people from a few more “shithole” countries banned from the US, they saw the restrictions on land mines get lifted, they see all the efforts made to ignore climate change and they want more. These are horrible people and should be treated as such.

Made the mistake of venturing over there. Holy shi*
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 03, 2020, 12:34:04 pm
Made the mistake of venturing over there. Holy shi*

Its an unpleasant bizzaro world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 03, 2020, 12:36:45 pm
For most or at least the most vocal democrats it is, but I take it you are in favor of enforcing existing immigration laws.

No, it's not at all true that most democrats favor open borders. That's a dogmatic, propagandist, nativist, Fox News talking point. Be better than this.

I'm in favor of clear and easy path to citizenship for DACA recipients. I'm in favor of a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who have been here for some time and who do not have a violent criminal record. I'm in favor of interpreting and enforcing asylum laws as most administrations prior to this one have. I agree with previous administrations that illegal border crossings should not be criminally enforced (aka, no kids in cages, period). In general, I believe that immigration is a net good for this country, and its curtailment is to our detriment.

I'm against the kinds of financial requirements the Trump administration intends to use to deny visas to certain immigrant populations. I'm against categorically limiting immigration (or even travel!) from purported "**** hole" countries. I'm against any kind of language that would paint people of certain ethnic or faith backgrounds as dangerous, diseased, uneducated, etc., and I'm against using that kind of propaganda to whip up a xenophobic, anti-immigration opinion in the population at large. These arguments have no basis in history or current statistics.

That people would risk everything to come to the USA to make a better life for their family is a privilege and an honor to all US citizens, and is the story of virtually every non-tribal person currently residing in the US. Immigration has been throughout our history and remains today an enormous driver of economic growth and social betterment, and the vast majority of people coming into this country continue in this great tradition.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 03, 2020, 12:50:10 pm
I'd also add in a guest worker program to help protect people coming over here to work. 


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 03, 2020, 01:01:01 pm
I'd also add in a guest worker program to help protect people coming over here to work. 

Absolutely.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 03, 2020, 01:47:04 pm
ticohans - I very much appreciate the time and effort you've made in your series of posts the past few days.  Thank you!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 03, 2020, 01:48:33 pm
Yes, thank you indeed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 03, 2020, 01:54:24 pm
I agree.  Thanks, tico for your thoughtful posts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 03, 2020, 02:33:20 pm
No, it's not at all true that most democrats favor open borders. That's a dogmatic, propagandist, nativist, Fox News talking point. Be better than this.

No it’s not dogmatic propagandist nativist or from Fox News.
It may be incorrect, but it comes from democratic leadership refusing to fund the border wall, which most supported not long ago, and refusing to even work with Republicans on immigration reform so as to block Trump from any success.  Remember when Trump said he was in favor of concluding DACA in return for  negotiating the wall?

I'm in favor of clear and easy path to citizenship for DACA recipients. I'm in favor of a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who have been here for some time and who do not have a violent criminal record. I'm in favor of interpreting and enforcing asylum laws as most administrations prior to this one have. I agree with previous administrations that illegal border crossings should not be criminally enforced (aka, no kids in cages, period). In general, I believe that immigration is a net good for this country, and its curtailment is to our detriment.


I too favor DACA and long term residency as a path to citizenship.
Enforcement of asylum by releasing applicants on their word they will attend their hearing is just irresponsible.  Most don’t show up.  They are housed in the same detention centers used for many years.  What do you do with 5000 people who show up at the border?  Release them into the desert?
We know about a third of the families aren’t related at all but are adults involved in trafficking.  Women in Tijuana are being offered hundreds of dollars daily for their kids.
We had neither the facilities nor supplies for the caravans.  The House took 2 years to add funding to help these people.  Please spare the “kids in cages” garbage.


I'm against the kinds of financial requirements the Trump administration intends to use to deny visas to certain immigrant populations. I'm against categorically limiting immigration (or even travel!) from purported "**** hole" countries. I'm against any kind of language that would paint people of certain ethnic or faith backgrounds as dangerous, diseased, uneducated, etc., and I'm against using that kind of propaganda to whip up a xenophobic, anti-immigration opinion in the population at large. These arguments have no basis in history or current statistics.

That people would risk everything to come to the USA to make a better life for their family is a privilege and an honor to all US citizens, and is the story of virtually every non-tribal person currently residing in the US. Immigration has been throughout our history and remains today an enormous driver of economic growth and social betterment, and the vast majority of people coming into this country continue in this great tradition.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on February 03, 2020, 03:16:38 pm
One of the saddest things about the immigration/refugee fights is that we were within a eyelash of addressing it with bipartisan legislation in 2014. Miraculously, a measure passed the Senate with a bipartisan filibuster-proof majority, President Obama was on record as willing to sign it, and a majority in the House supported it. Unfortunately, though, following the "Hastert Rule," then Speaker John Boehner would not let the measure come up for a vote because a majority of his party in the House did not support it. Partisanship strikes again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 03, 2020, 04:19:04 pm
Hey, ECF.  What do you think the Framers would have thought of Fox News?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 03, 2020, 05:27:40 pm
So what part of Trump saying, during the Presidential debate, that he's not sure he would accept the results of the election is tin-foil conspiracy? And what part of Trump saying, multiple times, that perhaps the Constitution should be changed so he could rule indefinitely is tin-foil conspiracy? You do know that of all the world leaders, the ones Trump most regularly expresses admiration and love for are the despotic ones, right? Those who have no term-limit check on their power. Those who are free to leverage the various branches of government to their whim as Trump has.

Do I think Trump will successfully remove term limits? No, but then again, he did just commit blatantly impeachable offenses, all without consequence thanks to the obsequiousness of the Republican Party. So while I don't think these things will happen, do I think that, if it were possible, that Trump would remake the Constitution in his own image? Of course. He's a malignant narcissist.

Saying openly that he does not know if he would accept the results of the election was certainly stupid, but meaningless.  Hilary and the majority of the Democrats have refused to accept the results of the election, and it has not mattered in the slightest.

Saying openly that he would like to change the constitution is hardly a conspiracy.  Like you, I doubt that neither he, nor anyone else could get that kind of change through the either Congress or the States.

You seem to have missed the entire set of hearings held by the House committees.  Not a single one of the witnesses testified to knowledge of impeachable offenses.  After testifying to a series of policy disagreements with the president, every one of the testified that he or she had no knowledge of impeachable offenses.  They DID say that they ASSUMED that his motivations were impeachable offenses, but no one could or would testify to his motivations.  Presumptions are not a very good legal basis to overturn a Presidential Election.

As far as the second charge is concerned, it is ludicrous on the face of it.  The house, after refusing either the President or the Republicans to call witnesses, they issued subpoenas which the President refused to honor, giving his reasons for doing so.  The Democrats not only did not take that issue to court in order to settle the matter, they recalled the one subpoena that was being taken to court, thus rendering the issue moot.

The House was not able to come up with any impeachable offenses, but merely made unproven accusations.  In America, no one, not even the President, has to prove his innocence.  There is no such thing as guild by accusation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 03, 2020, 05:45:37 pm
Impeachments are not criminal proceedings... the intent to be a shithole that sells out his country for personal gain, is enough to of a reason to not hold that office....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 03, 2020, 05:48:01 pm
Trump is going to celebrate his acquittal by doing more abuse of power and adding to the future articles of impeachment.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/02/trump-plots-revenge-on-bolton-impeachment-enemies
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 03, 2020, 05:50:23 pm
Fake news. Its more bullshit about his intent, not what he's actually doing!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 03, 2020, 05:52:00 pm
Imagine the attorneys for an accused bank robber getting the judge to agree that none of the customers in the bank lobby at the time can testify, none of the footage from security cameras can be shown, and the teller did not hand over any money so there was no crime.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 03, 2020, 06:01:33 pm
Imagine the attorneys for an accused bank robber getting the judge to agree that none of the customers in the bank lobby at the time can testify, none of the footage from security cameras can be shown, and the teller did not hand over any money so there was no crime.

Imagine if the bank manager and employees said there was never a robbery or attempted robbery to begin with.  Just sayin.....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 03, 2020, 06:13:24 pm
Pretending shi* didn’t occur is certainly one way to go about it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 03, 2020, 06:23:11 pm
Pretending shi* didn’t occur is certainly one way to go about it.

That's kind of what I was thinking when the issue of Joe Biden's son getting suitcases full of cash from Burisma was never thought to be a worthy reason to investigate Him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 03, 2020, 06:40:40 pm
I can only assume you must feel as strong about the trumps and Jared Kushner
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 03, 2020, 06:45:29 pm
I can only assume you must feel as strong about the trumps and Jared Kushner

I believe the truth should come out, whatever it is.  I'm pretty sure an investigation falls within one of the house committees responsibility, maybe judiciary.
However, they decided not to investigate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 03, 2020, 08:09:57 pm
I agree.  If Kushner or any other of the Trump family is breaking the laws, I want them investigated and if appropriate, tried, sentenced and punished.  I feel the same about those deeply involved in the Clinton Foundation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on February 03, 2020, 11:39:35 pm
Justice Dept. winds down Clinton-related inquiry once championed by Trump. It found nothing of consequence.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/justice-dept-winds-down-clinton-related-inquiry-once-championed-by-trump-it-found-nothing-of-consequence/2020/01/09/ca83932e-32f9-11ea-a053-dc6d944ba776_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 04, 2020, 11:57:21 pm
Not to stir the pot here but I am genuinely interested in hearing opinions on Nancy Pelosi's behavior tonight by those on the left.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on February 05, 2020, 06:14:57 am
TRIGGERED!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 05, 2020, 07:31:04 am
Not to stir the pot here but I am genuinely interested in hearing opinions on Nancy Pelosi's behavior tonight by those on the left.

It was dumb because it distracted from the horrible speech given by a horrible person.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 05, 2020, 09:06:06 am
What else could she do.  Trump went into the speech with the highest approval ratings of his presidency, and gave an outstanding speech to publicize his outstanding performance.  She had little choice other than to do something petty and mean spirited, to bolster the spirits of the Cletuses of the country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2020, 09:49:05 am
It's wonderful to see our country's leaders behaving like children! 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 05, 2020, 09:53:04 am
It was petty, sure. But I find it hilarious that it bothers Trump fans--something like that wouldn't be on a top 10 list of the most petty and vindictive things he does in an average week.

And "highest approval ratings of his presidency" is a case of damning with faint praise. As of this morning, his polling average on approval at Fivethirtyeight is 43.4% (compared to 52.1% disapproval). It's pretty hard for a president to be consistently that unpopular, especially when there have been no new wars and the economy hasn't crashed during his administration.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2020, 10:08:34 am
https://twitter.com/mattgertz/status/1225012237737320448?s=21

Love when people ITT tell on themselves.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2020, 10:13:17 am
At least Jefferson and Burr had the decency to duel with pistols. 

The country would be better off without Trump, Pelosi, etc........ having any power.  Tico 2020!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2020, 10:17:10 am
Jefferson would be shocked to learn he had a duel with Aaron Burr. Was it before or after Burr killed Hamilton?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 05, 2020, 10:28:30 am
Stickler for details, eh?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 05, 2020, 10:45:05 am
From another chapter in Rick Reilly's great book Commander In Cheat

There was a very exclusive golf club near LA where, in addition to the normal fees, prospective members were required to put $200,000.00 into a reserve fund.   If a member left, the money was returned.


One day an east coast real estate character came along and bought the club.  The members did not have a problem.


Not long after that, the new owner used the money in the reserve fund to pay down the loan he used to buy the club.  The members did have a problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2020, 10:51:42 am
Not to stir the pot here but I am genuinely interested in hearing opinions on Nancy Pelosi's behavior tonight by those on the left.

It was as childish as Trump refusing to shake her hand at the beginning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on February 05, 2020, 10:58:02 am
Quote
It was as childish as Trump refusing to shake her hand at the beginning.

Yeah.  And as childish as her deviation from the traditional introduction of the President of the United States to Congress.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2020, 11:00:34 am
Yeah. 

Fixed it for you. The point is not squabbling like kindergartners, crying “he/she did it first!”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 05, 2020, 11:02:00 am
That is all the right does at this point. go over to the bears board. Every defense of trump is X person did it first.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2020, 11:05:08 am
Jefferson would be shocked to learn he had a duel with Aaron Burr. Was it before or after Burr killed Hamilton?

Well Jefferson should have dueled with both then.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2020, 11:10:36 am
Stickler for details, eh?
.  It put a burr in my saddle.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on February 05, 2020, 11:24:58 am
In your saddle - or under your saddle?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 05, 2020, 11:36:53 am
https://twitter.com/mattgertz/status/1225012237737320448?s=21

Love when people ITT tell on themselves.

These people aren't even pretending like racism and white nationalism is a bad thing.  It's probably better that these awful people are more visible.  Check out the Bears board for reference.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 05, 2020, 12:54:24 pm
My only comment on the State Of the Union:  VP Mike Pence did such a great job of remembering exactly at what points in the speech he was supposed to jump to his feet, put a big grin on his face, and applaud as enthusiastically as possible that it looked very choreographed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 05, 2020, 01:47:42 pm
Romney announces he will vote to convict and Trumpites want to drive him out of the GOP.  No place for thoughtfully evaluating the evidence and moral courage in the GOP, I guess.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 05, 2020, 01:53:21 pm
Quote
No place for thoughtfully evaluating the evidence and moral courage in the GOP, I guess.

Anyone that does this gets destroyed by Fox News and loses their primary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 05, 2020, 04:17:11 pm
Tico, would you mind if i quoted a portion of a couple of your posts. Your command of the written word is better then mine.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 05, 2020, 04:27:51 pm
NOT GUILTY!!!

Now we can go back to our safe country that's easy to find a job in.

Im sorry for all of the folks who want a free ride in a non Christian country full of illegal aliens.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 05, 2020, 04:38:58 pm
Dusty,

You've mentioned before that your inlaws are immigrants right? are they here for a free ride?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 05, 2020, 05:04:08 pm
Im playing with you all honestly.

My in laws are white Southerners who adopted my Filipino wife when she was 2 1/2.

She was born in Zamboanga City,Phillipines.

All she remembers from the Phillipines is a nice woman in the orphanage she lived in.

She does have some pictures and stuff though and she does have paperwork documenting who her parents were and such.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 05, 2020, 05:40:57 pm
Im sorry for all of the folks who want a free ride in a non Christian country full of illegal aliens.

Yeah, they're being kept out by that beautiful wall that Mexico didn't pay for.  Instead, a national emergency was declared allowing money that was supposed to go for things like repairing substandard military housing to be taken away.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 05, 2020, 06:50:21 pm
Tico, would you mind if i quoted a portion of a couple of your posts. Your command of the written word is better then mine.

Have at it! And to those who've said kind things over the past couple days, thanks. Just trying to promote honest, fair, and open exchanges where possible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 05, 2020, 08:59:37 pm
Romney announces he will vote to convict and Trumpites want to drive him out of the GOP.  No place for thoughtfully evaluating the evidence and moral courage in the GOP, I guess.

I've pretty much considered myself to be from the Romney wing of the Republican party ever since he first ran in '08.  I still think we missed the boat big time by not electing him in 2012.  Especially in the age of Trump, though, telling people you're a Romney Republican pretty much means you're not getting along all that well with just about anyone politically.  And today probably doesn't much to change that either especially in the long run, but I don't think I've ever been prouder to call myself a Romney Republican than I am today.  That vote took a lot of guts and he's going to have a lot of hell to pay for it, but I think he did the absolute right thing today. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 05, 2020, 10:55:08 pm
Normal stuff

https://www.instagram.com/p/B8MnQ3flAy-/?igshid=qaw45fmfbvg4
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 06, 2020, 05:28:32 pm
https://twitter.com/jamesmartinsj/status/1225550118457401344?s=21

Will be interesting to see the convenient christians reveal themselves
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 06, 2020, 06:00:24 pm
There is nothing Christian about Donald Trump.  Anyone who thinks otherwise is a rube.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 06, 2020, 06:03:38 pm
Maybe not but he's much more Christian than the democrats.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 06, 2020, 06:04:28 pm
Not only is there nothing Christian about him, there's nothing really Republican about him. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 06, 2020, 06:13:57 pm
Maybe not but he's much more Christian than the democrats.

Another reason to prefer the Democrats.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 06, 2020, 07:00:03 pm
If you could take all of the worst traits of America--the arrogance, self-interest, lack of charity, ignorance, racism, elitism, narcissism, willful stupidity, all of it--and you could distill it somehow and put it in a bottle, that bottle would be 100% Donald Trump.  He is literally one of the worst human beings in history.

He has, as near as I can tell, one thing that he's gifted at: self-promotion.  Other than that, he doesn't even seem to be good at anything.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 07, 2020, 01:26:21 am
Do I think Trump will successfully remove term limits?


Could you point to any actual effort Trump has ever made to do so?  Could you offer a single legitimate news story addressing the faintest effort to do so?  Any proposed Constitutional amendments submitted into the legislative hopper to do so?

Jokes intended to cause the heads of political opponents to explode are not the same as effort to do anything other than to have a laugh at your expense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 07, 2020, 01:27:53 am
If the erosion of our ability as a society to speak coherently about truth shows anything, it's that language *matters*.

I agree.  Thanks, tico for your thoughtful posts.

Ah, the irony....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 07, 2020, 01:35:09 am
Hey, ECF.  What do you think the Framers would have thought of Fox News?

Newspapers of the day were openly partisan, often openly serving as organs for one political party or another.  Jefferson had his party organs in 1800, pretty much printing what he and his folks called for, and Adams had his.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 07, 2020, 01:37:15 am
Impeachments are not criminal proceedings... the intent to be a shithole that sells out his country for personal gain, is enough to of a reason to not hold that office....

That is a perfectly appropriate reason to vote against a candidate.

It is not a valid reason to remove someone and undo an election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 07, 2020, 01:39:32 am
I can only assume you must feel as strong about the trumps and Jared Kushner

The House is free to investigate this at any time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 07, 2020, 09:20:13 am
https://twitter.com/fahrenthold/status/1225777226886635520?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 07, 2020, 09:30:12 am
The House is free to investigate this at any time.

Heh

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1225802782244032512?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2020, 09:39:04 am
https://twitter.com/fahrenthold/status/1225777226886635520?s=21

Biden was a steal.  He only charged the secret service $2200/month to rent his cottage.  The same amount that he charged his mother to live there before she died...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 07, 2020, 09:41:22 am
Got a few emails/messages on my trade block, been traveling for work this week, i'll catch up with all of it this evening!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 07, 2020, 09:43:14 am
Biden was a steal.  He only charged the secret service $2200/month to rent his cottage.  The same amount that he charged his mother to live there before she died...

Wonder if he pocketed that money.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 07, 2020, 09:52:41 am
Got a few emails/messages on my trade block, been traveling for work this week, i'll catch up with all of it this evening!
  We have to agree with you politically to make a trade with you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 07, 2020, 09:53:38 am
  We have to agree with you politically to make a trade with you?

sorry wrong thread. the trouble of posting form a phone between flights.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 07, 2020, 09:54:25 am
Meant to post this here. Its a 20 minute read, but its an absolute must read. The disinformation war being waged by the trump campaign is something we should all be fearful of, and its all but certain he will be reelected because of it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/03/the-2020-disinformation-war/605530/?fbclid=IwAR3wm9SD85H4utCkeUbDEuZdVbVZc3OxBsbWegb6RY_F_G4zREHUsyc-z9Y
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2020, 10:38:45 am
Wonder if he pocketed that money.

Biden reported the income on his tax returns, just under $20,000 a year.  The Biden's chartiable giving as VP was under $10,000.  When his mom was alive his charitable giving was under $1,000 a year.  So yeah he pocketed the money.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on February 07, 2020, 05:36:27 pm
Quote
undo an election

Removing a corrupt politician for cause is not undoing an election.  If he had been removed (which there was never any chance of due to the gutless GOP senate), Pence would have taken over.  Clearly not undoing an election, as much as I would like to.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 07, 2020, 05:51:43 pm
Removing a corrupt politician for cause is not undoing an election.  If he had been removed (which there was never any chance of due to the gutless GOP senate), Pence would have taken over.  Clearly not undoing an election, as much as I would like to.

This is a “nuance” that Trump supporters like Jes can’t grasp.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 07, 2020, 10:30:08 pm
Biden reported the income on his tax returns, just under $20,000 a year.  The Biden's chartiable giving as VP was under $10,000.  When his mom was alive his charitable giving was under $1,000 a year.  So yeah he pocketed the money.

Now do the trumps
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 07, 2020, 10:43:10 pm
Now do the trumps
Ivanka maybe, but no thanks on the rest.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 07, 2020, 10:58:50 pm
Now do the trumps

One would have to release their tax returns to be able to to that. Safe to assume he’s pocketing the money too , gotta due what you what gotta do to get tres commas.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on February 10, 2020, 04:18:04 pm
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2020/02/01/trumps-economic-growth-is-slower-than-obamas-last-3-years/#190bfb544fed
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 10, 2020, 05:18:39 pm
Get outta here with your lies, damn lies, and statistics!!!!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 10, 2020, 06:02:28 pm
Anyone trying to claim the Obama economy was better than the last 3 years better check into the hospital.

Even Chris Matthews "gets it" that the Bidens should have been investigated

<iframe title="MRC TV video player" width="640" height="360" src="https://www.mrctv.org/embed/546790" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 10, 2020, 06:33:20 pm
Anyone trying to claim the Obama economy was better than the last 3 years better check into the hospital.

I suppose if you ignore all the facts, you can make this claim.  It is very much like you and your cult leader to prefer the alternative facts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 10, 2020, 07:38:32 pm
What “facts” point toward a lesser economy?

The middle and lower class have millions fewer on welfare higher incomes and employment and are saving more. 
Last week’s Gallup poll shows 69% are happy with the economy and 84% are happy overall.

I tend to forget those are bad news for democrats.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 10, 2020, 07:40:41 pm
Yeah, the bottom 20% are doing great.  What nonsense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 10, 2020, 07:47:09 pm
What “facts” point toward a lesser economy?

The middle and lower class have millions fewer on welfare higher incomes and employment and are saving more. 
Last week’s Gallup poll shows 69% are happy with the economy and 84% are happy overall.

I tend to forget those are bad news for democrats.

I guess you didn’t read the article that started this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 10, 2020, 07:50:16 pm
What “facts” point toward a lesser economy?

The middle and lower class have millions fewer on welfare higher incomes and employment and are saving more. 
Last week’s Gallup poll shows 69% are happy with the economy and 84% are happy overall.

I tend to forget those are bad news for democrats.

It’s not bad now so it makes sense that many are happy. But, the growth is slower.  Trump inherited a very strong economy and, despite his best efforts, it’s still growing.  His policies have hampered growth but hasn’t tanked it, yet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 10, 2020, 07:56:20 pm
Yeah, the bottom 20% are doing great.  What nonsense.

The bottom 20% has never been doing great, but their wages are increasing and fewer are below the poverty line.
According toCNBC the lowest wage levels saw the biggest increase in 2019.

Isn’t that why you want to see happen?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 11, 2020, 07:13:03 pm
Lots more entirely normal, not-corrupt things happening in DC today, while Senate GOP blocked 3 election security bills.

Just keep moving along. Nothing to see here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on February 11, 2020, 07:22:08 pm
end justifies the means
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 11, 2020, 08:43:44 pm
Lots more entirely normal, not-corrupt things happening in DC today, while Senate GOP blocked 3 election security bills.

Just keep moving along. Nothing to see here.

The corruption we are going to see the rest of this year will be comical.  It’s scary to think what he’ll do if he gets reelected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 11, 2020, 08:44:18 pm
Bill Barr and his DOJ are an embarrassment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 11, 2020, 08:52:59 pm
Don't worry...Susan Collins is sure he learned his lesson.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 11, 2020, 09:03:39 pm
People think it can’t happen here...

Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism ("Fascism Anyone?," Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine's policy.

The 14 characteristics are:

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .

Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 11, 2020, 09:43:18 pm
I guess you didn’t read the article that started this.

Looks like you read more into it than what it means
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 11, 2020, 09:45:21 pm
http://www.findingfascism.com/2017/06/a-re-evalution-of-laurence-britt.html?m=1

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 11, 2020, 10:17:05 pm
The Democrats look like they're well on their way to screwing up the election by nominating Bernie.  Trump has to be absolutely thrilled with how the Democratic nominating process is going so far.

If Bloomberg falls flat on Super Tuesday and/or if any more leaked audio comes out like the kind that did yesterday, well it's just amazing to me in this election that the Democrats may very well be nominating the absolute worst guy they can to go against Trump.  Then again, maybe it shouldn't be that amazing after all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 11, 2020, 10:52:46 pm
There is still plenty of time for Democrats to figure this out. I really wish Bloomberg would have run as an independent, I’m not sure billionaire guy is going to play well in there primary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 11, 2020, 10:52:59 pm
I really wish Harris or Booker had done better. Biden just should've stayed out of the race.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 11, 2020, 11:39:44 pm
The Democrats look like they're well on their way to screwing up the election by nominating Bernie.  Trump has to be absolutely thrilled with how the Democratic nominating process is going so far.

If Bloomberg falls flat on Super Tuesday and/or if any more leaked audio comes out like the kind that did yesterday, well it's just amazing to me in this election that the Democrats may very well be nominating the absolute worst guy they can to go against Trump.  Then again, maybe it shouldn't be that amazing after all.

Bernie is falling far short of his totals last time around. He won overwhelming majorities in virtually every county in NH in 2016. Yes, he won tonight, but this was actually a *very* poor showing for him.

This is still wide open.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 12, 2020, 06:59:02 am
Republicans where saying the same thing about Trump in 2016. Too big of a field will let somebody win with a lower vote total. Now the good thing is there is still plenty of time, but the Democrats don’t have many winner take all primaries so it will keep people from dropping out. The good thing is it keeps Bernie from racking up delegates as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 12, 2020, 07:40:49 am
Bernie is falling far short of his totals last time around. He won overwhelming majorities in virtually every county in NH in 2016. Yes, he won tonight, but this was actually a *very* poor showing for him.

This is still wide open.

I'm not sure I agree with that take on it.  He may have underperformed compared to 2016, but he still won.  If Iowa gets their mess finally cleaned up, he might be 2 for 2 so far in primary season and at the very worst has a win and a very close second.  FiveThirtyEight now has him with pretty solidly the best odds of winning the nomination out of the remaining candidates. 

People gravitate towards winners, and so far, he's winning. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 12, 2020, 09:03:48 am
Totally normal stuff happening with the DOJ. GOP talking about Bernie though. Thanks y’all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 12, 2020, 09:04:50 am
Because, you know, it’s not the actual people who voted for Trump and will do so again that’s the issue. Complicit racist fu*ks
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 12, 2020, 09:34:33 am
Because, you know, it’s not the actual people who voted for Trump and will do so again that’s the issue. Complicit racist fu*ks

I'm pretty sure Tico, JR and myself didn't vote for Trump.  Thanks for the feedback.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 12, 2020, 09:42:41 am
I'm pretty sure Tico, JR and myself didn't vote for Trump.  Thanks for the feedback.

Nobody said you did. Blaming the democrats for Trump’s election and saying they’re on their way to screwing up again is ridiculous. Hold the people who elected him responsible. And the party that is doing everything in its power and beyond it’s lawful power to keep him in office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 12, 2020, 10:02:46 am
It is the Democrats burden to nominate someone who can beat Trump. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 12, 2020, 10:10:49 am
Nobody said you did. Blaming the democrats for Trump’s election and saying they’re on their way to screwing up again is ridiculous. Hold the people who elected him responsible. And the party that is doing everything in its power and beyond it’s lawful power to keep him in office.
blue, I didn't vote for Trump either and most of the people who did weren't crazy about him but "couldn't" vote for Hillary.   Many Democrats in the area said that their party had put up a polarizing candidate.  I believe Biden would have won had he run.  Not sure about Sanders, but he would have been a clearer choice than Hillary.  Hell, Michelle would win if she ran.  The "machine" forced Hillary on the party. 

And, yes, I blame the Republicans too for not uniting behind a decent candidate to stop Trump.  They allowed the dick to thin the herd and put himself in the top position.  The media fell for the Trump game also, constantly pointing out his flaws and his lies but giving him necessary publicity. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 12, 2020, 10:17:46 am
It’s the people that voted for him and continue to support him that’s the primary problem. Didn’t realize this was controversial or debatable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 12, 2020, 10:20:09 am
And the complicit GOP.

https://twitter.com/maddow/status/1227610200758198275?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 12, 2020, 10:20:18 am
It’s the people that voted for him and continue to support him that’s the primary problem. Didn’t realize this was controversial or debatable.
A meaningful factor in the 2016 election was the number of people who voted against Hillary Clinton rather than for Donald Trump.  That has to be accounted for in 2020.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 12, 2020, 10:32:02 am
It is the Democrats burden to nominate someone who can beat Trump. 

Yeah that's 100% right.  If the Democrats nominate a terrible candidate who isn't going to appeal to enough people in enough states to win 270 electoral votes over the terrible human being we have as president right now, that's on them.  I'm not sure what anyone in the middle or center right can do about that.

James Carville touched on that with Chris Matthews a few days ago.  People in most of the states in the country don't want the far left positions that the likes of Sanders and Warren are promoting on the campaign trail.  It's not enough to point out that Trump is an unethical, sexual assaulting, government debt accumulating, religious phony with unsavory ties to Russia.  You need to nominate someone who enough people in enough states would be willing to vote for over that.  Otherwise, you'll just spend the next four years complaining about Trump and the electoral college again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 12, 2020, 10:39:01 am
When someone discusses "electability", they generally have no idea what they're talking about.  In this case, I think it will be much more about generating enthusiasm (i.e., turnout) than about position on issues.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 12, 2020, 10:41:02 am
Curious to know JR what makes Bernie or Warren less palatable than a compromised, criminal, racist rapist? The most amazing aspect is that he has gotten most of his base to vote against their own interests because they largely don’t like brown people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 12, 2020, 11:00:49 am
The US Government spent $4.45 Trillion last year.  The US GDP is $21.429 trillion.  If you take Sander's spending proposals at what he thinks the will cost and not more realistic numbers it will be an additional $9.7 trillion/year.  That is the federal government spending 66% of GDP/year which is sustainable.  The costs the Sanders and Warren are promoting are way to low so those spending numbers will be considerably higher.

The Republicans should have never nominated Trump and the Democrats should nominate someone that could beat him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on February 12, 2020, 11:14:21 am
Curious to know JR what makes Bernie or Warren less palatable than a compromised, criminal, racist rapist? The most amazing aspect is that he has gotten most of his base to vote against their own interests because they largely don’t like brown people.

Hey Blue, I wish I had a little more time to give a thoughtful answer (or what hopefully might pass for one) to that right now, but I'll try to get back to that later on today. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 12, 2020, 02:51:21 pm
I always hesitate to post something here because for the most part I like everyone on this board and have been with some of you more than 25 years in all talking Cubs. I try not to call names or pass judgements on people because of their views on here.

Our biggest problem in this country is not Donald Trump or Nancy Pelosi or taxes or the border. The biggest problem is we are no longer a country. We are Democrats and Republicans, gay and straight, conservative and liberal, men and women and everything in between. We used to be Americans first.

When Obama was elected I heard some on the right hoping the country would tank so he would fail. With Trump the other side has said the same thing. This polarization is the single biggest threat to our country we have ever faced. No foreign power, no 4 or 8 year run of a president can bring this great nation down. But this tribalism is far more dangerous than anything we have ever faced.

The problem is, I don't know what can be done to change it.  And BOTH sides are equally to blame for it. BOTH! We need to be Americans again first, and go back to civil discourse even and perhaps especially when we have differences with a fellow countryman. Unfortunately the only thing that could unite us like that is tragedy. But with things this bad I'm not even sure if that will be enough.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 13, 2020, 10:11:28 pm
Quote
Trump Cuts Scheduled Federal Pay Raise, Citing “Serious Economic Conditions” in the Country

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/02/trump-cuts-scheduled-federal-pay-raise-serious-economic-conditions.html

How is this possible in the best economy ever?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 13, 2020, 11:14:54 pm
"Amid an explosive outbreak of a novel coronavirus in China that has killed over 1,000 and sickened over 43,000 worldwide, US President Donald Trump proposed a nearly 19 percent budget cut to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—the agency primarily tasked with preparing for and responding to such outbreaks and other serious health threats."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 05:34:00 am
I always hesitate to post something here because for the most part I like everyone on this board and have been with some of you more than 25 years in all talking Cubs. I try not to call names or pass judgements on people because of their views on here.

Our biggest problem in this country is not Donald Trump or Nancy Pelosi or taxes or the border. The biggest problem is we are no longer a country. We are Democrats and Republicans, gay and straight, conservative and liberal, men and women and everything in between. We used to be Americans first.

When Obama was elected I heard some on the right hoping the country would tank so he would fail. With Trump the other side has said the same thing. This polarization is the single biggest threat to our country we have ever faced. No foreign power, no 4 or 8 year run of a president can bring this great nation down. But this tribalism is far more dangerous than anything we have ever faced.

The problem is, I don't know what can be done to change it.  And BOTH sides are equally to blame for it. BOTH! We need to be Americans again first, and go back to civil discourse even and perhaps especially when we have differences with a fellow countryman. Unfortunately the only thing that could unite us like that is tragedy. But with things this bad I'm not even sure if that will be enough.

Thank you for your amazing restraint.

Can you reconcile these comments?

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-04/billy-bush-says-infamous-access-hollywood-trump-tape-is-real/9224358
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 05:43:10 am


https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1228096916107468800?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 14, 2020, 07:29:57 am
"Amid an explosive outbreak of a novel coronavirus in China that has killed over 1,000 and sickened over 43,000 worldwide, US President Donald Trump proposed a nearly 19 percent budget cut to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—the agency primarily tasked with preparing for and responding to such outbreaks and other serious health threats."

The numbers China is releasing are worthless. Until it spreads to a country that will release worth while data the true danger is difficult to project. Some UK infectious disease doctor was guessing at rates that would mean 2,000,000 dead in the US.  My hunch is it won’t be that bad, but that is just a hunch and I can’t imagine something that bad type of thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 14, 2020, 08:24:14 am
The numbers China is releasing are worthless. Until it spreads to a country that will release worth while data the true danger is difficult to project. Some UK infectious disease doctor was guessing at rates that would mean 2,000,000 dead in the US.  My hunch is it won’t be that bad, but that is just a hunch and I can’t imagine something that bad type of thing.
The draconian steps China is taking indicate they consider the coronavirus problem could possibly become a pandemic.  Cutting the CDC budget by 19% while the outcome is still unknown seems counterintuitive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 14, 2020, 08:38:13 am
Thank you for your amazing restraint.

Can you reconcile these comments?

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-04/billy-bush-says-infamous-access-hollywood-trump-tape-is-real/9224358
I don't care what others have said, I can't change them. I can change my own discourse with others regardless of their views. Let's take a look at one of your posts above.

"Because, you know, it’s not the actual people who voted for Trump and will do so again that’s the issue. Complicit racist fu*ks.".

Do you really believe that 62 million people in this country are all racists f*cks? I refuse to defend Trump, who should really have his Twitter account deleted and quit worrying about the media. But I will defend those who voted for him. Your sweeping generalization is exactly the problem here. I know many good, charitable, thoughtful people who voted for Trump. I know others equal in all measures who voted for Clinton. Labelling 62 million as racist because they disagree with you politically is as bad as anything Trump has said. I could write something about casting out the beam in your own eye but I doubt it would have any effect.

As I have stated many times here I did not vote for Trump last election. I will however be voting for him this November. Not because I admire the man or think him a role model in any way, but because his policies are working. Almost across the board. I understand your hatred for the man. But I think what is perhaps the worst possible outcome of his presidency for liberals is showing that conservative policies work. This fall I believe you will again be shocked, perhaps even more so by the number of states that vote for Trump. If an increasing number of your fellow countrymen vote him in again will they too be grouped into your racist f*ck category?

By the way, in some polls Trump has a 25% approval rating among African Americans. If even half that percentage vote Trump the election is over. Would they be racist too? Just wondering.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 14, 2020, 08:48:46 am
Trump proposing cutting the CDC budget is stupi, but when is the last time the government actually passed a budget?  President Obama’s first term?  President Trump’s budget is DOA in house anyway.

China is treating it like it will be a pandemic because the flubbed the initial response. The question isn’t if it is going to be a pandemic. The question is if it going going to be a holy **** pandemic or just a run of the pandemic. China’s is under reporting cases and deaths from the virus and until it gets to a country that will give actual numbers projecting how bad it will is a question that can’t be answered.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 14, 2020, 08:59:50 am
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 09:06:35 am
Yes. If you vote and or support Trump, you are complicit. And subsequently a racist f*ck. Why’s that difficult?

Also what does that mean that you don’t care what others have said? That link was literally Trump speaking. And you are fine with it. And you’re voting for him.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 09:39:20 am
Also, across the board his policies are working is ludicrous. Gtfo
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 09:56:37 am
The last White House press brief was March 11, 2019. That is wild.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 10:09:39 am
Trump proposing cutting the CDC budget is stupi, but when is the last time the government actually passed a budget?  President Obama’s first term?  President Trump’s budget is DOA in house anyway.

China is treating it like it will be a pandemic because the flubbed the initial response. The question isn’t if it is going to be a pandemic. The question is if it going going to be a holy **** pandemic or just a run of the pandemic. China’s is under reporting cases and deaths from the virus and until it gets to a country that will give actual numbers projecting how bad it will is a question that can’t be answered.

Thoughts on this WSJ article?

https://twitter.com/michaelcbender/status/1228335868202672129?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 14, 2020, 10:12:54 am
I don't care what others have said, I can't change them. I can change my own discourse with others regardless of their views. Let's take a look at one of your posts above.

"Because, you know, it’s not the actual people who voted for Trump and will do so again that’s the issue. Complicit racist fu*ks.".

Do you really believe that 62 million people in this country are all racists f*cks? I refuse to defend Trump, who should really have his Twitter account deleted and quit worrying about the media. But I will defend those who voted for him. Your sweeping generalization is exactly the problem here. I know many good, charitable, thoughtful people who voted for Trump. I know others equal in all measures who voted for Clinton. Labelling 62 million as racist because they disagree with you politically is as bad as anything Trump has said. I could write something about casting out the beam in your own eye but I doubt it would have any effect.

As I have stated many times here I did not vote for Trump last election. I will however be voting for him this November. Not because I admire the man or think him a role model in any way, but because his policies are working. Almost across the board. I understand your hatred for the man. But I think what is perhaps the worst possible outcome of his presidency for liberals is showing that conservative policies work. This fall I believe you will again be shocked, perhaps even more so by the number of states that vote for Trump. If an increasing number of your fellow countrymen vote him in again will they too be grouped into your racist f*ck category?

By the way, in some polls Trump has a 25% approval rating among African Americans. If even half that percentage vote Trump the election is over. Would they be racist too? Just wondering.

This country is deeply racist.  And, the trump supporter segment especially so. If you vote for him now, knowing exactly what he has done and will do and knowing the kind of people who are very influential on his policy decisions (Stephen Miller), the only conclusion is that you support those incredibly racist policies and you, too, are a deeply racist person. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 14, 2020, 10:14:19 am
Also, across the board his policies are working is ludicrous. Gtfo

This is the thing that just blows my mind. I guess if you are in favor of white nationalism, fiscal and environmental ruin, it’s all going great.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 10:30:38 am
Right. It’s insane.

 Legit want to hear from a reasonable GOP member of this forum like JR. When he has a chance, of course.

Instead of just flatly rejecting Liz or Sanders or whomever, why Trump? Ultimately it’s either complicity or tacit endorsement not voting otherwise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 14, 2020, 10:53:50 am
Thank you for perfectly illustrating my point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 14, 2020, 11:03:37 am
Thank you for perfectly illustrating my point.

Your point is stupid and self-serving. You want all the benefits of trump’s racist policies with none of the responsibility. Sorry it doesn’t work that way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 11:19:01 am
It’s a buffet apparently.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 11:19:40 am
But like Jim Crow is the only cashier
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 14, 2020, 12:41:47 pm
Thoughts on this WSJ article?

https://twitter.com/michaelcbender/status/1228335868202672129?s=21

That was what I was referring to.  If you extrapolate the worse case would be around 2 million dead in the US.  How infectious and fatal it is dependent on China's numbers and they aren't worth ****.  To put in context, last year was a really bad influenza year and that killed around 85,000.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 14, 2020, 02:12:41 pm
Got ya. Thanks, CUB.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 14, 2020, 06:15:40 pm
Your point is stupid and self-serving. You want all the benefits of trump’s racist policies with none of the responsibility. Sorry it doesn’t work that way.
The left throws around racism so much it is hard to track. Which racist policy am I accused of supporting again? Criminal justice reform which affects African Americans more than any other race?

Or historically low unemployment among minorities?

Or is it the increased wages for lower income people?

I would argue that the left's continued support for Planned Parenthood, abortions on demand and placement of abortion clinics in minority dominated neighborhoods is racist. Why so many abortions of minorities since Roe V Wade? A disproportionate percentage. The founder of Planned Parenthood had some very racist beliefs. Are they simply fulfilling her mission?

Why did no Democrats vote for the civil Rights act? Racism? I could go on and on. Regular Americans are starting to tune you out. You've cried wolf every time you need the black vote. For fifty years minorities have lined up with the Democrats. Their cities are run by Democrats. Many of their states are run by Democrats, for 8 years Obama was President. 2 of those years he had a super majority. What did any of those leaders do for black Americans? What is the state of too many of their neighborhoods? Their schools? How many would be safer in Afghanistan than their home?

You can't blame racist Republicans or even Donald Trump. They are not elected in those places. But keep crying racism!! It might work a little longer in some areas. But eventually the horse will be buried and like a drug taken too long, this tired argument will have little to no effect.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on February 14, 2020, 08:00:23 pm
I guess we are a    s h i t    hole country but that's ok    my pocket book is doing great
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 14, 2020, 08:31:51 pm
Thank you for your amazing restraint.

Can you reconcile these comments?

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-04/billy-bush-says-infamous-access-hollywood-trump-tape-is-real/9224358

What is it you want reconciled?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 14, 2020, 08:42:14 pm
Why did no Democrats vote for the civil Rights act? Racism? I could go on and on.

Say what?

What civil rights act are you talking about?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 14, 2020, 10:33:03 pm
I amend my statement. Who opposed the civil Rights act in the 50' and 60's? Who filibustered the Senate for 75 days in 1964 to keep the first civil Rights act from going to a vote? Which party founded the klan? What were the political leanings of the justices who voted for and against in the Dred Scott decision? Once the Democrats knew they could not keep the blacks from voting they changed suddenly. Republicans were now racist for opposing the welfare state that has so decimated black families and kept them relying on big government to survive. The Rebublican party was founded specifically to oppose slavery. The Democrats rely on it in one form or the other.

There now, a perfect sweeping generalization that no doubt applies to some but not to many others who no doubt know everything I just wrote, yet still vote Democrat. Should all of you be included in the racist f*cks category?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on February 15, 2020, 06:36:47 pm
Robb, don’t take the bait.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 16, 2020, 09:09:17 pm
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1229241162256527360?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 20, 2020, 11:31:11 am
Bill Sharp, or anyone else with actual knowledge.

Can the President pardon someone convicted on state charges, or can he only do so (as I suspect) for Federal charges?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on February 20, 2020, 12:27:09 pm
Quote
Can the President pardon someone convicted on state charges, or can he only do so (as I suspect) for Federal charges?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_pardons_in_the_United_States

The president's pardon power is limited to federal offenses because the Constitution only grants the president the power to pardon "offenses against the United States." An offense that solely violates state law is not an offense against the United States. Experts disagree as to whether presidents can pardon themselves, and there is disagreement about how the pardon power applies to cases involving obstructions of an impeachment. The pardon can also be used for a presumptive case, such as when President Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon over any possible crimes regarding the Watergate scandal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on February 20, 2020, 09:11:09 pm
https://twitter.com/claudiakoerner/status/1230655162139791364

Normal stuff
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 26, 2020, 02:39:02 pm
https://www.mail.com/news/politics/9758514-court-sides-with-trump-sanctuary-cities-grant-figh.html#.7518-stage-hero1-1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 28, 2020, 09:58:24 am
Ooof. Almost feels like the stock market has zero confidence in the Trump administration's ability to deal with the upcoming potential pandemic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 28, 2020, 10:10:25 am
When you have the worst, dumbest, and least qualified president in the history of the country, it was inevitable that the house of cards would collapse. It's really a miracle that he didn't have a real global crisis until now.  The fact that he would be a like a deer in headlights and have no idea what to do or how to lead was known. It was just a question of what problem would arise to make this 100% clear. Thankfully, on the list of things that could have happened, this one is less likely to have real serious long-term effects. But, hopefully this amateur hour in DC is enough to get voters to do the right thing and get rid of these people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 28, 2020, 10:21:57 am
Not to say that Trump is competent in any way, but China is the one the screwed the pouch.  Whoever is in DC would be playing catchup.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 28, 2020, 10:26:31 am
I would presume if someone else was in DC they would not have cut funding for the CDC global nfectious diseases unit by 80% of the last 3 years.  Trump is going to own this...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 28, 2020, 10:48:10 am
Not to say that Trump is competent in any way, but China is the one the screwed the pouch.  Whoever is in DC would be playing catchup.

Well, when you need to play catch-up, seems like you should put a scientist with some expertise in epidemiology in charge of the response.

Trump? He went to his vice president. You know, the guy who does not accept evolution, denies that climate change is real, and believes that conversion "therapy" is a good thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 28, 2020, 11:06:40 am
Biden was in charge of the Ebola scare.

There isn't any stopping this once it got outside of China.  A vaccine won't be ready for years and viral drugs don't really do a whole a lot.  Since it sounds like people that aren't sick can spread the virus this is going to be a world wide problem.  No amount of CDC funding, epidemiologist is going to stop this.  The only hope is that China under reported the numbers of infected and that it is less fatal than what the China numbers make it look like.

Here is an article that talks about vaccine development for this and the time frame.  It takes Trump to task as well, but again whatever Washington does isn't going to change this. 

https://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/coronavirus-vaccine-development-donald-trump-wrong/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on February 28, 2020, 11:50:01 am
Ooof. Almost feels like the stock market has zero confidence in the Trump administration's ability to deal with the upcoming potential pandemic.
Could part of the reason be his appointing a lobbyist for a pharmaceutical company to take care of things?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 28, 2020, 01:01:12 pm
This **** is killing a smaller percentage of people than the flu does.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 28, 2020, 02:10:55 pm
Incorrect Dusty thus far it has about it 3% fatality rate 3% of people that get the flu do not die.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on February 28, 2020, 02:19:08 pm
What I mean is 30,000 people a year die of the flu and its usually unhealthy people that die from that.

The coronoavirus hasnt touched those numbers and a Dr. told me that only older and unhealthy people would die from it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 28, 2020, 02:25:37 pm
Well Dusty that's what this panic is about... That the disease is going to become a new version of the flu that is endemic to the population.  As it spreads more and more people will die.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 28, 2020, 02:28:51 pm
It's easy to see how misinformation gets propagated.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 28, 2020, 02:35:59 pm
It's easy to see how misinformation gets propagated.

Yes when people choose to use these events for political gain they tend to spread false and misleading information.

You don’t have to look very far to see it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 28, 2020, 02:38:36 pm
Yes when people choose to use these events for political gain they tend to spread false and misleading information.

You don’t have to look very far to see it.

This is Trump's MO for everything. Nothing is says is honest and everything is for his own gain.  But, you don't care for some reason.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on February 28, 2020, 02:42:57 pm
This is Trump's MO for everything. Nothing is says is honest and everything is for his own gain.  But, you don't care for some reason.

Wow you’re really way off thinking Trump has anything to gain here.

But I doubt anyone is surprised you would think that way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 28, 2020, 02:49:24 pm
Well Dusty that's what this panic is about... That the disease is going to become a new version of the flu that is endemic to the population.  As it spreads more and more people will die.

Those numbers are based on China that likely under reported the number of actual cases.  Worst case is China is true and you're looking at 4% fatality rate.  Best case is it is closer to the flu, but there isn't a vaccine so more people are going to get sick.  I'm not sure I really buy that just the old are going to die.  If it hits the elderly it usually will get young kids as well and that hasn't been reported.  People just need to calm down for now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on February 28, 2020, 04:34:32 pm
I would presume if someone else was in DC they would not have cut funding for the CDC global nfectious diseases unit by 80% of the last 3 years.  Trump is going to own this...

According to the AP, funding for the CDC was not cut at all.  https://apnews.com/d36d6c4de29f4d04beda3db00cb46104

"For starters, Trump hasn’t succeeded in cutting the budget.  He’s proposed cuts but Congress ignored him and increased financing instead. The National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention aren’t suffering from budget cuts that never took effect."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on February 29, 2020, 06:51:30 am
This isn't a time for politics and blaming the other side.  This is a time to come together as a country and prepare the best we can.  The only thing Trump could have done to stop this would have been to nuke China before it spread.  But blame him by all means. 

Hoping that thousands of people dying will at least keep Trump from being elected is beyond horrid. Do you even hear yourself?  If you truly feel this way you are far worse than anything you accuse Trump of being. 

I know no one wants to hear it but global plagues are mentioned in a very old book as signs of the times. Perhaps global pandemics, increased natural calamities,  political upheaval, the hearts of men growing cold,  a rejection of morality, addiction to pornagraphy and the rise of tribalism are signs we need to return to God. Nah, that cant be it.  It's  man made climate change and Trump who is at fault.  Amazing what the man has accomplished in three years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on February 29, 2020, 10:37:29 am
What I mean is 30,000 people a year die of the flu and its usually unhealthy people that die from that.

The coronoavirus hasnt touched those numbers and a Dr. told me that only older and unhealthy people would die from it.

It's easy to see how misinformation gets propagated.

True.  Perhaps a more scientific study will shed some light on the subject.  According to the Journal of American Medical Association

Mortality rate of Coronavirus in China

Over 80 years of age                – 15 %
Diabetes                                  – 7 %
Coronary arterial disease          – 10.5 %
Children under 9 years old        – 0 % (Not one single child under 9 has died in China thus far out of the more than two thousand deaths.

The mortality rate outside of China – 0.7 %
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 29, 2020, 11:42:39 am
The 0.7% fatality rate would get it closer to the influenza. The flu last year killed 85,000 in the US with a vaccine.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 02, 2020, 02:22:17 pm
The flu in the US affects about 32,000,000 million people per year. In a typical year 31,000 will die from it, put its morality rate at about 0.01%


Current numbers on the coronavirus has 89,000 affected with about 3,000 deaths.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 02, 2020, 02:26:08 pm
CUBbluejay


Not sure why you would add the "with vaccine" part to your post since there is no one flu and less than 50% of 18+ adults in the US bother to get the shot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 02, 2020, 03:17:54 pm
The flu in the US affects about 32,000,000 million people per year. In a typical year 31,000 will die from it, put its morality rate at about 0.01%


Current numbers on the coronavirus has 89,000 affected with about 3,000 deaths.

CUBbluejay


Not sure why you would add the "with vaccine" part to your post since there is no one flu and less than 50% of 18+ adults in the US bother to get the shot.

The affected numbers are under reported for coronoa virus. 
The US Infleunza mortality does not equal world wide mortality.
The vaccine covers 4 strains of influenza and those the get the shot are much less likely to die form influenza than those that don't.  In the US 80-90% of deaths are in the unvaccinated, so without the vaccine the mortality rate would be much higher.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on March 04, 2020, 01:39:07 pm
I agree
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 04, 2020, 08:28:23 pm
If that doesn't give one pause, nothing will.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 12, 2020, 01:20:07 pm
Not a conspiracy nut, but does anyone else find it odd that Russia has only 7 confirmed cases of COVID19? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 12, 2020, 01:54:17 pm
Cause they aren't testing most likely.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 12, 2020, 02:09:04 pm
Ive definitely found that the doom and gloom is much stronger here than anywhere else Ive been/seen.

No one around these parts seem to give it anywhere near as much thought as you all have me doing.

This isnt productive for a worrier.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 12, 2020, 02:27:31 pm
What, me worry?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 12, 2020, 02:32:21 pm
No.

Me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on March 12, 2020, 03:16:33 pm
And as I say that Knox Co. has its first confirmed case.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron Green on March 14, 2020, 10:31:36 am
And as I say that Knox Co. has its first confirmed case.

At this moment each of the first six news stories at https://www.knoxnews.com/ (the internet site for the Knoxville News Sentinel, the daily newspaper for Knoxville) deal with the corona virus.  It might be that you are misreading the local concern with the corona virus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 25, 2020, 04:27:32 pm
Just... wow.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1242905328209080331
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 25, 2020, 04:36:28 pm
He definitely spends too much time stroking his own ego.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 25, 2020, 04:41:15 pm
There are times so wish somebody could send him to his room and take his phone away and let the adults actually take care of things.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 25, 2020, 04:53:53 pm
Who could have seen this coming?  Oh wait, one person did.

Hillary Clinton
@HillaryClinton
Just imagine Donald Trump in the Oval Office facing a real crisis. We can’t afford that kind of risk.
2:56 PM · Aug 8, 2016·TweetDeck
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 26, 2020, 12:15:09 am
This stimulus bill is a train wreck. Instead of solidifying the economy Congress has given themselves a raise and put every pork project into the bill they ever dreamed up. 2 trillion dollars? Our country is screwed no matter which party is in power. 

But hey, at least I get my 4400 bucks in a few weeks! I am donating it,  i don't want their filthy lucre.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on March 26, 2020, 07:30:43 pm
This stimulus bill is a train wreck. Instead of solidifying the economy Congress has given themselves a raise and put every pork project into the bill they ever dreamed up. 2 trillion dollars? Our country is screwed no matter which party is in power. 

But hey, at least I get my 4400 bucks in a few weeks! I am donating it,  i don't want their filthy lucre.

It's actually YOUR filthy lucre.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 27, 2020, 08:01:42 am
No it is printed money from nothing.  Every country that has tried this has failed.  Greece is the latest but were small enough to be bailed out by the EU. There is no country that could bail us out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 27, 2020, 08:09:20 am
Lol. This is what you voted for. Donald Trump and his buddies are big believers in mondern monetary theory... Which posits that governments can run negative interest rates and unlimited debt....

Enjoy!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 27, 2020, 08:31:07 am
There is difference between doing short term stimulus vs Greece.

I thought AOC was the believer in modern monetary theory?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 27, 2020, 08:39:48 am
Manuchin and Kushner are right there with her.. they just believe in using the debt for other purposes.

Trump has repeatedly said he doesn't care about debt. It's not his problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 27, 2020, 09:09:15 am
I have watched every press conference that Trump has had for over a month.  What he has been saying is that in this particular instance, he does not care if our actions to contain the damage to our people and our economy negatively affect the debt SINCE THE CURRENT SHORT TERM CRISIS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE LONG TERM DEBT PROBLEM.

But, of course, this is just as disingenuous as what all politicians say.  The number of politicians of BOTH sides that actually have an interest in lowering the debt is close to zero.  Without the debt, neither side could buy votes, and both sides would happily trade debt increase for the associated power they gain.

Trump is NOT a conservative on most issues.  He is a populist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 27, 2020, 09:20:54 am
I have watched every press conference that Trump has had for over a month.  What he has been saying is that in this particular instance, he does not care if our actions to contain the damage to our people and our economy negatively affect the debt SINCE THE CURRENT SHORT TERM CRISIS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE LONG TERM DEBT PROBLEM.

But, of course, this is just as disingenuous as what all politicians say.  The number of politicians of BOTH sides that actually have an interest in lowering the debt is close to zero.  Without the debt, neither side could buy votes, and both sides would happily trade debt increase for the associated power they gain.

Trump is NOT a conservative on most issues.  He is a populist.

Oh, please. Trump has said nothing remotely close to this. A few weeks ago he was calling this a hoax. “We’ll get to 15 cases and then it will all disappear, like a miracle!” He goes back and forth depending on which way the Fox News wind is blowing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 27, 2020, 11:01:59 am
I don't know what you watched, Tico, but that is pretty much exactly what he said. 

If you are really interested in "word for word" accuracy rather than a paraphrase, can you show me where he said

"he doesn't care about debt. It's not his problem."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 27, 2020, 11:47:36 am
I don't know what you watched, Tico, but that is pretty much exactly what he said. 

If you are really interested in "word for word" accuracy rather than a paraphrase, can you show me where he said

"he doesn't care about debt. It's not his problem."

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-debt-crisis-fine-wont-be-here-report-2018-12
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 27, 2020, 11:50:07 am
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-debt-crisis-fine-wont-be-here-report-2018-12

All the Trumpers will latch onto the word "reportedly" and dismiss this as fake news. They have figured out a way to dismiss things that come straight out of his mouth as fake so there is no way they are going to believe something that is reportedly true.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on March 27, 2020, 02:30:36 pm
Cletus is right, for once.  Anyone with any sense will realize that the same people that "reportedly" said that Trump would be indicted by the Muller investigation, that the White House was in chaos, that Bolton would bring down Trump's Presidency, and ceased flights from China in January, have found something new to "report".

Perhaps if they would cite the names and positions of their "report" we could use other than our prejudices to evaluate them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 27, 2020, 03:02:56 pm
Nice tax cut for Trump in the stimulus deal... this is just absurd.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 27, 2020, 03:04:27 pm
https://www.businessinsider.com/wealthy-real-estate-investors-get-tax-cut-in-coronavirus-stimulus-2020-3

For a mere 180 billion over 10 years. This seems... totally needed and legit. just wow.

At this point... Anyone who thinks Trump is in this for "America" vs himself... really needs to re-evaluate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 27, 2020, 04:00:31 pm
Trump just yesterday states and asking for medical equipment they won’t need. Trump today uses DPA to force GM to make ventilators.  Great work.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 27, 2020, 04:03:08 pm
After backing out of a contract with GM... i am so confused.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 27, 2020, 04:03:47 pm
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-lashes-out-at-general-motors-over-ventilators-11585327749

Have not seen that he's used the DPA...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 27, 2020, 04:07:45 pm
Trump just yesterday states and asking for medical equipment they won’t need. Trump today uses DPA to force GM to make ventilators.  Great work.

And, yelling at them for not using  a plant they sold last year. He takes the idiocy to a new level.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 27, 2020, 04:54:25 pm
I don't know what you watched, Tico, but that is pretty much exactly what he said. 

If you are really interested in "word for word" accuracy rather than a paraphrase, can you show me where he said

"he doesn't care about debt. It's not his problem."

I never said anything remotely close to "Trump doesn't care about debt" (though he has made several "not my problem/I don't take responsibility" comments.)

I said Trump never had any kind of coherent, reasoned strategy to begin with, debt-related or otherwise. I mean, the government is currently spending TRILLIONS but the Trump admin just walked away from a paltry (by comparison) billion dollar contract for ventilators. If there has been any "strategy" it was to ignore this thing as long as possible.

I'm not the one who made the initial claim about Trump's strategy. You did. I challenged it with a verbatim quote from Trump. So no, I'm not going to dig up additional quotes for you to dismiss when you haven't put in the same effort.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 27, 2020, 05:14:44 pm
Trump’s COVID strategy is like a cat chasing a laser pointer.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 27, 2020, 05:23:24 pm
Trump currently on TV saying governors need to be nice to him if they want aid, specifically calling out Inslee and "that woman" from Michigan.

The "that woman" bit is intentionally chauvinistic. And as a resident of Washington, I've had a front-row seat to Inslee's response to the coronavirus. Inslee's leadership in this crisis has been extraordinary, and as a result, Washington is showing very positive trends towards flattening the curve.

Trump is a sociopathic, narcissistic, incompetent mobster. A loathsome, orange piece of S H I T. And he is sacrificing American lives on the altar of his ego.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 27, 2020, 05:25:52 pm
Good Donald. You’re a good boy. Go fetch my PPE and ventilators. Good Donald.

We have a freaking toddler in the White House.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 27, 2020, 05:36:44 pm
Dear Jesus this presser is terrible. Markets tanked today despite the stimulus bill signing. I can only imagine what would be happening right now if they were still open.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 27, 2020, 05:41:50 pm
Washington and Inslee have done an excellent job.

Deblasio botched NYC response.

Pete Ricketts might have done the best job in the nation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 27, 2020, 05:44:30 pm
"You can call this a flu, or a germ, or a virus, and actually nobody even knows what it is."

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 27, 2020, 05:47:25 pm
But doctors are amazed at his understanding.

I just laughed so hard I need to get a hernia repaired, too bad I have to wait 3 months.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 27, 2020, 05:52:10 pm
Lots of people, including some on this very board, are going to vote for more of this. It boggles the mind.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 27, 2020, 05:55:50 pm
Q: will everyone who needs a ventilator be able to get one?

TRUMP: "don't be a cutie pie."


Excerpts from the dystopian classic Trump in the Time of Corona.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 28, 2020, 08:59:27 am
I readily call out Trump for his stupidity. I didn't notice anyone here complaining about Pelosi nearly derailing the bill by putting  every pork project from the dem wish list into it to try to press that agenda during a time of crisis. She and Schumer are every bit as deplorable  as Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 28, 2020, 09:06:46 am
And the failing here is shared by all.  After H1N1 the Obama admin was told to replace the 100 million masks used from the national stockpile. They didn't do it.  https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/03/25/after-last-pandemic-task-force-advised-obama-to-avert-shortage-of-masks/  The Trump admin didn't either.  My guess is,  future admins will take this stuff seriously.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 28, 2020, 09:47:53 am
I readily call out Trump for his stupidity. I didn't notice anyone here complaining about Pelosi nearly derailing the bill by putting  every pork project from the dem wish list into it to try to press that agenda during a time of crisis. She and Schumer are every bit as deplorable  as Trump.

You still will vote for him so go **** yourself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 28, 2020, 10:34:27 am
Robb, your continual whataboutism with Obama is beneath you. The both-sides-ism is childish. And the notion that “Pelosi nearly derail[ed] the bill by putting every pork project from the dem wish list into it” is either complete and total ignorance due to being lost in the delusional right-wing hive mind, or it’s a blatant lie. No such thing is even remotely close to the faintest shadow of the truth. Are you really this far gone? Are you this lost to reality and objective fact? I have sincerely thought for quite some time that you are better than this.

No, this failing is not shared by all, not in the way you mean it, not even close. Who is the president? Who has been the president for over 3 years? Give an unqualified, no-excuses answer to that question and sit with it for a while. Really think about what that means in terms of responsibility. Be an adult, and do not devolve into the childish blame shifting, obfuscation, and projection of Trump.

If you can do that, perhaps we can walk through some of the history here, but I’m not wasting my time or energy on this discussion unless you can come to a baseline level of objectivity.

This bullshit has got to stop.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 28, 2020, 11:29:35 am
Tico, you continue to miss my point either willfully or ignorantly. I doubt the latter of you so I'll assume the first. My point has been and continues to be that both sides are at fault, both sides make mistakes, both sides are out for their own self interest, both sides are corrupt. I readily admit that. Why can't you?

Speaking of bullshit, please explain how Pelosi trying to insert any of the following into the bill is not pork:

1. Restructuring Corporate Boards - Aid Recipients Must Allow Labor to Appoint One-Third of Corporate Board Members
In other words, if companies accept aid from the federal government at a moment when, because of a completely unforeseeable global catastrophe, demand has cratered in response to a lethal pandemic, the House bill would force them to completely upend their boards of directors to no conceivable end other than the fulfillment of a longstanding progressive wish

2.Requiring States to Allow Same-Day Voter Registration

Amending the Help America Vote Act to Require States to Accommodate Same-Day Registrants

Requiring states to allow same day voter registration helps stave off the pandemic how?

3. Deinstitutionalization

Reauthorization of Money Follows the Person

This is controversial measure that has to do with forcing some in long term care into group home settings. Whether you like this or not it has nothing to do with the pandemic and should be debated on its own merits.

4.  Environmental Regulations

Grant Program for “Sustainable Aviation Fuel”

The Transportation secretary would be given the power to disburse grant monies based upon the “potential greenhouse gases emitted from” an applicant’s project and the “potential the project has in reducing United States greenhouse gas emissions associated with air travel.” Two hundred million dollars would be appropriated annually to the grant program.  And this will help alleviate the effects of the pandemic how?

5. Mandatory Carbon Offsets for Airlines

Every airline receiving federal aid would be required to “fully offset [its] annual carbon emissions [from] domestic flights beginning in 2025.” 

6. 25 Million to the Kennedy Arts Center

I could go on, that isn't the entire list. Can you defend any of those provisions in a Corona Virus relief bill? Do you not acknowledge the cynicism, the opportunism, the immorality of such an act at such a time? If not I don't know what to say to you. Perhaps it's Trump's fault?

I am against corporate bailouts, I am against running up large deficits so the government can be everything to everyone in order for politicians to win votes. Both sides do this. Both sides are reprehensible and without principal collectively. There are individuals who buck that trend but they are swallowed up by the swamp. Why is this such an affront to you Tico? This is indeed a failing shared by all. The mayor of New Orleans blamed Trump for not shutting down Mardi Gras. Really? The NY city health commissioner was out telling New Yorkers to go out and go to restaurants, that everything was fine and under control, that the city was prepared for this less than a month ago. Trump's fault?

Finally, I have to chuckle at being told to be an adult when nearly every comment you make in this thread involves a tantrum. Perhaps some introspection is in order. I very seldom devolve into name calling here, I try to keep my arguments dispassionate and reasoned. Sometimes I fail, admittedly, but nearly every post you make with someone who disagrees with you devolves into heated emotional rhetoric demanding capitulation or the offender is deemed childish, an obfuscator and a projection of Trump, to use your own words from your last post.

How about you take a deep breath, understand at least half the country disagrees with you, no matter the demographics of this board, and try to understand their legitimate reasons for doing so. I believe I can see where liberals are coming from. i do not question their motives, their religion, their character or their maturity, I simply disagree with their philosophy of government. Is that still okay in this country?







Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 28, 2020, 01:03:09 pm
Kennedy Art Center is now not going to pay their musicians after getting the money. Is it possible the money gets redirected to something better? 

There is going to be plenty of blame to go around to both parties, but that doesn’t excuse President Trump for acting like a toddler durning press conferences and being generally useless to harmful during this.  I can’t imagine being Dr Fauci or Dr Brix and having to stroke President Trump ego to keep him from doing stupid crap. I guess this is why I’m not built for politics.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 28, 2020, 05:01:37 pm
I agree, I wish he would stop showing up for the press conferences. Let the doctors handle it. They both come across as competent.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 29, 2020, 08:48:55 am
The quantity of disinformation that Trump has spread on this issue... is breath taking. There are people in the country who now listen to science as a matter of the presidents "gut" instinct.  If his gut doesnt agree its obviously fake news and nothing to we need worry.

Look at the difference in response in S. Korea to our dear leader... the two countries reported their first case a day apart in January. 2 months later we're in the middle of a terrible sci fi movie, and they see day light.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 29, 2020, 03:59:46 pm
I do hope that whoever wins the white house this fall does the right thing and takes a look back and studies all the things done wrong and prepares the country for the next pandemic. With globalization and for other reasons I believe this is just the first volley. Figure this stuff out, take it seriously, create policies that can quickly respond and don't let it return to a backburner issue. Use this time of heightened awareness to focus on lessons learned.

Americans need to become more self sufficient, have a supply of food and water and essentials including an emergency fund instead of spending every dollar they make. I hope we emerge from this wiser as a country and government. I suppose finger pointing will be inevitable, but more important to me is the need to learn from it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 29, 2020, 04:02:51 pm
I do hope that whoever wins the white house this fall does the right thing and takes a look back and studies all the things done wrong and prepares the country for the next pandemic. With globalization and for other reasons I believe this is just the first volley. Figure this stuff out, take it seriously, create policies that can quickly respond and don't let it return to a backburner issue. Use this time of heightened awareness to focus on lessons learned.

Americans need to become more self sufficient, have a supply of food and water and essentials including an emergency fund instead of spending every dollar they make. I hope we emerge from this wiser as a country and government. I suppose finger pointing will be inevitable, but more important to me is the need to learn from it.

You’d better hope Biden wins.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 29, 2020, 07:23:22 pm
Hey Robb, I see and appreciate that you responded to my previous post. Been a very busy few days for me. Just calling out that I'm not ignoring you and plan on responding thoughtfully.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on March 31, 2020, 06:01:38 am
What the ****

https://twitter.com/jackmjenkins/status/1244739744992563200?s=21

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 31, 2020, 08:11:03 am
What the ****

https://twitter.com/jackmjenkins/status/1244739744992563200?s=21

Unfortunately, these are his best people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on March 31, 2020, 08:20:56 am
He did revamp his factory to make 50,000 masks a day so maybe that's why he was featured. Our country was founded on a belief in God. Why are his words so terrifying? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on March 31, 2020, 08:31:40 am
Are you a parody account like Ken M? I can’t tell if you’re just taking the **** or not. Hoping the guy regularly caping for a racist shithead demagogue as president and who repeatedly has stated homosexuality is a “lifestyle” is just trolling. But maybe the it’s the cult you belong to and you actually believe that the MyPillow Guy should be holding court in the Rose Garden to announce that Donald F’n Trump was a gift from God during a pandemic crisis that is taking hundreds of thousands of lives daily.

And spare me your no civility act. You writing tomes trying to both sides everything is disgusting. I will point that out every time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 31, 2020, 09:06:48 am
He did revamp his factory to make 50,000 masks a day so maybe that's why he was featured. Our country was founded on a belief in God. Why are his words so terrifying?

Sure, give the guy a shout out and thank him. Don’t give him the mic and let him spout out his ancient superstitious bullshit. His religion is a blight on humanity and should not be given any sort of public outlet like that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on March 31, 2020, 09:15:39 am
The man who praised white supremacists and bragged about groping women and said that CoVID poses very little threat to the US and is well under control  is a god send. Sounds about right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 01, 2020, 09:32:07 am
The Mypillow guy disagrees with you politically, he also sees things differently regarding our president. That doesn't make him a POS. It simply puts him in line with about half of America, who are not all racists. I find it amazing that the arm-chair quarterbacks apparently expected a perfect response to the first world wide pandemic of our time. Of course the administration has made and will continue to make mistakes. Presidents have always tried to calm the fears of the nation to abate panic. Trump did following:

• Jan. 7: The CDC established a coronavirus incident management system to better share and respond to information about the virus.

• Jan. 17: The CDC began implementing public health entry screening at the three U.S. airports that received the most travelers from Wuhan — San Francisco, New York JFK, and Los Angeles.

• Jan. 20: Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Health’s infectious disease institute, announced efforts to develop a vaccine.

• Jan. 21: The CDC activated its emergency operations center to provide support to the coronavirus response.

• Jan. 31: Mr. Trump declared a public health emergency, announced Chinese travel restrictions, and suspended entry into the U.S. for foreign nationals at risk of transmitting the virus.

Feb. 4: Mr. Trump vowed in his State of the Union address to “take all necessary steps” to protect Americans from the coronavirus.

• Feb. 11: The Department of Health and Human Services expanded a partnership with Janssen Research & Development to “expedite the development” of a coronavirus vaccine.

• Feb. 24: The administration sent a letter to Congress requesting at least $2.5 billion to help combat the spread of the coronavirus.

• Feb. 29: The administration announced a level 4 travel advisory to areas of Italy and South Korea, barred all travel to Iran, and barred the entry of foreign citizens who visited Iran in the last 14 days.

• March 3: The CDC lifted federal restrictions on coronavirus testing to allow any American to be tested “subject to doctor’s orders.”

• March 13: Mr. Trump announced public-private partnerships to open drive-through testing sites, a pause on interest payments on federal student loans, and an order to the Department of Energy to purchase oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

• March 18: Mr. Trump announced a temporary closure of the U.S.-Canada border to non-essential traffic and plans to invoke the Defense Production Act to increase the number of necessary supplies needed to combat coronavirus.

Is that list "perfect" as he would put it? Nope, not even close. His excuse for playing it down is he was trying keep people calm and not raise a panic. Take that for what you will, which I am sure will be in the worst possible way. This is unprecedented. I will say it again, mistakes will be made. Considering the misinformation we have received from China, I don't know how any country could properly prepare. I hope, when this is all over, that China pays a price for not owning up to this and costing so many lives and such economic upheaval. They are truly the ones at fault.

As far as the last part of your post. Your vitriol is typical and childish. It is possible to be nuanced and see that there aren't two sides but a middle ground where both have done good and both have made mistakes. But in this political climate where you are either on the left or the right, your response is to be expected. And calling my religion a cult is about as hateful as any rhetoric you accuse the President of. How about a look in the mirror before casting stones?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 01, 2020, 09:44:15 am
Sure, give the guy a shout out and thank him. Don’t give him the mic and let him spout out his ancient superstitious bullshit. His religion is a blight on humanity and should not be given any sort of public outlet like that.
Actually, your views are a blight on society. You are in a very small minority with no belief in God. So the rest of society should just shut up about their beliefs because you are offended? His religion part of a belief system that is in part responsible for the laws and nation you live in. So I don't expect you to believe it, but calling it a blight is either ignorant or well no, it's just ignorant.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 01, 2020, 09:59:28 am
Actually, your views are a blight on society. You are in a very small minority with no belief in God. So the rest of society should just shut up about their beliefs because you are offended? His religion part of a belief system that is in part responsible for the laws and nation you live in. So I don't expect you to believe it, but calling it a blight is either ignorant or well no, it's just ignorant.

Religion is the source of more intolerance and ignorance than pretty much anything ever invented by humans. I'll give the bronze age folks who came up with these stories a pass because they didn't know enough about the world to know any better. But, now, in the 21st century, to believe any of this BS is absurd. And, it's a massive blight on our species.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 01, 2020, 10:07:18 am
Part of being human is having a value system, believing in something larger than yourself, and acknowledging that our understanding about the universe we live in is limited.  Religion is what helps us appreciate this humanity.  The problem is the frequent failure of "organized religion" as a vehicle for this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 01, 2020, 11:01:46 am
Religion is the source of more intolerance and ignorance than pretty much anything ever invented by humans. I'll give the bronze age folks who came up with these stories a pass because they didn't know enough about the world to know any better. But, now, in the 21st century, to believe any of this BS is absurd. And, it's a massive blight on our species.

It is hard to view intolerance as stemming from religion, since Cletus is nonreligious, and is the most intolerant person I have ever come across.  Apparently, intolerance is merely a human failing, rather than a religious one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on April 01, 2020, 01:25:04 pm
I genuinely would like to understand something.  How you can see a person continue to be petty and demeaning, during a news conference about the likely death of 10s of thousands of people, and your response to that is: he is the right person at the right time.

If it’s the bottom of the ninth and I need a homer to tie the game, I am hoping Rizzo or Bryant are due up.  The current president, in my evaluation, is not Rizzo or Bryant.

I honestly wonder if some are capable of an honest evaluation of whose currently at the plate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 01, 2020, 01:29:41 pm
I genuinely would like to understand something.  How you can see a person continue to be petty and demeaning, during a news conference about the likely death of 10s of thousands of people, and your response to that is: he is the right person at the right time.

If it’s the bottom of the ninth and I need a homer to tie the game, I am hoping Rizzo or Bryant are due up.  The current president, in my evaluation, is not Rizzo or Bryant.

I honestly wonder if some are capable of an honest evaluation of whose currently at the plate.

They love the racism and Trump is giving them all they can handle.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 01, 2020, 04:21:26 pm
I genuinely would like to understand something.  How you can see a person continue to be petty and demeaning, during a news conference about the likely death of 10s of thousands of people, and your response to that is: he is the right person at the right time.


When, at a time of national crisis, you are asked petty and demeaning questions from reporters whose aim is not to inform the public, but to play gotcha with a Politician they don't like, it isn't surprising when the responses occasionally sound petty and demeaning also.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 01, 2020, 04:24:48 pm
"what would you say to the americans who are scared right now"

Very petty question...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 01, 2020, 05:00:33 pm
GA, AL have shut down schools for the remainder of the year...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 01, 2020, 06:24:07 pm
robb


From your list I see that trump is responsible for very little in regard to the virus. He somewhat closed the border with China and constantly over promised and under delivered any tangible results. All the while downplaying the threat the virus posed.

11 times Donald Trump has 'belittled' coronavirus

1.    "We have it totally under control. It's one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It's going to be just fine." (January 22)

2.    "We pretty much shut it down coming in from China." (February 2)

3.    "The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA. We are in contact with everyone and all relevant countries. CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart. Stock Market starting to look very good to me!" (February 22)

4.    "We're going very substantially down, not up. ... We have it so well under control. I mean, we really have done a very good job." (February 26)

5.    "This is a flu. This is like a flu. ... It's a little like the regular flu that we have flu shots for. And we'll essentially have a flu shot for this in a fairly quick manner." (February 26)

6.    "It's going to disappear. One day —it's like a miracle — it will disappear. And from our shores, we — you know, it could get worse before it gets better. It could maybe go away. We'll see what happens. Nobody really knows." (February 27)
 
7.    "No, I'm not concerned at all. No, I'm not. No, we've done a great job." (March 8)

8.    "So last year 37,000 Americans died from the common Flu. It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year. Nothing is shut down, life & the economy go on. At this moment there are 546 confirmed cases of CoronaVirus, with 22 death. Think about that!" (March 9)

9.    "This is a very contagious virus. It's incredible. But it's something we have tremendous control of." (March 15)

10.   "I don't believe you need 40,000 or 30,000 ventilators. You know, you're going to major hospitals sometimes, they'll have two ventilators. And now, all of a sudden, they're saying, can we order 30,000 ventilators?" (March 27)

11.   "You call it germ, you can call it a flu. You can call it a virus. You can call it many different names. I'm not sure anybody knows what it is." (March 27)


He made all those statements while he was receiving intelligence reports about a possible pandemic from the virus here in American. Of course, now he says that, "I knew it was a pandemic before anyone..."

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 01, 2020, 06:33:00 pm
robb

Over 10% of Americans self-describe themselves Atheist. Much higher rates of people under 30 call themselves that.

That would mean over 33 million people in our country believe in no god.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on April 01, 2020, 08:00:41 pm
Even IF I thought the questions of the press were petty, which I don’t, I learned when I was 5 something about you being rubber and I being glue.  The president of the United States should be able to deal with this with more grace than a 5-year-old.  This is life and death.  I genuinely would like to understand how his words are OK with anyone?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 01, 2020, 08:29:03 pm
He's a man with no grace, no morals, no empathy.  But he's not a Democrat.  That's all that matters to many.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 01, 2020, 08:30:33 pm
His words are not OK with me, any more than gotcha questions from the press are OK with me.

But my major concern is not what he says, or how he says it, but what his actions actually are.

In an interview earlier in the week, Dr. Fauchi said that every recommendation that the medical team has recommended as necessary, President Trump has had implemented, and although in brainstorming sessions the President has a great many ideas that he throws out, whenever the medical team has said that something is not medically wise, he has not gone against their recommendations.

He also said that when the medical team said back in January that it was NOT necessary to ban flights from China, the fact that Trump did it anyway probably did more to keep the influx down that anything could have done at that time.

Words are important.  But actions are much more important than words.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 01, 2020, 08:41:56 pm
He's a man with no grace, no morals, no empathy.  But he's not a Democrat.  That's all that matters to many.
You couldn't be more right.  This statement cuts both ways,  intended or no. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on April 01, 2020, 08:53:42 pm
Nice attempt at CYA davep. but you consider any question that challenges trump a "gotcha question".


You consider queries like, "mr president, your approval ratings have never been higher, can you speak that..." acceptable from OANN reporter plants.


Unacceptable ones would be, "mr. president 3 weeks ago you claimed Google would have a national website for COVID-19 testing sites in your location. What is the status of the website?"


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on April 01, 2020, 09:45:50 pm
Another thing I remember from my childhood was that if I did poorly on a test, I would say to my parents “but Ethan failed.  And Senthil failed.  And so did Heather.”  Their response, “we aren’t talking about them, we are talking about you.”  At some point there needs to be an honest reckoning of the individual who is the president of the United States.  And I mean good and bad.  If you can’t find yourself capable of an honest critique the way you could Javy Baez or Corey Patterson, your bias is a problem.  It’s not Fox.  It’s not CNN .  It’s you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 02, 2020, 12:12:47 am
Acosta asked Dr Fauci, an Obama era appointee why they didn't respond sooner. He said, "In a perfect world, it would have been nice to have known what was happening there (in China). We didn’t. But I believe, Jim, that we acted very early.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brs2 on April 02, 2020, 04:25:23 am
Acosta asked Dr Fauci, an Obama era appointee why they didn't respond sooner. He said, "In a perfect world, it would have been nice to have known what was happening there (in China). We didn’t. But I believe, Jim, that we acted very early.”

Reagan, not Obama. Not that it should matter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 02, 2020, 07:54:50 am
The attempted revision of history to make trump seem as if he acted decisively and competently is offensive.  How stupid are the people who are falling for this? Trump is going to make only 200K dead an achievement that he uses in his campaign and Robb is going to vote for more of this BS.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 02, 2020, 09:42:46 am
Reagan, not Obama. Not that it should matter.
My bad, I should have said holdover.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 02, 2020, 10:07:17 am
I wish I could take credit for this but it is from a letter to the editor in the local paper on those who praise Donald Trump for extending social distancing.

"Do we think this signals a newfound respect for science, facts and reason? Come on. This is like cheering on a drunken driver who momentarily gets back in his lane after careening all over the highway."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 02, 2020, 10:43:29 am
His words are not OK with me, any more than gotcha questions from the press are OK with me.

But my major concern is not what he says, or how he says it, but what his actions actually are.

In an interview earlier in the week, Dr. Fauchi said that every recommendation that the medical team has recommended as necessary, President Trump has had implemented, and although in brainstorming sessions the President has a great many ideas that he throws out, whenever the medical team has said that something is not medically wise, he has not gone against their recommendations.

He also said that when the medical team said back in January that it was NOT necessary to ban flights from China, the fact that Trump did it anyway probably did more to keep the influx down that anything could have done at that time.

Words are important.  But actions are much more important than words.

Is it a gotcha question when the journalist quotes Trump?

https://twitter.com/girlsreallyrule/status/1244400596649742337?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 02, 2020, 10:45:53 am
The attempted revision of history to make trump seem as if he acted decisively and competently is offensive.  How stupid are the people who are falling for this? Trump is going to make only 200K dead an achievement that he uses in his campaign and Robb is going to vote for more of this BS.

And then claim that Nancy f’n pelosi is just as bad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 05, 2020, 09:21:55 am
Quote from: local sports columnist
I have been looking for positive news from college sports. I found this from Clemson football coach Dabo Swinney last week:

“This is America, man. We’ve stormed the beaches of Normandy. We’ve sent a rover out on Mars and walked on the moon. This is the greatest country. We’ve created an iPhone where I can sit here and talk to people in all these different places. We’ve got the smartest people in the world. We’re going to rise up and kick this thing in the teeth and get back to our lives.”

That man can coach my football team any time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 05, 2020, 03:45:26 pm
https://twitter.com/thetnholler/status/1246847132717416450?s=21

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 05, 2020, 04:43:40 pm
https://twitter.com/thetnholler/status/1246847132717416450?s=21

Cults can inspire some very odd and dangerous behavior.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 07, 2020, 07:45:59 am
Disgusting.

https://twitter.com/mspackyetti/status/1247395169156169729?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 07, 2020, 07:50:03 am
https://twitter.com/omarjimenez/status/1247500202921078785?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 07, 2020, 08:00:03 am
Republicans have correctly recognized that their only real path to maintain power is to limit voting as much as possible.  The lengths they will go to keep people from the polls in Nov will be infuriating.  We should be setting up a comprehensive vote by mail program in every state to prepare for the likelihood that this virus will still be active in Nov and gathering in crowds will not be a good idea. But, as Trump himself said, let that happen and he’ll lose 40 states. The battle for a fair and open election this year is going to be the most important voters rights issues we’ve had in a generation and the republicans are going to be firmly on the side of a less open and free election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 07, 2020, 08:44:54 am
This would sure be a nice development.  https://abc7.com/coronavirus-drug-covid-19-malaria-hydroxychloroquine/6079864/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 07, 2020, 09:55:07 am
If I were at an advanced stage of the disease, I would be willing to try just about anything.  Why not?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 07, 2020, 10:56:40 am
Disgusting.

https://twitter.com/mspackyetti/status/1247395169156169729?s=21

I moved out of Wisconsin several years ago.  Do you know exactly what the Republicans are doing to suppress votes there?  The tweet is not very specific.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 07, 2020, 02:44:48 pm
I moved out of Wisconsin several years ago.  Do you know exactly what the Republicans are doing to suppress votes there?  The tweet is not very specific.

Did you read the thread or just the first tweet? It’s abundantly clear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 07, 2020, 04:19:52 pm
I have read the thread as far as it goes, but it seems to talk about dozens of different things, but very little about what has been done to suppress the vote.  There is one mention of a Supreme Court Decision, but nothing about how it suppresses the vote in Wisconsin.  Is there an actual link that explains it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 07, 2020, 04:25:18 pm
If I were at an advanced stage of the disease, I would be willing to try just about anything.  Why not?

If it works the proposed mechanism of action it would need to used early. Using it late in the disease it won’t do much.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 07, 2020, 04:27:27 pm
This would sure be a nice development.  https://abc7.com/coronavirus-drug-covid-19-malaria-hydroxychloroquine/6079864/

The disease is so varied reports like this really don’t mean anything. If he is giving it to people that will get better without treatment is it really worthwhile?  Probably not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 08, 2020, 01:26:28 am
From what I've read people on the brink are taking it and improving within hours. Not everyone,  but a significant number. Again, I hope this can work and save lives and perhaps our economy as well.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on April 08, 2020, 03:47:06 am
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/trump-comments-on-hydroxychloroquine-as-treatment-for-coronavirus-fact-checked-by-malaria-expert-003056251.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 08, 2020, 05:18:51 am
https://twitter.com/trudyandpierre/status/1247693757639770113?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 08, 2020, 07:00:25 am
From what I've read people on the brink are taking it and improving within hours. Not everyone,  but a significant number. Again, I hope this can work and save lives and perhaps our economy as well.   

If that was true the deaths would be going down, doctors are using it and the results haven’t been great. UNMC is one of a handful of Biocontainment hospitals in the US. They where getting COVID-19 patients off of the cruise ships has looked at the data and isn’t using it. University of Michigan hospital, while I hate them they have a top notch hospital, isn’t using it. The evidence isn’t that great that it is working. Focusing on only 1 drug could cause us to miss something that might actually work. I hope they don’t tell Trump, but the are looking at V i a g r a to help with this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 08, 2020, 08:08:27 am
Bluejay, quick question: What is the benefit or perceived benefit of zinc coupled with this?  I've heard some doctors saying hydroxychoriquin alone doesn't do anything against Covid but it's effective only when zinc is included.  Not a doctor so I just wanted to ask.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 08, 2020, 08:44:27 am
Best video I've seen on how to make a face mask

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YLXEhSjVsw
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 08, 2020, 10:04:26 am
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 08, 2020, 12:34:07 pm
Best video I've seen on how to make a face mask

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YLXEhSjVsw
Don't have rubber bands the right length or elasticity?  Try these. Before you order, look at the shipping date.  These will arrive in a week or so:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07W4S8VKL/ref=ppx_od_dt_b_asin_title_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 08, 2020, 12:40:49 pm
Bluejay, quick question: What is the benefit or perceived benefit of zinc coupled with this?  I've heard some doctors saying hydroxychoriquin alone doesn't do anything against Covid but it's effective only when zinc is included.  Not a doctor so I just wanted to ask.

A bunch of psuedoscience?  Zinc hasn't ever been shown to be really effective against virals are though there are theoretical reasons for it to work.  Zinc will bind Plaquenil in the gut if taken near the same time and render both ineffective. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 08, 2020, 02:02:43 pm
We've been waiting for YOU to come up with a cure, CBJ.  We're disappointed in you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 08, 2020, 03:39:26 pm
I'm way to dumb for that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 08, 2020, 05:14:38 pm
I've read many other accounts like the ones from this doctor. https://abc7news.com/coronavirus-drug-covid-19-malaria-hydroxychloroquine/6079864/  From the article, "He said he has found it only works if combined with zinc. The drug, he said, opens a channel for the zinc to enter the cell and block virus replication." 

You can read the rest if you'd like but I was just wondering what you thought. The two studies done on this treatment were too small to be reliable. Some doctors have tried replicating the conditions and found they didn't come close to the same results. Then there are individuals like this one and the Dr in New York who say it is the solution and works nearly every time. i don't see this as a right vs left issue, I'm just wondering why the disparate experiences? What are they doing different? Is someone lying? If so who and why?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 09, 2020, 10:04:24 am
Nothing in medicine works 100% of the time and if somebody claims that it is a bold face lie.  Why do it, it gets you national media coverage and the possibility of being the Dr. Oz or upping patient volume because you are the "hero" of the outbreak.

The guy above works in an urgent care, chances are decent he isn't seeing the really sick patients or has the follow up to see if they get worse.  He doesn't have the ability to actually test what he is claiming.  I don't either, that would be done in a research lab.  There is ton of controversial zinc "science" and how it might work. 

The doctor in New York would have been working 7 days a week and seeing 70 COVID patients a day to get his numbers to add up.  That was more than the number of confirmed cases in his county at the time.  Plus with his beard he can't wear an N95 mask effectively and the viral load from that many COVID patient would kill him.  My general rule is if somebody says 100% or if it works amazing they are lying, because medicine doesn't work that way.  Never has, never will.

Could it work, sure.  That is what better studies will tell us.  In the meantime I might use it, but the treatment has risks.  If you combine the two meds the risk of arrhythmia is much greater.  People with oxygen and being on their stomach might actually be a better treatment for the virus.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on April 09, 2020, 04:35:50 pm
https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/news/2020/04/08/coronavirus-plasma-used-treat-patients-baptist-health-system/2971682001/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on April 09, 2020, 07:02:55 pm
This too shall pass.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 11, 2020, 11:07:29 am

Churchill's quote could easily be applied to when baseball might resume

https://youtu.be/pdRH5wzCQQw
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 11, 2020, 10:08:02 pm
On February 2, 2020 (3 days after Trump barred flights from China because of the serious nature of the Coronavirus), Governor Cuomo said that there is no reason to panic.  There is no reason to have an inordinate amount of fear about this situation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 11, 2020, 10:09:15 pm
On February 24, 2020 (25 days after Trump barred flights from China because of the serious nature of the Coronavirus) Nancy Pelosi announced to the press, “We think it is very safe to be in Chinatown, and hope that others will come.  It is lovely here.  The food is delicious, shops are prospering.  The parade was great.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 11, 2020, 10:12:57 pm
On March 10, 2020, (39 days after Trump barred flights from China because of the serious nature of the Coronavirus)  Mayor Deblasio of New York said that “For the vast number of New Yorkers, Life is going on pretty much normally right now, and we want to encourage that.”

He went on to say “ If you are under fifty and healthy, which is most New Yorkers, there is very little threat here.  This disease, even if you were to get it, acts like a common cold or flu.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 07:01:07 am
Now do the president old man
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 07:01:30 am
https://twitter.com/mrbenwexler/status/1248976820034138112?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 12, 2020, 07:37:15 am
These folks covering for Trump's incompetence at this point is just becoming laughable.  I honestly do believe that media coverage of Trump has gone way over the top.  but anybody that can objectively look at the situation and think that Trump and his administration have not failed completely is no longer looking at facts but only looking at what they want to.

The CDC is a organization that is under direct control of the president of the United States of America. They were not prepared and the buck stops with Donald Trump just like he said about George Bush and Obama He's the one to blame at the end of the day no one else.

his singular obsession with the stock market and how big of a number it could get to and his own ego are the reason we're mired in this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 07:44:40 am
Tells you a lot about those people that white knight for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 07:53:37 am
https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1249068388921442305?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 12, 2020, 08:58:32 am
(https://www.loriferber.com/pub/media/catalog/category/buckstopsherefrontsmall.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 12, 2020, 09:33:11 am
Tells you a lot about those people that white knight for him.

These people have been revealing a lot about themselves for four plus years now. In case there was any doubt, they are telling us loud and clear that they are firmly on the side of anti-science ignorance and racism.  They’ve been dying to be out and proud with this for years and trump finally give them the outlet they’ve needed.  It’s a disgrace.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 12, 2020, 10:00:46 am
There is a difference between shilling for Trump and objectivity. I know in the black and white world of the left if you don't hate Trump you are an enemy. Tolerance is demanded, but only if you agree with leftist policies. Trump has made some excellent decisions in all this, including banning travel at a time when he was mocked/called a racist by Biden, the media ad nauseum, and people here. He tried to calm the country by saying we are going to beat this thing, no reason to panic, just like 'leaders' on the left at the same time and later were saying. During a pandemic the plan has always been to employ federalism. The federal government is back-up to the states. For example: in NY Gov. Cuomo was told the state needed more respirators in case of pandemic several years ago and the recommendation was ignored.

Cuomo and Newsom in California have praised the administration for their quick responses and problem solving. Dr. Fauci has said the President listens to every recommendation they make. Has allowed this entire economy to be shut down to save lives. His entire argument for re-election was the economy. If he only cared about himself he could have overruled them. For all his bluster his decision making has been solid throughout this crisis. No President would have done this perfectly. Weekly and sometimes daily adjustments are necessary as new data continues to come in.

The main culprits in this are China and WHO. China hid the true impact of the virus from the world, disappearing their own doctors who spoke out about it and lying about the numbers once it was exposed. The World Health Organization issued  a statement as late as January 14th claiming there was no COVID-19 human to human spread of the disease. I will readily admit Trump has made mistakes, said things not true in his pressers and should shut up and let the people under him handle the briefings. He is not an articulate man. His need for ego stroking is at times problematic, unseemly and shows a lack of character. He also seems to make good decisions on a regular basis and has policies many in this country agree with, enough to elect him, probably re-elect him and grow the economy again upon a return to normalcy.

You can rage, call racism, cultism, demonstrate in the streets, (whenever that can be done again), and listen to the media echo chamber, but those are the facts. Believe it or not the whole country doesn't agree with your Trump hatred. In fact, other than a few heavily skewed polls, most think Trump's handling of this has been either good or excellent. Imagine that.

And by the way, Happy Easter :)

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 12, 2020, 10:15:46 am
There is a difference between shilling for Trump and objectivity. I know in the black and white world of the left if you don't hate Trump you are an enemy. Tolerance is demanded, but only if you agree with leftist policies. Trump has made some excellent decisions in all this, including banning travel at a time when he was mocked/called a racist by Biden, the media ad nauseum, and people here. He tried to calm the country by saying we are going to beat this thing, no reason to panic, just like 'leaders' on the left at the same time and later were saying. During a pandemic the plan has always been to employ federalism. The federal government is back-up to the states. For example: in NY Gov. Cuomo was told the state needed more respirators in case of pandemic several years ago and the recommendation was ignored.

Cuomo and Newsom in California have praised the administration for their quick responses and problem solving. Dr. Fauci has said the President listens to every recommendation they make. Has allowed this entire economy to be shut down to save lives. His entire argument for re-election was the economy. If he only cared about himself he could have overruled them. For all his bluster his decision making has been solid throughout this crisis. No President would have done this perfectly. Weekly and sometimes daily adjustments are necessary as new data continues to come in.

The main culprits in this are China and WHO. China hid the true impact of the virus from the world, disappearing their own doctors who spoke out about it and lying about the numbers once it was exposed. The World Health Organization issued  a statement as late as January 14th claiming there was no COVID-19 human to human spread of the disease. I will readily admit Trump has made mistakes, said things not true in his pressers and should shut up and let the people under him handle the briefings. He is not an articulate man. His need for ego stroking is at times problematic, unseemly and shows a lack of character. He also seems to make good decisions on a regular basis and has policies many in this country agree with, enough to elect him, probably re-elect him and grow the economy again upon a return to normalcy.

You can rage, call racism, cultism, demonstrate in the streets, (whenever that can be done again), and listen to the media echo chamber, but those are the facts. Believe it or not the whole country doesn't agree with your Trump hatred. In fact, other than a few heavily skewed polls, most think Trump's handling of this has been either good or excellent. Imagine that.

And by the way, Happy Easter :)

Back in the real world, we have a pretty detailed accounting of how trump **** this up through ignorance and indecisiveness.  I’m not surprised you are so susceptible to the BS revision of history coming from the trump cult given your lifelong cult affiliation.  You were born and raised in a hilarious rewriting of history so this current retcon must seem quite reasonable. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/us/politics/coronavirus-trump-response.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 12, 2020, 10:26:13 am
Let's not resort to religious bigotry when there are so many legitimate reasons to disagree with Robb.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 11:29:10 am
Trumps made great decisions and listened to Fauci and the experts? Not according to Fauci. You’re an ****

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1249327614357012482?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 11:35:17 am
[attachimg=1]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 11:41:30 am
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1249132374547464193?s=21

Literally voted by mail himself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 12, 2020, 01:00:29 pm
This whole thing about trump listening... yes... eventually.

Lets put it this way, if you apply the Benghazi litmus test for preparedness to trump administration for a pandemic you could see coming... he'd be hung for treason.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 12, 2020, 01:12:02 pm
Now do the president old man

That seems to be Cletus's job.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 12, 2020, 01:19:09 pm
https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1249068388921442305?s=21

Dr Fauci also said in an interview last week that he never made a medical recommendation to Trump that Trump did not implement, and while Trump often came up with suggestions during brainstorming sessions, whenever Fauci disagreed with his suggestions on a medical basis, Trump dropped them.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 12, 2020, 01:42:35 pm
Dr Fauci was recently absent from one of the Coronavirus task force briefings.  He’d been told to practice not letting his facial expressions show how he felt about what trump was saying at the podium.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 01:59:38 pm
Dr Fauci also said in an interview last week that he never made a medical recommendation to Trump that Trump did not implement, and while Trump often came up with suggestions during brainstorming sessions, whenever Fauci disagreed with his suggestions on a medical basis, Trump dropped them.

There’s simply no denying that he and the administration didn’t react appropriately or in a timely manner. Then he went on TV and to his jackass rallies and Maralago and acted a moron.And it’s cost lives. Spin it how you want.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 02:00:36 pm
Amazing GOP spin about the projections being inflated. No shi* morons, that’s what the lockdown was supposed to do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 12, 2020, 02:01:43 pm

*****
Posts: 3459
View Profile Personal Message (Online)

Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
« Reply #3213 on: Today at 02:00:56 pm »
QuoteModifyRemove
Dave you are repeating Trump's propaganda. If anyone speaks up against dear leader they get fired. He's doing his duty to shut up  influence as much as he can.

in fact dear leader has already told us that he's going to use his gut instinct to reopen the country...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 12, 2020, 02:45:53 pm
There’s simply no denying that he and the administration didn’t react appropriately or in a timely manner. Then he went on TV and to his jackass rallies and Maralago and acted a moron.And it’s cost lives. Spin it how you want.

I didn't spin anything.  I merely quoted Fouci, saying that Trump has done what Fouci requested, and has NOT done what Fauci requested NOT be done.  Your problem seems to be with Dr. Fauci, not with any spin.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 12, 2020, 02:48:59 pm
*****
Posts: 3459
View Profile Personal Message (Online)

Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
« Reply #3213 on: Today at 02:00:56 pm »
QuoteModifyRemove
Dave you are repeating Trump's propaganda. If anyone speaks up against dear leader they get fired. He's doing his duty to shut up  influence as much as he can.

in fact dear leader has already told us that he's going to use his gut instinct to reopen the country...

Actually, Trump has said that he will create bipartisan team of Governors, medical experts and economic experts to decide when and how we will reopen the country.  For some reason, that was not reported on CNN or MSNBC.  Probably just an oversight.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 03:23:33 pm
I didn't spin anything.  I merely quoted Fouci, saying that Trump has done what Fouci requested, and has NOT done what Fauci requested NOT be done.  Your problem seems to be with Dr. Fauci, not with any spin.

No. Fauci was clear today. It’s you folk that seem to have a problem with the medical experts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 03:25:59 pm
Actually, Trump has said that he will create bipartisan team of Governors, medical experts and economic experts to decide when and how we will reopen the country.  For some reason, that was not reported on CNN or MSNBC.  Probably just an oversight.

Lmao. The jackass has had enough of the abhorrent Fox apparently. So do all of the lapdogs move to OANN now?

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1249424452477235200?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 12, 2020, 05:08:12 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/fauci-trump-rebuffed-social-distancing-advice-coronavirus
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on April 12, 2020, 07:24:49 pm
Matthew 28 verses 5 and 6... 5: And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.6: He is not here: for he is risen, as he said.Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 12, 2020, 07:26:23 pm
So when did Fauci lie?  Last week when he said Trump followed his advice, or this week, when he said Trump didn't follow his advice?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 12, 2020, 07:27:00 pm
Matthew 28 verses 5 and 6... 5: And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.6: He is not here: for he is risen, as he said.Come, see the place where the Lord lay.

It’s difficult to believe that there are people living in 2020 that think that actually happened.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 12, 2020, 07:34:13 pm
It sounds like Fauci agrees with Trump on this point, at least.

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2020/04/12/fauci-says-rolling-reentry-of-us-economy-possible-in-may/23975994/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 12, 2020, 10:16:34 pm
It was inevitable that trump would get us to an unprecedented national disaster.  He’s made it official today.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EVbpxedXkAEfLOC.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 11:45:42 pm
So when did Fauci lie?  Last week when he said Trump followed his advice, or this week, when he said Trump didn't follow his advice?


Per Fauci, whatever is convenient for the moron you guys elected.

https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1249327036159664139



You entirely missed that timeframe that Trump was downplaying the threat of the virus, huh? Disingenuous twat. Seems like only a few weeks and thousands of bodies ago that “the cure shouldn’t be worse than the threat” was the GOP talking point.

You do you, though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 12, 2020, 11:51:14 pm
https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1249507968011456513
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 13, 2020, 12:36:02 am
Trump lashes out at Fauci

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/trump-fauci-coronavirus.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 13, 2020, 07:47:35 am
Liberal lies he was never warned. No one can possibly ever seen this coming.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 07:50:35 am
https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1249507968011456513

If you get caught in trump’s sphere, only two things can happen - 1) your principals, whatever they might have been (and for most of these folks, they weren’t great) get eroded away and you turn into a cartoon character villain or 2) you stick to your principals you will get dragged through the mud by trump and his proxies and eventually get fired.  There is no doubt that all the competent people working this virus problem will be fired before too long and people like Peke and DaveP will be talking about they never knew what they were doing and made the problem worse.  We’re already seeing this in the way guys like that are revising history and making trump the hero of this story.  A hero needs a foil and it will certainly be the doctors trying to advise him and keep him from acting on his worst impulses. But, those folks can’t win and will get fired.  It’s guaranteed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 08:13:49 am
If you get caught in trump’s sphere, only two things can happen - 1) your principals, whatever they might have been (and for most of these folks, they weren’t great) get eroded away and you turn into a cartoon character villain or 2) you stick to your principals you will get dragged through the mud by trump and his proxies and eventually get fired.  There is no doubt that all the competent people working this virus problem will be fired before too long and people like Peke and DaveP will be talking about they never knew what they were doing and made the problem worse.  We’re already seeing this in the way guys like that are revising history and making trump the hero of this story.  A hero needs a foil and it will certainly be the doctors trying to advise him and keep him from acting on his worst impulses. But, those folks can’t win and will get fired.  It’s guaranteed.

It’s not even Trump. McConnell and people like Barr are worse.

This has always been a very tight-knit forum. But eventually the worst in people come out. I’m likely one of the few non-whites here. People like Dusty and Robb have flourished for years just spouting wild ****.

And I just accepted it because Dudes like chris27, Craig, and oldfan and weatherguy, D23 and even that rascal Curt made it palatable. We are all Cub fans at the end of the day (except method, aTm, ISF, and a few others).

To see DaveP ignore obvious voter suppression and prop up Trump is so depressing.

Should ban politics and religion threads and just complain about our bullpen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 08:25:50 am
It’s not even Trump. McConnell and people like Barr are worse.

This has always been a very tight-knit forum. But eventually the worst in people come out. I’m likely one of the few non-whites here. People like Dusty and Robb have flourished for years just spouting wild ****.

And I just accepted it because Dudes like chris27, Craig, and oldfan and weatherguy, D23 and even that rascal Curt made it palatable. We are all Cub fans at the end of the day (except method, aTm, ISF, and a few others).

To see DaveP ignore obvious voter suppression and prop up Trump is so depressing.

Should ban politics and religion threads and just complain about our bullpen.

McConnell and Barr fall into category #1.  They were already terrible people but Trump has given them free reign to be out and proud about the terrible things they believe and want.

DaveP, Robb, Dusty, and the cretins on the Bears forum are the same.  At their core, they are despicable which they have revealed in bits and pieces over the years. But, now it’s out in the open for everyone to see and they are cool with it. Trump will go away but filth like these guys will not. This is an existential problem for the future of this country and, at the moment, the outlook is not great.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 08:34:32 am
McConnell and Barr fall into category #1.  They were already terrible people but Trump has given them free reign to be out and proud about the terrible things they believe and want.

DaveP, Robb, Dusty, and the cretins on the Bears forum are the same.  At their core, they are despicable which they have revealed in bits and pieces over the years. But, now it’s out in the open for everyone to see and they are cool with it. Trump will go away but filth like these guys will not. This is an existential problem for the future of this country and, at the moment, the outlook is not great.

Oh, one hundred percent. He’s been a conduit for these folks to peek out of their hoods. It’s just wild that it goes unchecked. But I guess not.

Just hope it’s not less futile trying to change it
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 13, 2020, 08:36:05 am
It’s not even Trump. McConnell and people like Barr are worse.
Speaker of the House John Boehner showed them all how to do it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 08:41:22 am
Speaker of the House John Boehner showed them all how to do it.

Boehner tried to work with Obama but the Tea Party scumbags came in and that was the end of that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 13, 2020, 08:46:56 am
Boehner also saw the toxicity and walked away instead of being dragged into the muck.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 08:51:22 am
Oh, one hundred percent. He’s been a conduit for these folks to peek out of their hoods. It’s just wild that it goes unchecked. But I guess not.

Just hope it’s not less futile trying to change it

While there will still be 60M **** who vote for trump and want that version of the world, the hopeful part of me remembers that trump only won because of about 100K voters in a few states. Biden is a horrible candidate but I’m confident that he can turn those 100K voters when they realize that trump has only made their lives worse. Winning this election does not fix the structural problems we have but it’s a step in the right direction.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 09:00:30 am
That’s the best part. GOP has morons voting against their own interests in the name of god and guns (in other words white power).

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 13, 2020, 09:42:38 am
I believe that the ever increasing inequality of wealth is the biggest danger that faces America as we go forward.  Young people by and large do not buy the xenophobia, misogyny, and lack of respect for facts and the truth characteristic of Trump and many of his supporters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 09:48:21 am
I believe that the ever increasing inequality of wealth is the biggest danger that faces America as we go forward.  Young people by and large do not buy the xenophobia, misogyny, and lack of respect for facts and the truth characteristic of Trump and many of his supporters.

Of course. It’s that wealth that gerrymanders and suppresses and stokes the fears of the narrow minded though. It’s kinda entwined, my guy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 09:50:12 am
I believe that the ever increasing inequality of wealth is the biggest danger that faces America as we go forward.  Young people by and large do not buy the xenophobia, misogyny, and lack of respect for facts and the truth characteristic of Trump and many of his supporters.

I agree on your first point and worry that the current recession is only going to exacerbate the problem.  I'm not as confident on your second point.   I think the hallmarks of trumpism - xenophobia, misogyny, and lack of respect for facts and the truth - do skew towards an older demographic but I worry that as more and more young white people find themselves on the wrong side of the income and wealth distribution curve and are taught by their parents that are already there that this hateful idiocy will pass down to a new generation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 13, 2020, 09:53:20 am
I believe that the ever increasing inequality of wealth is the biggest danger that faces America as we go forward.  Young people by and large do not buy the xenophobia, misogyny, and lack of respect for facts and the truth characteristic of Trump and many of his supporters.

Plenty of young white men here in florida that sure revel in "xenophobia, misogyny, and lack of respect for facts and the truth characteristic of Trump and many of his supporters"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 13, 2020, 11:02:45 am
Plenty of young white men here in florida that sure revel in "xenophobia, misogyny, and lack of respect for facts and the truth characteristic of Trump and many of his supporters"
And even more young voters on the left are believing socialism actually works, racism is a major problem in the US in the year 2020, and that they should rack up 100k in student loan debt for a liberal arts degree with no demand. Seems there is a healthy lack of respect for facts there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2020, 11:44:04 am
GB, there's no point in talking to DaveP. Literally none. He's either brainwashed and doesn't want to hear otherwise, or he's completely disingenuous.

It's sad to see it come to this, cause he wasn't always this way, but he's completely bought into the Trump cult and he doesn't want out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2020, 11:52:47 am
And even more young voters on the left are believing socialism actually works, racism is a major problem in the US in the year 2020, and that they should rack up 100k in student loan debt for a liberal arts degree with no demand. Seems there is a healthy lack of respect for facts there.

Socialism is not a monolithic boogey man for you to take swings at like this. Just stop it with this garbage.

There are plenty of countries with socialist-style governments, support systems, etc., that are all doing quite well. In fact, many of them rank as the healthiest and happiest countries in the world, year in and year out.

Further, there are plenty of socialist-style support systems in our own government, whether support for ag or oil industries, or the unemployed, or hungry children. All of DC just got together to deliver a socialist stimulus package sending cash directly to consumers.

The way you use the term "socialism" here is beyond lazy, and descends completely into the right-wing, propagandistic talking points you position yourself as superior to.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 13, 2020, 12:09:12 pm
Had Bernie been nominated, "Socialism" would have been annointed the new Red Scare.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 13, 2020, 12:24:35 pm
The word "socialism" doesn't really mean anything anymore thanks to Republicans. It used to have a specific meaning. But they use it now to mean "anything that is not pure, unregulated, libertarian-wet-dream capitalism." It's not even the boogey man Robb thinks it is...it's a word that is met with eyerolls from anyone not on the far right.

I'm sure all the people who hate "socialism" so much are going to refuse to accept that $1,200 stimulus check they get in the next couple of weeks, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 13, 2020, 02:03:56 pm
The latest item you'll have a hard time finding at the store?

Because the beauty parlors are closed, it's hair dye.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 02:35:06 pm
Socialism is not a monolithic boogey man for you to take swings at like this. Just stop it with this garbage.

There are plenty of countries with socialist-style governments, support systems, etc., that are all doing quite well. In fact, many of them rank as the healthiest and happiest countries in the world, year in and year out.

Further, there are plenty of socialist-style support systems in our own government, whether support for ag or oil industries, or the unemployed, or hungry children. All of DC just got together to deliver a socialist stimulus package sending cash directly to consumers.

The way you use the term "socialism" here is beyond lazy, and descends completely into the right-wing, propagandistic talking points you position yourself as superior to.


Now address that he thinks racism isn’t an issue, lol. This shi* goes by on this forum for decades with Dusty casually dropping Asian slurs and it’s just Jiggy being Jiggy.

This dude has demonized homosexuals repeatedly, for years, on BBF while peddling his “faith” and his writings..

I respect your patience and civility. Always have. You graduated at Davidson around the same time as SC30, so use his sharpshooting eyes to see through this man’s bullshit, bruh.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 02:38:16 pm
And that’s not a shot at Curt, or my guy D23...

I appreciate y’all for letting us sound off and all.

I’m just saying...for a man to think racism isn’t an issue in 2020!? Beyond the pale. Literally in this case.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 03:18:57 pm

Now address that he thinks racism isn’t an issue, lol. This shi* goes by on this forum for decades with Dusty casually dropping Asian slurs and it’s just Jiggy being Jiggy.

This dude has demonized homosexuals repeatedly, for years, on BBF while peddling his “faith” and his writings..

I respect your patience and civility. Always have. You graduated at Davidson around the same time as SC30, so use his sharpshooting eyes to see through this man’s bullshit, bruh.

This "racism isn't a major problem in 2020" take is utterly mind boggling. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 04:13:30 pm
This is a real all-star group trump was able to assemble.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EVgaQ3YXsAAlHf_.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2020, 04:14:11 pm

Now address that he thinks racism isn’t an issue, lol.


GB, I'm *fully* in agreement that racism is a *MASSIVE* societal problem. My omission of that point was not meant to signal agreement with Robb in the least. Apologies for where my silence communicated otherwise.

As someone who was blind to this reality 5 years ago, I know how insidious this problem is, because white privilege simultaneously dehumanizes minorities while anesthetizing white people.

Frankly, I question how deep to dive on the topic here. It's not a subject where I expect sanitized, rational arguments between disembodied internet personas to change anything. That's because, from the personal experience of becoming aware of my own privilege, awareness begins not with mind but with the heart. It requires an empathetic curiosity and vulnerability from those of us who benefit from privilege, and it's rare to see anything that remotely resembles empathetic curiosity (let alone vulnerability!) in this topic.

I don't have any great answers, and I don't really know what more to say. If you have thoughts, I'd love to hear them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 13, 2020, 04:24:09 pm
This is a real all-star group trump was able to assemble.

It really shows what will be prioritized. Which one of those people has any medical expertise at all? Every one of them will look at re-opening from an economic standpoint only. Hopefully most governors and mayors will just ignore their advice completely and will make decisions based on what the medical experts say.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 04:28:01 pm
It really shows what will be prioritized. Which one of those people has any medical expertise at all? Every one of them will look at re-opening from an economic standpoint only. Hopefully most governors and mayors will just ignore their advice completely and will make decisions based on what the medical experts say.

Even then most of these dopes have no clue how an economy works.  These are people who can be reliably counted on to do whatever trump tells them.  This is a major disaster in the making.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2020, 04:34:20 pm
It still baffles me how little rank and file Republicans care about Trump’s extraordinary nepotism.

Has there *EVER* been a presidential administration where the president’s children served in key unelected advisory roles? EVER?!?!?!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 13, 2020, 04:39:19 pm
No, but hunter biden sat on a board of  an oil company in Ukraine!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on April 13, 2020, 04:40:22 pm
You know I might be racist in some of your eyes even though I have an Asian wife but if Im racist you should see everyone else around these parts.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that I'd be in the bottom 10% of most racist people in this part of the country.

I married an Asian girl and came terribly close to jumping a black girl shortly before I met my wife.

If this is a place where we can sound off without consequence seeing that I was just called a racist my personal opinion is this board is built mostly around **** liberals who'll take any chance they can to bash conservative Christians.

Just like when you all said Trump didnt have a chance and he got voted in without any trouble you all also want us to believe this is the end of the world when we're clearly gaining ground on the virus and the majority of the cases in this whole country is in 1 state.

Preach the shitty and corrupt and Ill keep doing the Lords work.

You may not like what I preach but you're not supposed to like it when someone is chastising you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 04:59:42 pm
GB, I'm *fully* in agreement that racism is a *MASSIVE* societal problem. My omission of that point was not meant to signal agreement with Robb in the least. Apologies for where my silence communicated otherwise.

As someone who was blind to this reality 5 years ago, I know how insidious this problem is, because white privilege simultaneously dehumanizes minorities while anesthetizing white people.

Frankly, I question how deep to dive on the topic here. It's not a subject where I expect sanitized, rational arguments between disembodied internet personas to change anything. That's because, from the personal experience of becoming aware of my own privilege, awareness begins not with mind but with the heart. It requires an empathetic curiosity and vulnerability from those of us who benefit from privilege, and it's rare to see anything that remotely resembles empathetic curiosity (let alone vulnerability!) in this topic.

I don't have any great answers, and I don't really know what more to say. If you have thoughts, I'd love to hear them.

No, you’re mint. It wasn’t an omission at all. I was just trying to convey that after decimating his socialism hot take...Flex on his completely OANN-sided racism comments. Was urging you to continue. Preach on.

Your sentiments with regard to DaveP are equally appropriate with Robb. And others who parrot that noise.




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 05:04:58 pm
I married an Asian girl and came terribly close to jumping a black girl shortly before I met my wife.


rAcIsM iSnT rEAL-Robb

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on April 13, 2020, 05:07:03 pm
Let's also throw this out there.

95% of the people who get this virus either dont know they have it or have the flu.

2/3 of 1% of the people who are getting this virus are dieing from it and its only killing old and sick people [go ahead and point out the few young and healthy people who are dieing to serve your purpose].

Are we being fed a line of **** to serve certain peoples political interest?

Ill let you all decide.

The good will side with the good and the corrupt will side with the corrupt regardless of facts.

I know a guy who knew a guy who had it and he beat it at home after a few days of flu like symptoms.

Noone else I know even knows someone who has it around these parts let alone have it themselves.

And what does our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ say?

He's already laid it out for us...

2 Chronicles 7:13–14

13 If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people; 14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 05:10:17 pm
Let's also throw this out there.

95% of the people who get this virus either dont know they have it or have the flu.

2/3 of 1% of the people who are getting this virus are dieing from it and its only killing old and sick people [go ahead and point out the few young and healthy people who are dieing to serve your purpose].

Are we being fed a line of **** to serve certain peoples political interest?

Ill let you all decide.

The good will side with the good and the corrupt will side with the corrupt regardless of facts.

I know a guy who knew a guy who had it and he beat it at home after a few days of flu like symptoms.

Noone else I know even knows someone who has it around these parts let alone have it themselves.

And what does our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ say?

He's already laid it out for us...

2 Chronicles 7:13–14

13 If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people; 14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

There are 60 million people like this, Robb, and the Bears guy.  The American experiment has failed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2020, 05:12:04 pm
You know I might be racist in some of your eyes even though I have an Asian wife but if Im racist you should see everyone else around these parts.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that I'd be in the bottom 10% of most racist people in this part of the country.

I married an Asian girl and came terribly close to jumping a black girl shortly before I met my wife.

Dusty, slave-owners had sex with (****) their slaves. Being sexually attracted to someone from a different race means literally nothing. If anything, your objectification of a black woman points to the misogyny and yes, racism, that people call out in your posts.

If this is a place where we can sound off without consequence seeing that I was just called a racist my personal opinion is this board is built mostly around **** liberals who'll take any chance they can to bash conservative Christians.

White people need to get over their fragility and understand that "racist," while sometimes used as an insult, is also used as a statement of fact.

Just like when you all said Trump didnt have a chance and he got voted in without any trouble you all also want us to believe this is the end of the world when we're clearly gaining ground on the virus and the majority of the cases in this whole country is in 1 state.


This is false (Trump's campaign required significant foreign interference, he lost the popular vote, and he did not enjoy any kind of electoral landslide) and has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

Preach the shitty and corrupt and Ill keep doing the Lords work.

You may not like what I preach but you're not supposed to like it when someone is chastising you.

Ahh, yes, the "Lord's work" is indeed the erasure of other peoples' experiences in order to perpetuate one's own ignorance and comfort. Sounds exactly like Jesus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 13, 2020, 05:17:14 pm
GB, there's no point in talking to DaveP. Literally none. He's either brainwashed and doesn't want to hear otherwise, or he's completely disingenuous.

It's sad to see it come to this, cause he wasn't always this way, but he's completely bought into the Trump cult and he doesn't want out.

Tico, I assume that you watched the briefing today.  Dr Fauci led off with the statement that the first time he went to Trump and recommended implementing social distancing, Trump did it immediately.  Then, when he went again to recommend that it be extended another 30 days, Trump also implemented it that very day.  Upon questioning, he once again said that he has not made an medical recommendation to President Trump that he did not immediately implement.

I don't think you have been brainwashed.  I merely think that you are seeking out secondary sources that may be biased, rather than listen to the primary sources.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2020, 05:23:07 pm
And what does our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ say?

He's already laid it out for us...

2 Chronicles 7:13–14

13 If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people; 14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Jesus did not say this, nor did he write 2 Chronicles. Dusty, if you spent much time in the teachings of Jesus, you'd know his criticisms were usually reserved for those in power and the religious hard-liners. In this way - and this is painfully ironic - the call to humility and repentance is indeed a word for our culture; he who has ears, let him hear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2020, 05:45:34 pm
Tico, I assume that you watched the briefing today.  Dr Fauci led off with the statement that the first time he went to Trump and recommended implementing social distancing, Trump did it immediately.  Then, when he went again to recommend that it be extended another 30 days, Trump also implemented it that very day.  Upon questioning, he once again said that he has not made an medical recommendation to President Trump that he did not immediately implement.

I don't think you have been brainwashed.  I merely think that you are seeking out secondary sources that may be biased, rather than listen to the primary sources.

Dave, I have already told you I'm not getting into tit-for-tat discussions with you about Trump quotes, sources, coronavirus strategy, etc. You regularly and repeatedly ignore evidence, posts, quotes, and all manner of information that does not align with your predetermined position. You're simply trying to win an argument rather than participate in a real discussion. I have no time for high-school-debate-club tactics, and I have no appetite for forcibly acquainting you with an objective reality you refuse to acknowledge.

There is an insurmountable epistemological difference between us. I'm not going to build a bridge you don't want to cross for the sake of a discussion you don't want to have on an internet message board.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 06:20:54 pm
There are 60 million people like this, Robb, and the Bears guy.  The American experiment has failed.

There could be “merely” 1 million...and the rules would be mended to keep them in office. McConnell is the worst mf’er alive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 06:27:13 pm
There could be “merely” 1 million...and the rules would be mended to keep them in office. McConnell is the worst mf’er alive.

Trump declared himself a dictator today. So we’ve got that going for us.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 13, 2020, 06:30:38 pm
Yes. It’s the new normal here. They took the robes and hoods off

https://twitter.com/yamiche/status/1249834557593001989?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 13, 2020, 06:35:41 pm
Yes. It’s the new normal here. They took the robes and hoods off

https://twitter.com/yamiche/status/1249834557593001989?s=21

I’m looking forward to the outrage from all GOP guys who claim to be all about the constitution.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 14, 2020, 09:40:03 am
Schrodinger Trump strikes again. When it was time to shut down, it was a states right issue federal government cant step in. Now its time to restart, so its the president's authority is absolute.

This guy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 14, 2020, 09:53:49 am
Schrodinger Trump strikes again. When it was time to shut down, it was a states right issue federal government cant step in. Now its time to restart, so its the president's authority is absolute.

This guy.

I look forward to the Trumpers explaining to us why this declaration isn't actually authoritarian and how a declaration of ultimate power is actually constitutional.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 14, 2020, 09:58:10 am
Here's a comment from one of the more delusional Trumpers on the Bears board:

This is a weak distraction on the day Dr Fauci exposed the media and liberals for the lying fools they are.

And, let’s not mention Trump said the states should be the decision makers on the come back.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 14, 2020, 11:23:45 am
I not only won't explain Trumps statement I vehemently disagree with him. The constitution was designed to keep such power from the executive or any branch of government.  As with most things Trump I am more interested in what he does than what he says.  If he starts acting on those words I will be the first to condemn him.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 14, 2020, 12:05:17 pm
I not only won't explain Trumps statement I vehemently disagree with him. The constitution was designed to keep such power from the executive or any branch of government.  As with most things Trump I am more interested in what he does than what he says.  If he starts acting on those words I will be the first to condemn him.

What he has done has been an national disgrace and disaster. So, if you are really focusing on actions and not words, you would not be as enthusiastic a supporter as you are.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on April 14, 2020, 12:42:22 pm
In defense of the rubes, it's not easy to admit you've been taken in by the biggest charlatan in history--a guy who played on bigotry you didn't want to admit existed in your heart, who will say anything to make you believe he isn't a completely incompetent (which he is), who's sole useful attribute is self-promotion, who wouldn't know a Christian act if it bit him in the ass.  Especially with Fox News preaching about how righteous he is. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 14, 2020, 12:44:43 pm
In defense of the rubes, it's not easy to admit you've been taken in by the biggest charlatan in history--a guy who played on bigotry you didn't want to admit existed in your heart, who will say anything to make you believe he isn't a completely incompetent (which he is), who's sole useful attribute is self-promotion, who wouldn't know a Christian act if it bit him in the ass.  Especially with Fox News preaching about how righteous he is.

That is true.  Trump himself said how much he loves the uneducated because he knew how easily he could manipulate them. He definitely got that right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 14, 2020, 01:23:53 pm
These people are the worst.

Quote
In the summer of 2016, Mick Mulvaney promised an experiment of sorts to resolve just what had motivated the Republican Party’s fanatical opposition to Barack Obama. Mulvaney proposed that the answer was not partisanship or racism, but instead principled adherence to the Constitution. The test would come when the president — a man Mulvaney acknowledged to have dangerous instincts and contempt for governing norms — was a Republican.

“We’ve been fighting against an imperial presidency for five and a half years,” he said in June 2016, after Trump had captured the nomination. “Every time we go to the floor and push back against an overreaching president, we get accused of being partisan at best and racist at worst. When we do it against a Republican president, maybe people will see that it was a principled objection in the first place. So we actually welcome that opportunity. It might actually be fun, being a strict-constitutionalist congressman doing battle with a non-strict-constitutionalist Republican president.”

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/08/american-carnage-review-tim-alberta-trump.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on April 15, 2020, 01:59:21 am
No comment necessary...

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on April 15, 2020, 03:45:33 am
Right Trump a Christian
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 15, 2020, 07:24:43 am
In defense of the rubes, it's not easy to admit you've been taken in by the biggest charlatan in history--a guy who played on bigotry you didn't want to admit existed in your heart, who will say anything to make you believe he isn't a completely incompetent (which he is), who's sole useful attribute is self-promotion, who wouldn't know a Christian act if it bit him in the ass.  Especially with Fox News preaching about how righteous he is. 
https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-helps-rescue-the-fifth-annual-negro-league-reunion-event-after-donor-pulled-out/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-helps-unemployed-hispanic-man-need-get-life-back-track-hiring-asked-job-off-street/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-donated-200-rooms-6-suites-st-moritz-48th-international-pen-congress-writers/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-prevented-foreclosure-on-a-families-farm-after-the-husband-had-committed-suicide-while-trying-to-save-his-farm-land/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-appointed-chairman-new-york-citizens-committee-78th-annual-naacp-convention/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donates-48-passenger-bus-wilderness-scouts-underprivileged-children-1988/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donated-al-sharptons-national-youth-movement-organization/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-donates-use-trump-shuttle-airplane-transport-relief-aid-puerto-rico-hurricane-hugo/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donates-10k-send-homeless-children-benefit-concert/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-rescues-nelson-mandela-unable-rent-plane/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/teen-bronx-group-home-couldnt-afford-corrective-foot-surgery-trump-came-rescue/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donated-30k-harlem-based-hale-house-babies-born-suffering-mothers-drug-alcohol-abuse-aids-1992-not-trump-foundation/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donated-1-million-get-new-yorks-vietnam-veterans-plaza-built-also-gave-175000-50th-anniversary-end-wwii-parade-gave-retired-staff-sergeant/

There is more,  a lot more.  But you get the point,  which is,  you are wrong.  He is actually a very charitable person.  And if you bothered to find out,  much of his charity is to minorities.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 15, 2020, 07:43:00 am
https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-helps-rescue-the-fifth-annual-negro-league-reunion-event-after-donor-pulled-out/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-helps-unemployed-hispanic-man-need-get-life-back-track-hiring-asked-job-off-street/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-donated-200-rooms-6-suites-st-moritz-48th-international-pen-congress-writers/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-prevented-foreclosure-on-a-families-farm-after-the-husband-had-committed-suicide-while-trying-to-save-his-farm-land/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-appointed-chairman-new-york-citizens-committee-78th-annual-naacp-convention/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donates-48-passenger-bus-wilderness-scouts-underprivileged-children-1988/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donated-al-sharptons-national-youth-movement-organization/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-donates-use-trump-shuttle-airplane-transport-relief-aid-puerto-rico-hurricane-hugo/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donates-10k-send-homeless-children-benefit-concert/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-rescues-nelson-mandela-unable-rent-plane/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/teen-bronx-group-home-couldnt-afford-corrective-foot-surgery-trump-came-rescue/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donated-30k-harlem-based-hale-house-babies-born-suffering-mothers-drug-alcohol-abuse-aids-1992-not-trump-foundation/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donated-1-million-get-new-yorks-vietnam-veterans-plaza-built-also-gave-175000-50th-anniversary-end-wwii-parade-gave-retired-staff-sergeant/

There is more,  a lot more.  But you get the point,  which is,  you are wrong.  He is actually a very charitable person.  And if you bothered to find out,  much of his charity is to minorities.

You may want to check into how he used his foundation. I have a feeling The Giving Trump forgot to mention that. 

Rube is a good way to describe you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on April 15, 2020, 01:28:06 pm
Where's the portrait?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 15, 2020, 02:50:28 pm
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."--Abraham Lincoln
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on April 15, 2020, 07:57:08 pm
https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-helps-rescue-the-fifth-annual-negro-league-reunion-event-after-donor-pulled-out/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-helps-unemployed-hispanic-man-need-get-life-back-track-hiring-asked-job-off-street/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-donated-200-rooms-6-suites-st-moritz-48th-international-pen-congress-writers/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-prevented-foreclosure-on-a-families-farm-after-the-husband-had-committed-suicide-while-trying-to-save-his-farm-land/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-appointed-chairman-new-york-citizens-committee-78th-annual-naacp-convention/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donates-48-passenger-bus-wilderness-scouts-underprivileged-children-1988/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donated-al-sharptons-national-youth-movement-organization/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/donald-trump-donates-use-trump-shuttle-airplane-transport-relief-aid-puerto-rico-hurricane-hugo/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donates-10k-send-homeless-children-benefit-concert/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-rescues-nelson-mandela-unable-rent-plane/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/teen-bronx-group-home-couldnt-afford-corrective-foot-surgery-trump-came-rescue/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donated-30k-harlem-based-hale-house-babies-born-suffering-mothers-drug-alcohol-abuse-aids-1992-not-trump-foundation/

https://www.thegivingtrump.com/trump-donated-1-million-get-new-yorks-vietnam-veterans-plaza-built-also-gave-175000-50th-anniversary-end-wwii-parade-gave-retired-staff-sergeant/

There is more,  a lot more.  But you get the point,  which is,  you are wrong.  He is actually a very charitable person.  And if you bothered to find out,  much of his charity is to minorities.


don"t forget his $130,000 to **** star Stormy Daniels
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 15, 2020, 09:16:50 pm
Where's the portrait?
My point, which apparently eluded you, is that this world of black and white you live in doesn't exist. I was quite shocked myself to find just how charitable Trump has been, decades before running for president. As with most things Trump, I pay attention to what he does, not what he says. As an orator I think I'd rather listen to a drunken hairlip than Trump. He is full of bluster and his ego gets the better of him. I can understand the hatred. I really can. But his actions as president have been conservative for the most part, and much to the chagrin of many, they worked. I don't have to like the man to like the policy. Obama seems like a respectable person, intelligent, thoughtful. And I couldn't have disagreed with his most of policies more. Despite his soaring rhetoric, his actions were a disaster for this country. Given the two options I'll take policy over rhetoric every time.

Cletus, Delmar and Robert committed the classic internet argument of the left. Level a charge, when proven wrong don't acknowledge their error, just level a new attack. I typically don't respond to the first because I know it is never ending. "What about this? What about this?, Oh yeah! Well what about that?"  You leveled a charge, Delmar. I proved you wrong. Trump has been very charitable in his life, outside of his foundation, in personal ways that did nothing for him. So your statement is false. I realize you won't acknowledge it. That doesn't fit the playbook. So who is the rube? Me for having a nuanced view of Trump after gathering information from all sources? Or you for believing the media and thinking the man incapable of any good in life or as a President? For all your enlightenment you have a very narrow world view. So on to your next attack. But this just continues. We are talking past each other. here.  I haven't resorted to the type of garbage you have thrown at me here in return, although it is tempting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 15, 2020, 09:48:48 pm
In defense of the rubes, it's not easy to admit you've been taken in by the biggest charlatan in history--a guy who played on bigotry you didn't want to admit existed in your heart, who will say anything to make you believe he isn't a completely incompetent (which he is), who's sole useful attribute is self-promotion, who wouldn't know a Christian act if it bit him in the ass.  Especially with Fox News preaching about how righteous he is. 
Foxnews, other than a few night commentators is not nearly as pro-Trump as you think. In fact he has complained about the 'home team' not being nice quite often of late. I find your hatred of Foxnews funny. The left absolutely hates any conservative voice in media. Yet, conservatives watch as CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, NPR and most print publications have become virtual arms of the democrat national committee. 

A classic example of this is the Tara Reide accusation against Joe Biden. Now, I have no idea if he assaulted the woman or not. Yet the presumption of innocence, the questioning of her story, the silence of feminists for a woman who leveled a charge and must be #believed is deafening. Where is the media outrage? Where are the protesters outside the offices of Joe Biden? There has been a deafening silence from the left outrage machine. Instead they question the woman's ever changing story and lack of recollection about an incident in the early 90's by a man who has made many a woman uncomfortable with his touchy feely ways. You come here calling Trump a misogonyst rapist philanderer. You condemned Brett Kavanaugh because charges had been leveled, no matter how flimsy. Yet silence on Joe Biden? AOC is actually one of the few troubled by the accusations, to her credit. The media is highly skeptical, the women in congress who couldn't wait to march to the microphone after hearing only one side of testimony by Blasey-Ford to exclaim they believe! (Some believed her even before the hearing) All of these women are now silent. Not answering requests for comment even from their leftist media allies. Their silence is deafening.

If you believe Foxnews watchers are rubes for watching media that agrees with their political views, then pot meet kettle. The rest of the media complex leans severely left. If you don't know that then I won't take the time proving it. Foxnews is a thorn in the left's side, no doubt. Liberals want silence from conservatives or any that oppose their worldviews, much like most of you here. How liberal of you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on April 15, 2020, 10:37:44 pm
I have better things to do than argue with you, Robb.  You're putting all sorts of words into my mouth. 

I have a particularly low view of Trump, but please find where I called him a misogynist rapist philanderer.

You're right--Trump has given more to charity than I thought.  It doesn't change my opinion of his abilities to lead, worth as a human, and damage he's done to our society.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 16, 2020, 09:02:15 am
For a racist, homophobic cult member, yeah I’d imagine Obama was a disaster for the version of the country those people want and Trump has been an astounding success. How delusional.


Labels every prominent news outfit as biased then hyperlinks the giving trump ad nauseum.

The Trump foundation, much like most everything tied to his name, has been revealed as shambolic.

Here’s more on the “giving trump”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/trump-and-the-truth-his-charitable-giving
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on April 16, 2020, 09:04:56 am
US will never get a decent President again because the intelligent ones want no part of that machine
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 16, 2020, 09:08:28 am
V strange how this keeps occurring. Must be great for the country though because Trump

https://twitter.com/jesselehrich/status/1250595619397386245?s=21

https://twitter.com/crewcrew/status/1039695153970274304?s=21

Maybe yet another task force headed by his moron son-in-law and vapid daughter can investigate. The most qualified people and all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 16, 2020, 09:27:35 am
For a racist, homophobic cult member, yeah I’d imagine Obama was a disaster for the version of the country those people want and Trump has been an astounding success. How delusional.


Labels every prominent news outfit as biased then hyperlinks the giving trump ad nauseum.

The Trump foundation, much like most everything tied to his name, has been revealed as shambolic.

Here’s more on the “giving trump”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/trump-and-the-truth-his-charitable-giving

It's not really delusional. Robb wants a country governed by white supremacists principles, one in which LGBQT people are marginalized as much as possible, and, for some reason, one where the interests of corporations and extremely rich individuals are the priority.  He takes his marching orders from the old scumbags in SLC so I can see where it comes from. And, you'd better believe those folks were not going to stand for someone with the mark of Cain in the White House. No way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 16, 2020, 09:50:14 am
V strange how this keeps occurring. Must be great for the country though because Trump

https://twitter.com/jesselehrich/status/1250595619397386245?s=21

https://twitter.com/crewcrew/status/1039695153970274304?s=21

Maybe yet another task force headed by his moron son-in-law and vapid daughter can investigate. The most qualified people and all.

Those contracts were given out by deep state operatives. Give trump 4 more years he'll find and fire them all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 16, 2020, 09:52:40 am
It was nice to see Trump commit to sending ventilators to Russia. Got to make sure his handlers stay healthy! We don’t need them. It’s all good here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 16, 2020, 09:53:22 am
Just the most bizarre thing that wacky libs insist there’s a connection between racists/white supremacists and Trump when racism isn’t a problem according to some

https://twitter.com/maggienyt/status/1250793541829365760?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 16, 2020, 09:54:40 am
Just the most bizarre thing that wacky libs insist there’s a connection between racists/white supremacists and Trump when racism isn’t a problem according to some

https://twitter.com/maggienyt/status/1250793541829365760?s=21

I guess Stephen Miller, the only non-family member that seems to have made it through since day one, is just misunderstood.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 16, 2020, 10:06:01 am
Really running a tight ship in the trump admin.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EVsSAUCWAAA1i0q?format=png&name=medium)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 16, 2020, 10:17:23 am
Hedge fund managers are claiming coronavirus bailouts as small businesses

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-04-14/hedge-fund-coronavirus-bailout

Who said he would provide oversight for how this money would be distributed?

Don't forget:  The hedge fund managers are the guys who get to claim their humongous salaries are capital gains making their tax rate only 15%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 16, 2020, 10:34:29 am
Pretty sure he also fired the IG that would have been in charge of investigating if anything was going on...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 16, 2020, 10:35:30 am
Pretty sure he also fired the IG that would have been in charge of investigating if anything was going on...

He did. Remember, look at what he does, not says. Or something.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 16, 2020, 12:36:15 pm
For a racist, homophobic cult member, yeah I’d imagine Obama was a disaster for the version of the country those people want and Trump has been an astounding success. How delusional.


Labels every prominent news outfit as biased then hyperlinks the giving trump ad nauseum.

The Trump foundation, much like most everything tied to his name, has been revealed as shambolic.

Here’s more on the “giving trump”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/trump-and-the-truth-his-charitable-giving
For so few words you sure squeezed it in here. Is this the product of your enlightened mind? In one sentence you call me a racist, homophobe, you cast aspersions on my religion and finally end by calling me delusional. If this is the product of the left you have confirmed yet again why you are the party of rage and hatred.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 16, 2020, 12:41:08 pm
For so few words you sure squeezed it in here. Is this the product of your enlightened mind? In one sentence you call me a racist, homophobe, you cast aspersions on my religion and finally end by calling me delusional. If this is the product of the left you have confirmed yet again why you are the party of rage and hatred.

None if it is wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 16, 2020, 06:42:51 pm
Remdesivir has had a few interesting reports as a treatment for COVID 19. Plaquenil not so much.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on April 16, 2020, 08:43:34 pm
any reports on Fujifilm?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 17, 2020, 08:19:28 am
The worst people

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1250977991871602689?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 17, 2020, 08:22:37 am
The worst people

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1250977991871602689?s=21
Worse than the scammers who send emails saying "I can help expedite your stimulus check"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 17, 2020, 09:10:01 am
The worst people

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1250977991871602689?s=21

Being evil and dumb is an incredible combo.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 17, 2020, 11:24:15 am
Complete POS

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1251170178945052672?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 17, 2020, 11:50:35 am
Complete POS

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1251170178945052672?s=21

This will work out great. No way that having people out and about too early could backfire. The problem is that his supporters are the very dumbest people on earth and they are going to do whatever he says. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 17, 2020, 11:52:02 am
I love how his supporters all call Obama a "divisive" president... this guy is next level f'ed up and no one in the GOP is calling him out.

You should check out the right doing its best to turn the commerce clause into supreme authority of the president right now. its a lot of fun.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 17, 2020, 11:52:43 am
The last time there was a right wing liberate Virginia rally, a bunch of very fine people turned up and it was great.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EV0Vnq-XQAMo8M2.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 17, 2020, 11:53:39 am
I love how his supporters all call Obama a "divisive" president... this guy is next level f'ed up and no one in the GOP is calling him out.

You should check out the right doing its best to turn the commerce clause into supreme authority of the president right now. its a lot of fun.

Obama is black. In their world, nothing could be more divisive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 17, 2020, 11:54:52 am
Most of this can be traced back to having a black president and the insult that was to good clean white male Americans.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 17, 2020, 11:59:02 am
Most of this can be traced back to having a black president and the insult that was to good clean white male Americans.

I think thats taking it a little to far. There are a lot of divisive issues between the two sides. imo and personal experience, racism is alive, well and revitalized in America, however attributing it all of the division to that is a bit much.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 17, 2020, 12:09:13 pm
I think thats taking it a little to far. There are a lot of divisive issues between the two sides. imo and personal experience, racism is alive, well and revitalized in America, however attributing it all of the division to that is a bit much.

I said most, not all.  But, I do not think it’s a coincidence that a guy who ramped up his political ambitions by calling into question Obama’s birth certificate and eligibility, has appealed directly to an extremely racist base, and has actual white supremacists as close advisors followed directly after our first and only black president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 17, 2020, 12:13:08 pm
I love how his supporters all call Obama a "divisive" president... this guy is next level f'ed up and no one in the GOP is calling him out.

You should check out the right doing its best to turn the commerce clause into supreme authority of the president right now. its a lot of fun.

Obama was divisive to racist white trash

Those same **** think this guy is doing a great job. And wonder why the left is full of hate.
https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1250921394440896517?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 17, 2020, 12:22:38 pm
That's his entire gameplay he's taking away from blue states to give to the red ones... Meanwhile GOP policies generally mean that red states get way more and federal dollars than blue states.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 17, 2020, 12:25:34 pm
That's his entire gameplay he's taking away from blue states to give to the red ones... Meanwhile GOP policies generally mean that red states get way more and federal dollars than blue states.

I love the yokels who say that they’d love to see CA and NY out of the union when it it nearly guaranteed that they live in places that are subsidized by those very states.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 17, 2020, 12:26:39 pm
I think the thunderdome approach to governance is what I really hate the most about him.  He's not depressing at the United States He's the president of the red States.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 17, 2020, 01:12:56 pm
I said most, not all.  But, I do not think it’s a coincidence that a guy who ramped up his political ambitions by calling into question Obama’s birth certificate and eligibility, has appealed directly to an extremely racist base, and has actual white supremacists as close advisors followed directly after our first and only black president.

And literally trying to reverse every decision that black man made.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 17, 2020, 03:53:00 pm
https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1250927187827572736

Just straight make it up as you go along.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 17, 2020, 03:56:12 pm
https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1250927187827572736

Just straight make it up as you go along.

Cults are a powerful thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 18, 2020, 07:09:23 am
https://twitter.com/existentialfish/status/1251260593107021824?s=21

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 18, 2020, 07:42:25 am
https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-data-suggest-the-coronavirus-isnt-as-deadly-as-we-thought-11587155298?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/McOoBAI9Hj

A new study by Stanford is suggesting the virus is much more widespread than originally thought and thus far less deadly. This study of over 3300 people suggests a mortality rate right around the seasonal flu. If we had known this would the country be okay with shutting down like it did?  I don't think so. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 18, 2020, 07:43:44 am
https://twitter.com/existentialfish/status/1251260593107021824?s=21

These are very fine people, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 18, 2020, 08:04:50 am
These are very fine people, right?

The finest
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 18, 2020, 08:36:06 am
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1251495696127029248?s=21


Something about swamps.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 18, 2020, 09:13:57 am
Robb, the number of deaths from Covid-19 in the US over the past 6 weeks is roughly on the order of the number of flu deaths/year.  And Covid-19 is much more communicable.  Hundreds of thousands of Americans were projected to die without the stay at home orders.  Only a fool or someone who is evil would object to the social distancing/stay at home requirements.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 18, 2020, 09:14:50 am
https://twitter.com/billkristol/status/1251357553705041920?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 18, 2020, 09:50:43 am
https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-data-suggest-the-coronavirus-isnt-as-deadly-as-we-thought-11587155298?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/McOoBAI9Hj

A new study by Stanford is suggesting the virus is much more widespread than originally thought and thus far less deadly. This study of over 3300 people suggests a mortality rate right around the seasonal flu. If we had known this would the country be okay with shutting down like it did?  I don't think so.

Commentary on that study.

https://medium.com/@balajis/peer-review-of-covid-19-antibody-seroprevalence-in-santa-clara-county-california-1f6382258c25
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 18, 2020, 09:52:31 am
The number of deaths does appear to be higher.  But science is still figuring that out.  The study I linked shows it is about the same. The eye test would seem to indicate otherwise.  Even if the death rate is double what the study suggests i again ask the question,  would Americans be willing to shutter our economy, which can also severely effect public health with those numbers?  Remember that WHO stated the death rate was 3.4%. This study says it has been .112٪ - 2%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 18, 2020, 10:08:39 am
I would love for all these people to congregate with each other somewhere far from the rest of us. Have at it. Bring your assault rifles too!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 18, 2020, 10:15:10 am
Actually I would love that,  including the assault rifles. Guess how many mass shootings occur in gun free zones?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 18, 2020, 10:16:54 am
Actually I would love that,  including the assault rifles. Guess how many mass shootings occur in gun free zones?

You’re like a republican cartoon character.  We couldn’t invent a more absurd stereotype if we tried.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 18, 2020, 10:18:15 am
Commentary on that study.

https://medium.com/@balajis/peer-review-of-covid-19-antibody-seroprevalence-in-santa-clara-county-california-1f6382258c25
It looks like there were 2 major problems with that study.  I hope they either answer or correct them so a true sense of the infection and mortality rates can be ascertained.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 18, 2020, 11:05:55 am
The third conclusion in that peer review article (that a death rate that low would imply that the virus spread extremely quickly) is important. A spread that fast would mean that so many vulnerable people would be impacted so quickly that it would still overwhelm hospitals. Even if the study was 100% correct, stay at home orders were still necessary to slow the spread.

The peer review article spent a lot of time on false positives. I wish he'd talked at least a little about false negatives too, which seem to occur pretty frequently with the test they used if I read it correctly. But I'm not a scientist or doctor...maybe there's a good reason that addressing false negatives is unnecessary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on April 18, 2020, 11:26:21 am
You’re like a republican cartoon character.  We couldn’t invent a more absurd stereotype if we tried.

I see the racist is running his mouth over here as well. C'mon fukkhead, do us all a favor and come clean, come on out of the closet. You talk about "colored folk" over here as well? You still have your daddy's white pointed hat? You dress up as a clansman at Halloween? As a joke of course.. Which would fit you just fine..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 18, 2020, 12:06:35 pm
I see the racist is running his mouth over here as well. C'mon fukkhead, do us all a favor and come clean, come on out of the closet. You talk about "colored folk" over here as well? You still have your daddy's white pointed hat? You dress up as a clansman at Halloween? As a joke of course.. Which would fit you just fine..

The projection is strong in this one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 18, 2020, 12:50:47 pm
Another important factor is the time course for Covid-19 illness and how long the severe symptoms last (in those who get severe symptoms).  The social distancing/stay at home orders were an absolute necessity to save lives and to make it possible for hospitals and the medical system to cope with the disease load.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 18, 2020, 01:04:12 pm
Feckless leader

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1251571195784450052?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 18, 2020, 01:28:37 pm
It's hard to believe someone could be this tone deaf and bigoted. Imagine having so little respect for what Rosa Parks and others in the civil rights movement went through that you think the current stay at home orders are just as oppressive.

"I think there’s a boiling point that has been reached and exceeded,” said Stephen Moore, a conservative economist. Moore is a member of both the White House council to reopen the country and a coalition of conservative leaders and activists seeking to push government officials to relax stay-at-home orders.

“I call these people the modern-day Rosa Parks — they are protesting against injustice and a loss of liberties,” Moore said of the protesters.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/rallies-against-stay-at-home-orders-grow-as-trump-sides-with-protesters/2020/04/17/1405ba54-7f4e-11ea-8013-1b6da0e4a2b7_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 18, 2020, 01:30:04 pm
It's hard to believe someone could be this tone deaf and bigoted. Imagine having so little respect for what Rosa Parks and others in the civil rights movement that you think the current stay at home orders are just as oppressive.

"I think there’s a boiling point that has been reached and exceeded,” said Stephen Moore, a conservative economist. Moore is a member of both the White House council to reopen the country and a coalition of conservative leaders and activists seeking to push government officials to relax stay-at-home orders.

“I call these people the modern-day Rosa Parks — they are protesting against injustice and a loss of liberties,” Moore said of the protesters.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/rallies-against-stay-at-home-orders-grow-as-trump-sides-with-protesters/2020/04/17/1405ba54-7f4e-11ea-8013-1b6da0e4a2b7_story.html

Here’s a picture of the “modern day Rosa Parks” in Michigan. Quite a group.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EVrUuHCWkAMrdFe.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 18, 2020, 01:30:38 pm
I love the guys protesting the stay at home measures wearing masks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 18, 2020, 03:23:49 pm
If they are protesting stay at home orders in areas and states with an outbreak they are foolish. I believe the original protest in MI was not just for stay at home guidelines but the governor  telling the stores what departments could be open and other more draconian measures like arresting people walking in a park alone or playing with their own kids.  There comes a point when it is too far for many Americans which is why the governors needed to exercise some restraint. I am myself under quarantine because my son in law was exposed to it at work 4 days ago. I don't need policeman to keep an eye on me.  I care enough about my neighbors to stay isolated. He was tested yesterday so we should hear in the next day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 18, 2020, 03:24:40 pm
Can i get some eggnog too?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 18, 2020, 03:26:02 pm
Just reread it and my phone decided that enough should be eggnog instead.  I wouldn't mind some eggnog right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 18, 2020, 03:33:45 pm
Keep safe, Robb.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 18, 2020, 09:45:56 pm
https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-data-suggest-the-coronavirus-isnt-as-deadly-as-we-thought-11587155298?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/McOoBAI9Hj

A new study by Stanford is suggesting the virus is much more widespread than originally thought and thus far less deadly. This study of over 3300 people suggests a mortality rate right around the seasonal flu. If we had known this would the country be okay with shutting down like it did?  I don't think so. 

*with social distancing that prevented the healthcare system from getting overwhelmed. Without social distancing the mortality rate is higher.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 18, 2020, 10:25:44 pm
Some really good and informative news today from trump at the Coronavirus briefing.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EV7YAPiXgAAs2Mj.png?format=png&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 18, 2020, 10:40:21 pm
Another important factor is the time course for Covid-19 illness and how long the severe symptoms last (in those who get severe symptoms).  The social distancing/stay at home orders were an absolute necessity to save lives and to make it possible for hospitals and the medical system to cope with the disease load.

I agree.  Even when we lift the stay at home orders in some areas, I hope they continue to do social distancing.  We did it here in most of Florida weeks before it was mandated by the Governor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 19, 2020, 08:25:32 am
Grand old party

https://twitter.com/willdizard/status/1251671034115342340?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 19, 2020, 09:06:26 am
Keep safe, Robb.

Thanks Play. He was tested Friday and we are still waiting. It's been a week since his exposure and no symptoms. We'll see I guess.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 19, 2020, 09:23:13 am
Grand old party

https://twitter.com/willdizard/status/1251671034115342340?s=21

It’s a shame was can’t embed tweets here and make everyone see what they are supporting. It’s too easy for people like Robb to avoid the link and deny reality.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on April 19, 2020, 12:03:54 pm
Grand old party

https://twitter.com/willdizard/status/1251671034115342340?s=21

You're a fukking idiot.. If I had to guess, that's you in your 1995 mini van.

Dave23, just because someone is a Cubs fan doesn't mean they have the intelligence to post meaningful content. Oh wait, you let otto post here, what was I thinking..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on April 19, 2020, 12:15:06 pm
I get it. The democrat party is the party of diversity.. That's why your nominee is an old white guy. Way to go, you fukknuts  hit that one out of the park.. Oh wait, that's right, Joe was an integral part of the civil rights movement. If you didn't know that, just ask him..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on April 19, 2020, 12:28:33 pm
https://youtu.be/_-eD2n2dD2Y
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 19, 2020, 12:34:44 pm
You're a fukking idiot.. If I had to guess, that's you in your 1995 mini van.

Dave23, just because someone is a Cubs fan doesn't mean they have the intelligence to post meaningful content. Oh wait, you let otto post here, what was I thinking..

Chifaninva you are the perfect example of a person that doesnt grasp trump's umbrella includes the racists.. if you stand with them you're one of them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 19, 2020, 01:34:52 pm
You're a fukking idiot.. If I had to guess, that's you in your 1995 mini van.

Dave23, just because someone is a Cubs fan doesn't mean they have the intelligence to post meaningful content. Oh wait, you let otto post here, what was I thinking..

Who the fuc* is this mouth breather? Take a hike.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 19, 2020, 01:38:19 pm
https://twitter.com/weinsteinlaw/status/1251730002476924930?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 19, 2020, 05:20:52 pm
It’s a shame was can’t embed tweets here and make everyone see what they are supporting. It’s too easy for people like Robb to avoid the link and deny reality.
What a stupid post. Why would I support that?  Antisemitism is alive and well on both sides of the political aisle, as is religious bigotry, as you often personally display here. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 19, 2020, 05:29:15 pm
What a stupid post. Why would I support that?  Antisemitism is alive and well on both sides of the political aisle, as is religious bigotry, as you often personally display here.

Those are your fellow trump supporters. It’s a good reminder of the team you are on. Speaking of which, here’s another one of your people. It’s been a big week for these idiots to give us a look behind the curtain.

Quote
A Republican state lawmaker compared Idaho Gov. Brad Little (R) to Adolf Hitler because she said that stay-at-home orders during the coronavirus pandemic are akin to Nazi extermination camps.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/04/idaho-goper-says-stay-at-home-orders-no-different-than-sending-jews-to-extermination-camps/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on April 19, 2020, 07:07:11 pm
Those are your fellow trump supporters. It’s a good reminder of the team you are on.

The team? What team? There was nothing that said the person was a Republican. I'm betting it was blueboy007... That would be your team... Quit acting so lame..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 20, 2020, 12:25:38 am
The team? What team? There was nothing that said the person was a Republican. I'm betting it was blueboy007... That would be your team... Quit acting so lame..

Yes, I’m an old white boomer residing in Columbus Ohio.

How do you remember to breathe?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 20, 2020, 07:03:56 am
Yes, I’m an old white boomer residing in Columbus Ohio.

How do you remember to breathe?

The sad thing is that this guy is one of the more intelligent and reasonable trump followers I have come across.  It’s not an impressive group to be sure.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 20, 2020, 08:30:58 am
UCLA doctor on relaxing the Covid19 restrictions too soon

That would be like jumping out of an airplane, pulling the cord on your parachute, and once you’d slowed down saying you no longer need your parachute.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 20, 2020, 09:35:42 am
The sad thing is that this guy is one of the more intelligent and reasonable trump followers I have come across.  It’s not an impressive group to be sure.

GOP found a way to get their base to cheer against their own interests.


The sad thing is that Trump isn’t even the problem. McConnell and Barr are even worse.

I’m not telling you something you don’t already know. It’s just depressing.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 20, 2020, 10:15:58 am
The reality is that nearly half the country looks at the world a lot differently than I do.  If I want to remain an American, I can't just ignore them or label them as idiots.  Alienating them doesn't really get me anywhere.  The only real weapons are reason and discourse, and change for the better (if it's going to happen) will be slow.  I hope the fabric of our society can withstand the strain, but I'm not sure it can particularly if Trump is reelected. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 20, 2020, 10:48:06 am
The reality is that nearly half the country looks at the world a lot differently than I do.  If I want to remain an American, I can't just ignore them or label them as idiots.  Alienating them doesn't really get me anywhere.  The only real weapons are reason and discourse, and change for the better (if it's going to happen) will be slow.  I hope the fabric of our society can withstand the strain, but I'm not sure it can particularly if Trump is reelected.

It won’t change on account the courts have been packed. And that has long been before Trump was even a thought.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 20, 2020, 11:45:04 am
The reality is that nearly half the country looks at the world a lot differently than I do.  If I want to remain an American, I can't just ignore them or label them as idiots.  Alienating them doesn't really get me anywhere.  The only real weapons are reason and discourse, and change for the better (if it's going to happen) will be slow.  I hope the fabric of our society can withstand the strain, but I'm not sure it can particularly if Trump is reelected. 
Play,  I don't think it matters who is elected this fall. I think the fracturing is inevitable. If Biden wins the Trump supporters are going to come up with reasons for why he lost and blame conspiracies and subterfuge. Despite what many think here I am not an avid Trump supporter. As I have mentioned, I agree with many of his policies, not his rhetoric. But Trump is simply a by-product of the system that has been corroding for decades. The blame lies on those who see party as more important than country, and I'm not just talking politicians, although they do set the example. Trump was elected because Republicans wanted someone to fight back. After Mitt Romney tried the nice guy act in 2012 they wanted a fighter. So they elected the big-mouth who would say anything. As I have stated before I did not vote for him. I do believe the President should have a level of dignity that he simply will never have. The fact I agree and defend policy does not put me under his umbrella, agreeing with everything he does, nor does it put me at odds with everything democrat or liberal.

Political purity is now demanded on both sides as the extreme right and left have taken over their parties. Moderates are necessary evils to win purple states and districts, but the party elites hate them because they dare not follow the party line at all times.

I am sure there was partisanship during World War 2 however, Americans saw themselves are Americans first. The Democrats didn't win the war. America won the war, together. The death of patriotism will be the eventual undoing of this country if it is not resurrected.

I have tried in this thread to have civil discourse with those who I disagree with politically on most issues(sometimes failing). For that I have been labeled a racist, cult member, idiot, ignorant and homophobic. Perhaps we can change the country a little at a time when we stand up to those in our sphere and tell them to knock it off, to be civil, to allow voices we disagree with to be heard. I am not standing on a soapbox here. I can certainly do better at this and will try to in the future. It can start with just one person.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on April 20, 2020, 11:47:56 am
It's not "If Trump gets reelected". Unless something happens between now and election, Trump will win in a landslide. And I'm not trash talking. If you think Trump is a gaffe machine, give Biden some rope.. If the dems would've run a Mark Warner, or someone along those lines, I would say it would be a race. Only because of the virus and the beating the economy is going to take. No way Biden beats Trump...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on April 20, 2020, 11:49:26 am
The dems have problems. There is division within the party. The old school dems, and the Bernie supporters..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on April 20, 2020, 12:02:41 pm
Play,  I don't think it matters who is elected this fall. I think the fracturing is inevitable. If Biden wins the Trump supporters are going to come up with reasons for why he lost and blame conspiracies and subterfuge. Despite what many think here I am not an avid Trump supporter. As I have mentioned, I agree with many of his policies, not his rhetoric. But Trump is simply a by-product of the system that has been corroding for decades. The blame lies on those who see party as more important than country, and I'm not just talking politicians, although they do set the example. Trump was elected because Republicans wanted someone to fight back. After Mitt Romney tried the nice guy act in 2012 they wanted a fighter. So they elected the big-mouth who would say anything. As I have stated before I did not vote for him. I do believe the President should have a level of dignity that he simply will never have. The fact I agree and defend policy does not put me under his umbrella, agreeing with everything he does, nor does it put me at odds with everything democrat or liberal.

Political purity is now demanded on both sides as the extreme right and left have taken over their parties. Moderates are necessary evils to win purple states and districts, but the party elites hate them because they dare not follow the party line at all times.

I am sure there was partisanship during World War 2 however, Americans saw themselves are Americans first. The Democrats didn't win the war. America won the war, together. The death of patriotism will be the eventual undoing of this country if it is not resurrected.

I have tried in this thread to have civil discourse with those who I disagree with politically on most issues(sometimes failing). For that I have been labeled a racist, cult member, idiot, ignorant and homophobic. Perhaps we can change the country a little at a time when we stand up to those in our sphere and tell them to knock it off, to be civil, to allow voices we disagree with to be heard. I am not standing on a soapbox here. I can certainly do better at this and will try to in the future. It can start with just one person.

I agree 100% and find myself in the same boat.

People with low self esteem will generally resort to the name calling and labeling rather than try to debate. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 20, 2020, 12:20:54 pm
I agree 100% and find myself in the same boat.

People with low self esteem will generally resort to the name calling and labeling rather than try to debate.

What’s the debate? I mean someone who thinks homosexuality is a sin and racism isn’t a problem will not have their minds changed. Then incorporate the other thoughts and...

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on April 20, 2020, 12:35:51 pm
What’s the debate? I mean someone who thinks homosexuality is a sin and racism isn’t a problem will not have their minds changed. Then incorporate the other thoughts and...

Those are easy points to debate. 

If there is no debate there is no point to this thread or the match on the Bears board.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 20, 2020, 12:41:55 pm
What’s the debate? I mean someone who thinks homosexuality is a sin and racism isn’t a problem will not have their minds changed. Then incorporate the other thoughts and...

Davebear has, at least twice, toured the concentration camps on the Mexican border. And he wasn’t there to protest the injustice there.  This is the kind of person you are dealing with.
 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on April 20, 2020, 12:47:45 pm
Davebear has, at least twice, toured the concentration camps on the Mexican border. And he wasn’t there to protest the injustice there.  This is the kind of person you are dealing with.

Yeah, you don't like informed people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 20, 2020, 12:50:07 pm
Davebear has, at least twice, toured the concentration camps on the Mexican border. And he wasn’t there to protest the injustice there.  This is the kind of person you are dealing with.

I’m sure. That place is stormfront-ish. Worst part about being a season ticket holder for Bears and Cubs is the South Lot and Cubby Bear.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 20, 2020, 12:57:16 pm
I rarely agreed with Jes, but I admired his approach to discourse and reliance on logic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 20, 2020, 12:59:08 pm
What’s the debate? I mean someone who thinks homosexuality is a sin and racism isn’t a problem will not have their minds changed. Then incorporate the other thoughts and...


Actually I would be happy to debate either point with you. Although many believe homosexual behavior is a sin, that doesn't mean there isn't nuance in public policy and the rights of all people to liberty and fair treatment.

As far as racism being a major issue in the country today I will readily admit that it is, but only because it is used a political tool and leveled against the right for simply believing in a different governing policy, rather than empirical evidence showing actual widespread racism among the party. I readily admit that growing up in the inner cities and depressed areas of this country make it much harder to succeed. But I believe that is an inner city problem, more specifically a father not at home problem than one determined by skin color. Feel free to disagree but notice I made my point without a name being hurled or calling into question your intelligence.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 20, 2020, 01:10:56 pm
Actually I would be happy to debate either point with you. Although many believe homosexual behavior is a sin, that doesn't mean there isn't nuance in public policy and the rights of all people to liberty and fair treatment.

As far as racism being a major issue in the country today I will readily admit that it is, but only because it is used a political tool and leveled against the right for simply believing in a different governing policy, rather than empirical evidence showing actual widespread racism among the party. I readily admit that growing up in the inner cities and depressed areas of this country make it much harder to succeed. But I believe that is an inner city problem, more specifically a father not at home problem than one determined by skin color. Feel free to disagree but notice I made my point without a name being hurled or calling into question your intelligence.

Holy ****.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 20, 2020, 01:12:04 pm
You dont see racism everywhere because you are white. you are not the subject of the rasism. Its been less then 100 days, since someone called me a ****.. and i've been in my house for the last 40 days.

By and large i experience at least one racist event per month... some months are fun and there are 2-3, other months there are none.

As far as i'm concerned, its a huge problem. There are folks out there like you who are trying to tell folks accusation of racism is a "political" tool, instead of screaming the racist's down.

We live in different worlds apparently.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 20, 2020, 01:14:42 pm
Storm front is is here I guess so that’s cool. Welp.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 20, 2020, 01:20:54 pm
Holy ****.

No words
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 20, 2020, 01:22:21 pm
Yeah, you don't like informed people.

I guess I don’t find racism tourism cool. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on April 20, 2020, 02:06:37 pm
I guess I don’t find racism tourism cool.

You don't find critical thinking, mature discussion or rationale cool either.  Who cares.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on April 20, 2020, 02:31:00 pm
Holy ****.

Well put and to the point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 20, 2020, 03:48:20 pm
You don't find critical thinking, mature discussion or rationale cool either.  Who cares.

Are you for real?  When has that ever happened with you and your crew? Remember, you agreed 100% with this nonsense.

Play,  I don't think it matters who is elected this fall. I think the fracturing is inevitable. If Biden wins the Trump supporters are going to come up with reasons for why he lost and blame conspiracies and subterfuge. Despite what many think here I am not an avid Trump supporter. As I have mentioned, I agree with many of his policies, not his rhetoric. But Trump is simply a by-product of the system that has been corroding for decades. The blame lies on those who see party as more important than country, and I'm not just talking politicians, although they do set the example. Trump was elected because Republicans wanted someone to fight back. After Mitt Romney tried the nice guy act in 2012 they wanted a fighter. So they elected the big-mouth who would say anything. As I have stated before I did not vote for him. I do believe the President should have a level of dignity that he simply will never have. The fact I agree and defend policy does not put me under his umbrella, agreeing with everything he does, nor does it put me at odds with everything democrat or liberal.

Political purity is now demanded on both sides as the extreme right and left have taken over their parties. Moderates are necessary evils to win purple states and districts, but the party elites hate them because they dare not follow the party line at all times.

I am sure there was partisanship during World War 2 however, Americans saw themselves are Americans first. The Democrats didn't win the war. America won the war, together. The death of patriotism will be the eventual undoing of this country if it is not resurrected.

I have tried in this thread to have civil discourse with those who I disagree with politically on most issues(sometimes failing). For that I have been labeled a racist, cult member, idiot, ignorant and homophobic. Perhaps we can change the country a little at a time when we stand up to those in our sphere and tell them to knock it off, to be civil, to allow voices we disagree with to be heard. I am not standing on a soapbox here. I can certainly do better at this and will try to in the future. It can start with just one person.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on April 20, 2020, 05:50:52 pm
Cletus you illustrate my point virtually every time you post.

It’s uncanny.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 20, 2020, 06:21:38 pm
So far the reaction to my post is typical emotion. Give me facts to back up your assertions. I promise to keep an open mind as long as it doesn't descend. As harsh as it may sound one person's experience isn't convincing. I have no tolerance for racism. So if you have data that shows racism is a major problem in America I  will take a look and perhaps even change my mind. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on April 20, 2020, 07:12:32 pm
I guess I don’t find racism tourism cool. 

Why? You're one of the biggest racist on the board.

Funny how you have a dumbass on the other board and one over here. This one thinks he's James Bond..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 20, 2020, 07:14:12 pm
Robb, to demonstrate why you got the reaction you got from your last post, let me change a few words. I'm not expressing my beliefs here...just trying to show why you get the emotional reaction:

As far as prejudice against Mormons being a major issue in the country today I will readily admit that it is, but only because it is used a political tool and leveled against the left for simply believing in a different religion, rather than empirical evidence showing actual widespread anti-Mormon bias in the party. I readily admit that growing up in Utah and rural areas of this country make it much harder to succeed. But I believe that is an Utah problem, more specifically a four mothers at home problem than one determined by religious beliefs. Feel free to disagree but notice I made my point without a name being hurled or calling into question your intelligence.

You used generalizations and a harmful stereotype in your post...but since you put a disclaimer about skin color in there, you felt it absolved you of any bigotry (real or perceived). You said racism only an issue because it's just a tool people use to demonize the right, which is essentially blaming the victim (basically, you said "it's only an issue because minorities bring it up"). Your post comes across as patronizing even if you don't directly call people names or question their intelligence.

Basically, this is what tico was talking about in a post about a week ago: As someone who was blind to this reality 5 years ago, I know how insidious this problem is, because white privilege simultaneously dehumanizes minorities while anesthetizing white people. You're in such a conservative bubble that you didn't realize that using stereotypes and blaming the victim would come across as insensitive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davebear on April 20, 2020, 08:54:43 pm
So far the reaction to my post is typical emotion. Give me facts to back up your assertions. I promise to keep an open mind as long as it doesn't descend. As harsh as it may sound one person's experience isn't convincing. I have no tolerance for racism. So if you have data that shows racism is a major problem in America I  will take a look and perhaps even change my mind.

I don't know what facts or data there can be that "proves" racism.  I know that it certainly exists in the US and all over the world for that matter.
You don't want anecdotal stories because it "isn't convincing" yet those stories are the reality. 
I know for a fact because my wife is a minority and I know of her experiences and how deeply she remembers them.  Other minorities I know have similar experiences.
If you have a discussion with any minority on your own I'm confident you will hear similar stories. 
Not sure what you even really mean by "it's not a problem"

Certainly it's used as a political tool to gain power and disparage others but that fact does not mean it's not a problem.

since the majority of our population is caucasian, most of the racism in this country is caucasian vs minority.  It exists among all races.  Some blacks particularly don't like my wife's race and have let her know it.  I could take you to restaurants in Mexico where you will be seated and served last because you're white.

While racism receds with each generation, it's still alive and well.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 20, 2020, 08:56:46 pm
Brjones,  I appreciate your point. The problem is that your changes didn't really do anything to change my mind. In fact, I have received a fair amount of bigotry due to my religion including not being hired in one job and let go in another for my belief system. I am called a cult member, asked how many wives I have, and on this very board the death of the 98 year old president of my church was celebrated. Not his life, his death. And this man was like a father figure to me, he never harmed a fly in his entire life. I could be bitter about this, feel that this behavior was abhorrent and I would be right, but that attitude of being a victim is in direct opposition to success in life.

The major problem I have with the Democrat party is not their policies. Although I am not a fan of leftist policies in general, my major problem with Democrats is that their coalition is built through victimhood. Every four years they enter the black communities to tell them they are oppressed, they cannot succeed in life because of systemic racism, cops treat them differently because of their skin color (I don't dispute this, they are at times) and all of their problems are due to evil Republican racists. Mitt Romney, who I know personally, and who has not a racist bone in his body was suddenly a racist when he ran for President.

All of the problems of the community would be solved if they just vote Democrat again. Then, nothing changes. Democrats have run every major urban area for decades, every other President is a democrat, congress is quite often run by Democrats, even enjoying a super majority in 2008 and a Democrat President, yet nothing is done, nothing changes. It is a political ploy. Women are told that republicans are misogynists, LGBQ are told Republicans and Christians hate them and want to deny their right to exist, young people are convinced that student loans and capitalism itself is to blame for their lack of opportunity. More victims of the inequity of society. You might think I am in denial of the struggles of all these different people. I am not. But the thing is, life is hard. It is tough for everyone minus a few rich kids who have wealth handed to them. Funny enough, every one I know in that category is miserable, on drugs, have ruined marriages. Every one of them. Even wealth doesn't guarantee prosperity. Life is hard, it is supposed to be. Telling people they are victims does not help them. Yes there are racists. Yes there are misogynists, there are homophobes, (although too many are grouped in this category, myself included, for simply believing it a sin), there are obstacles in life. Selling victimhood for political capital is the single most racist move I can think of. There are black Americans on the right who see this for what it is and cry out against it. I am in their corner. A prominent black man once said this, ""More than half of all black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled — doubled — since we were children."

He went on to say that these absent fathers don't realize that "responsibility does not end at conception" and they are "acting like boys instead of men." Were those comments racist? In 1960, 22 percent of black children lived with single parents. In 1968 (shortly after the enactment of the great society welfare programs incentivized single parent households, , the number rose to 31.4 percent. By 2006, the 1960 percentage had more than doubled to 56 percent.

What is the single greatest indicator of poverty and potential criminal conduct regardless of race? The answer is being a child in a single parent household. So is it because of racism that more and more black households are single parent households? If so then why were only 22% in single parent households at a time when we can all agree that racism was rampant across the country?

Racism exists in this country, I don't deny it. But racism generally is not the problem it was 30, 50, 100 years ago when you couldn't vote without threat of violence if you were black, couldn't sit at the same counter, ride the same section of a bus, couldn't own a business in some sectors. Blacks were not accepted in most major colleges. That was systemic racism. Most of the inequities of the inner cities today are rooted in the great society. See what LBJ said when these were enacted. The quote is too offensive to repeat. Again as in my previous post I asked for data. Do you have any that shows this systemic problem? If so I would happily consider it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 20, 2020, 09:07:24 pm
I don't know what facts or data there can be that "proves" racism.  I know that it certainly exists in the US and all over the world for that matter.
You don't want anecdotal stories because it "isn't convincing" yet those stories are the reality. 
I know for a fact because my wife is a minority and I know of her experiences and how deeply she remembers them.  Other minorities I know have similar experiences.
If you have a discussion with any minority on your own I'm confident you will hear similar stories. 
Not sure what you even really mean by "it's not a problem"

Certainly it's used as a political tool to gain power and disparage others but that fact does not mean it's not a problem.

since the majority of our population is caucasian, most of the racism in this country is caucasian vs minority.  It exists among all races.  Some blacks particularly don't like my wife's race and have let her know it.  I could take you to restaurants in Mexico where you will be seated and served last because you're white.

While racism receds with each generation, it's still alive and well.   
I do not doubt what you say. growing up in Rockford I count many dozens of my friends who are minorities including several girlfriends. Here in southern Utah there are fewer African Americans but many more hispanic and asian minorities. I count many my friends, including a wonderful man who is a neighbor who is perhaps the best guy I know since moving here. I do not doubt they each have had experiences in their lives hurt them deeply, their race has not made life easier for them. I don't deny that. My neighbor also is still caring for his 42 yr old special needs son, so life has thrown some hard obstacles in his way. I have asked him about racism many times but his philosophy is that everyone has hard things they go through in life, the system beats up everyone in some way or another. If he stops to to complain he doesn't get anywhere. I like that philosophy, and have used it in my life. My successes in life have come despite severe trauma in my early years, loss of several fingers in an industrial accident and so on. There is data out there that can show systemic issues with race.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 21, 2020, 01:58:51 am
Brjones,  I appreciate your point. The problem is that your changes didn't really do anything to change my mind. In fact, I have received a fair amount of bigotry due to my religion including not being hired in one job and let go in another for my belief system. I am called a cult member, asked how many wives I have, and on this very board the death of the 98 year old president of my church was celebrated. Not his life, his death. And this man was like a father figure to me, he never harmed a fly in his entire life. I could be bitter about this, feel that this behavior was abhorrent and I would be right, but that attitude of being a victim is in direct opposition to success in life.

The major problem I have with the Democrat party is not their policies. Although I am not a fan of leftist policies in general, my major problem with Democrats is that their coalition is built through victimhood. Every four years they enter the black communities to tell them they are oppressed, they cannot succeed in life because of systemic racism, cops treat them differently because of their skin color (I don't dispute this, they are at times) and all of their problems are due to evil Republican racists. Mitt Romney, who I know personally, and who has not a racist bone in his body was suddenly a racist when he ran for President.

All of the problems of the community would be solved if they just vote Democrat again. Then, nothing changes. Democrats have run every major urban area for decades, every other President is a democrat, congress is quite often run by Democrats, even enjoying a super majority in 2008 and a Democrat President, yet nothing is done, nothing changes. It is a political ploy. Women are told that republicans are misogynists, LGBQ are told Republicans and Christians hate them and want to deny their right to exist, young people are convinced that student loans and capitalism itself is to blame for their lack of opportunity. More victims of the inequity of society. You might think I am in denial of the struggles of all these different people. I am not. But the thing is, life is hard. It is tough for everyone minus a few rich kids who have wealth handed to them. Funny enough, every one I know in that category is miserable, on drugs, have ruined marriages. Every one of them. Even wealth doesn't guarantee prosperity. Life is hard, it is supposed to be. Telling people they are victims does not help them. Yes there are racists. Yes there are misogynists, there are homophobes, (although too many are grouped in this category, myself included, for simply believing it a sin), there are obstacles in life. Selling victimhood for political capital is the single most racist move I can think of. There are black Americans on the right who see this for what it is and cry out against it. I am in their corner. A prominent black man once said this, ""More than half of all black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled — doubled — since we were children."

He went on to say that these absent fathers don't realize that "responsibility does not end at conception" and they are "acting like boys instead of men." Were those comments racist? In 1960, 22 percent of black children lived with single parents. In 1968 (shortly after the enactment of the great society welfare programs incentivized single parent households, , the number rose to 31.4 percent. By 2006, the 1960 percentage had more than doubled to 56 percent.

What is the single greatest indicator of poverty and potential criminal conduct regardless of race? The answer is being a child in a single parent household. So is it because of racism that more and more black households are single parent households? If so then why were only 22% in single parent households at a time when we can all agree that racism was rampant across the country?

Racism exists in this country, I don't deny it. But racism generally is not the problem it was 30, 50, 100 years ago when you couldn't vote without threat of violence if you were black, couldn't sit at the same counter, ride the same section of a bus, couldn't own a business in some sectors. Blacks were not accepted in most major colleges. That was systemic racism. Most of the inequities of the inner cities today are rooted in the great society. See what LBJ said when these were enacted. The quote is too offensive to repeat. Again as in my previous post I asked for data. Do you have any that shows this systemic problem? If so I would happily consider it.

Robb, the whole point of br’s post was to suggest there is a perspective and an experience that is different from your own, and that you dismiss it out of hand.

Once again you have missed the point entirely and interpreted everything through the lens of your own experience.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 21, 2020, 09:11:44 am
In truth Tico I quoted statistics and Obama in my response coupled with my and others experiences. Not sure where else to draw from on the subject short of interviewing every minority in the country. Where do you get your information on racism from? Others experiences and I would assume, data from somewhere. I am interested in the somewhere.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 22, 2020, 02:11:15 pm
This is why you don't just start handing out drugs because of anecdotal evidence:

A malaria drug widely touted by President Donald Trump for treating the new coronavirus showed no benefit in a large analysis of its use in U.S. veterans hospitals. There were more deaths among those given hydroxychloroquine versus standard care, researchers reported.

https://apnews.com/a5077c7227b8eb8b0dc23423c0bbe2b2
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 22, 2020, 02:18:11 pm
Have not read this to verify the claim, but right wing blogosphere thinks this is fake news.

https://twitter.com/mikebravodude/status/1252779019856154629?s=20

Also, read those comments.... just wow.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 22, 2020, 02:23:44 pm
Have not read this to verify the claim, but right wing blogosphere thinks this is fake news.

https://twitter.com/mikebravodude/status/1252779019856154629?s=20

Also, read those comments.... just wow.

1) I have not looked but I bet you got this from Pekin.

2) I guess this because the author is a Q guy which is Peke's thing. The Qanon stuff is wild.

EDIT

Just checked and I was right. That guy is really a piece of work.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 22, 2020, 03:07:01 pm
This is why you don't just start handing out drugs because of anecdotal evidence:

A malaria drug widely touted by President Donald Trump for treating the new coronavirus showed no benefit in a large analysis of its use in U.S. veterans hospitals. There were more deaths among those given hydroxychloroquine versus standard care, researchers reported.

https://apnews.com/a5077c7227b8eb8b0dc23423c0bbe2b2

Shocking. You knew when Fox News and that cun* ingraham started back-peddling, it was a wrap.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 22, 2020, 03:12:51 pm
It's too bad.  It would make a huge difference if we could find an approved drug that actually prevents deaths.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 22, 2020, 03:42:25 pm
Historically awful regime.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1253061064511459329?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 22, 2020, 04:17:05 pm
Historically awful regime.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1253061064511459329?s=21

They don't do well with reality.  You know, things like racism is not a problem anymore are things they say with a straight face.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 22, 2020, 04:20:13 pm
It's too bad.  It would make a huge difference if we could find an approved drug that actually prevents deaths.

There are a lot meds that are getting looked, but there was unlikely to ever be a magic bullet. This was also a small retrospective study. It doesn’t put the nail in the coffin on Plaquenil.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 22, 2020, 04:28:35 pm
here's a statement from the doctor that got fired. Trump voters want more Trump and less of this guy.  We live in an upside down world.

Quote
"Yesterday, I was removed from my positions as the Director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response by the Administration and involuntarily transferred to a more limited and less impactful position at the National Institutes of Health. I believe this transfer was in response to my insistence that the government invest the billions of dollars allocated by Congress to address the COVID-19 pandemic into safe and scientifically vetted solutions, and not in drugs, vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit. I am speaking out because to combat this deadly virus, science -- not politics or cronyism -- has to lead the way.

"I have spent my entire career in vaccine development, in the government with CDC and BARDA and also in the biotechnology industry. My professional background has prepared me for a moment like this -- to confront and defeat a deadly virus that threatens Americans and people around the globe. To this point, I have led the government's efforts to invest in the best science available to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Unfortunately, this resulted in clashes with HHS political leadership, including criticism for my proactive efforts to invest early in vaccines and supplies critical to saving American lives. I also resisted efforts to fund potentially dangerous drugs promoted by those with political connections.

"Specifically, and contrary to misguided directives, I limited the broad use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, promoted by the Administration as a panacea, but which clearly lack scientific merit. While I am prepared to look at all options and to think "outside the box" for effective treatments, I rightly resisted efforts to provide an unproven drug on demand to the American public. I insisted that these drugs be provided only to hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 while under the supervision of a physician. These drugs have potentially serious risks associated with them, including increased mortality observed in some recent studies in patients with COVID-19.

"Sidelining me in the middle of this pandemic and placing politics and cronyism ahead of science puts lives at risk and stunts national efforts to safely and effectively address this urgent public health crisis.

"I will request that the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services investigate the manner in which this Administration has politicized the work of BARDA and has pressured me and other conscientious scientists to fund companies with political connections as well as efforts that lack scientific merit. Rushing blindly towards unproven drugs can be disastrous and result in countless more deaths. Science, in service to the health and safety of the American people, must always trump politics.

"I am very grateful for the bipartisan support from Congress and their confidence in my leadership of BARDA as reflected in the generous appropriation to BARDA in the CARES 3 Act. It is my sincere hope that the dedicated professionals at BARDA and throughout HHS will be allowed to use the best scientific acumen and integrity to continue their efforts to stop the pandemic without political pressure or distractions. Americans deserve no less."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 22, 2020, 04:38:08 pm
As long as they disenfranchise minorities, let white supremacy flourish, ignore climate change, cage brown kids, and let Chad keep AR-15 assault rifles, it’s all good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 22, 2020, 04:53:24 pm
As long as they disenfranchise minorities, let white supremacy flourish, ignore climate change, cage brown kids, and let Chad keep AR-15 assault rifles, it’s all good.

They'll get all they can handle between now and next January.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 22, 2020, 05:46:46 pm
We can cross Birx off the doing right thing list.

https://news.yahoo.com/birx-says-georgia-residents-can-be-very-creative-about-getting-tattoos-and-haircuts-while-social-distancing-001903192.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 22, 2020, 05:52:56 pm
The director of the CDC was just forced to humiliate himself by trump. I don’t know why people do this to themselves. They are destroying their reputations in the service of a despicable conman. WTF?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 23, 2020, 01:46:26 pm
https://twitter.com/kfile/status/1253384997307899904

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 23, 2020, 01:51:41 pm
https://twitter.com/kfile/status/1253387355844730880
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 23, 2020, 01:58:12 pm
He only hires the very best people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 23, 2020, 02:52:25 pm
Actually, sometimes he does.  Those are the ones he promptly fires.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 23, 2020, 06:28:45 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhj2X_qgGg0&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0VWz5iCj6fb44oTJlDP65lecuuMhaP-SzD5f4M66PsGZldsQwPjoITA0I

In today's news, the president just suggested shine a UV light inside people to help fight covid. Potentially, also using disinfectant as a injection.

But he's going to need to use medical doctors to test these things first.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 23, 2020, 06:35:35 pm
Fauci keeps contradicting Trump, he might be in the unemployment line very soon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 23, 2020, 06:45:05 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhj2X_qgGg0&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0VWz5iCj6fb44oTJlDP65lecuuMhaP-SzD5f4M66PsGZldsQwPjoITA0I

In today's news, the president just suggested shine a UV light inside people to help fight covid. Potentially, also using disinfectant as a injection.

But he's going to need to use medical doctors to test these things first.

Every day is a new humiliation for the United States.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 23, 2020, 06:46:15 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EWUlFJgXgAIF_2T.png?format=png&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 23, 2020, 06:51:27 pm
I can’t say that I’d be all that bummed out if a bunch of trump supporters decided to take his advice and inject some disinfectant.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 23, 2020, 07:04:08 pm
I don't think Trump has the balls to fire Fauci.  But I have been surprised by him before.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 23, 2020, 09:17:53 pm
I mean holy **** **** he is a goddamn **** idiot.  My seven year old would do a better job.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 23, 2020, 09:21:54 pm
He is literally going to get people killed. There is prob some dip **** injecting bleach into their veins right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 23, 2020, 09:53:29 pm
People use is as an enema to “treat” their autistic children,’so yeah somebody is going to drink a bottle. Somebody else will cut themselves open to insert a UV light and other people will inhale Lysol or a new one I just found out about is nebulizing hydrogen peroxide.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 23, 2020, 10:39:02 pm
For once I’m cheering for his base to listen to him. Cmon you can do it! Drink all the bleach!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 23, 2020, 10:41:00 pm
For once I’m cheering for his bass to listen to him. Cmon you can do it! Drink all the bleach!
Some will, I guarantee it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on April 24, 2020, 12:11:29 am
He is literally going to get people killed. There is prob some dip **** injecting bleach into their veins right now.

He already has with his Chloroquine advice (of course he owns stock in the manufacturer).  People have died as a result of following it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 24, 2020, 01:04:07 am
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_158749182480707.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=400)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 24, 2020, 09:36:16 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EWX_BIoWoAA3uBR.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 24, 2020, 09:36:32 am
Bet OANN is on it

https://twitter.com/tvietor08/status/1253674230333403137?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 24, 2020, 09:56:00 am
Bet OANN is on it

https://twitter.com/tvietor08/status/1253674230333403137?s=21

Surely the Hunter Biden truthers are going to be up in arms over this one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 24, 2020, 10:09:02 am
'Reopening' country too early is Trump's reelection Hail Mary

THE WASHINGTON POST

Public health experts worry that 'reopening' the country too soon will be bad for public health. Economists worry it will be bad for the economy. The general public worries it will bad for, well, everyone.

So why is President Trump agitating to do so anyway, even encouraging insurrection against his own administration's stay-athome guidance?

Because it's the only Hail Mary chance he has at reelection. And, sure, it probably won't pay off. But just as he's done his entire life, Trump has no problem gambling with other people's money and well-being.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 24, 2020, 01:41:11 pm
CBJ i'm not sure why you're still beating your head against the wall on the bears forum. Expertise is frowned upon in the new world paradigm.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 24, 2020, 03:24:56 pm
CBJ i'm not sure why you're still beating your head against the wall on the bears forum. Expertise is frowned upon in the new world paradigm.

I was curious so I went over there and read a little of it. They really take after their hero in the way they just yell about whatever they want to be true, then double and triple down on it even when it's explained to them exactly why they are clearly wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 24, 2020, 03:29:09 pm
Actual quote from a Breitbart "fact check" that's circulating on Twitter.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EWX82W6WsAEyzs5?format=jpg&name=small)


So basically, inject doesn't mean inject, and the word disinfectant is actually interchangeable with more generic "other factors."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 24, 2020, 03:31:35 pm
So basically, inject doesn't mean inject, and the word disinfectant is actually interchangeable with more generic "other factors."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 24, 2020, 03:31:55 pm
ABove is from BR's post it was too small to read so i enlarged it.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 24, 2020, 03:33:07 pm
Donald now just came out and said,  he was being sarcastic about the disinfectant injections...

Not sure if i saw any of that in the video clip, he looked pretty **** serious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 24, 2020, 03:35:50 pm
Donald now just came out and said,  he was being sarcastic about the disinfectant injections...

Not sure if i saw any of that in the video clip, he looked pretty **** serious.

And, just a few minutes later, he started speculating on the same thing all over again.  He really thinks that disinfecting lungs is the magic bullet, can't believe nobody else has thought of it, and that he's the hero we all need.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 24, 2020, 03:41:11 pm
Drinking Lysol makes cleaning the toilet a snap.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 24, 2020, 03:45:45 pm
I feel bad for the people at The Onion because satire is impossible now. Here's an article they posted a month ago.

https://local.theonion.com/man-just-buying-one-of-every-cleaning-product-in-case-t-1842493766
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 24, 2020, 09:17:50 pm
Ehh I was having trouble downloading the update to OOTP and needed to take out some frustrations.  I love Apple products, but sometimes they drive me crazy and I start wishing I had a DOS prompt.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 25, 2020, 12:43:21 am
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_1587770433369.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=300)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 25, 2020, 12:19:38 pm
Yeah, it's not so much that Trump lies all the time, some of the time he's just being Cliff Claven.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 25, 2020, 12:57:01 pm
White house is scaling back pressers with Trump. Reporters can no longer ask questions, just a short statement and he's done. Too bad, he was doing a great job of showing the electorate his true genius.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 25, 2020, 01:13:17 pm
White house is scaling back pressers with Trump. Reporters can no longer ask questions, just a short statement and he's done. Too bad, he was doing a great job of showing the electorate his true genius.

This won’t last.  The only part of the job he likes are the campaign rallies. These are a stand in for those and he’s not going to have any rallies for awhile so he’ll eventually bring back the longer press conferences.  He won’t be able to help himself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 25, 2020, 04:11:55 pm
BlueJay - is this just another Facebook Scam?  It seems rather long for the typical crap that gets posted.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6122858/?fbclid=IwAR1KWHt_ZE6N_ok-KlAZIfhhMJ72qtaQGFGNcc3RW6BQ2sDCD6eRHJYTJJA
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 26, 2020, 08:07:57 am
Dictator ****

https://twitter.com/tripgabriel/status/1254176076663840768?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 26, 2020, 07:44:07 pm
Watch how quickly the goalposts move. Don’t blink or you’ll miss it.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EU2Q4ozXYAQXyz1.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EU2Q5HlWAAgOIW0.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EU2Q5lGXYAEIqk_.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EU2Q57yXsAEIjSU.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 27, 2020, 07:44:21 am
This article expresses my thoughts on the President's remarks perfectly. His opining in front of the public is foolish. He should be having these conversations behind closed doors. But the media cutting out the rest of the story is criminal. Because the right has lost all faith in the objectivity of the media they are more prone to turn to extremes, which can be dangerous. The Alex Jones of the world have an audience in no small part because the networks and CNN, NPR and the major papers have given up objectivity. I don't believe a word Alex Jones says. But I know many successful, hard working smart people who would believe him over the NY Times. That is a problem, and the media is to fault for it. Here is the article that spends a great deal of time bashing Trump for his foolishness this week, but makes the same point about how it was reported.

 https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/media-donald-trump-new-york-times-inflates-foolishness-into-monstrousness/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 27, 2020, 08:48:14 am
“The press destroys its own credibility, however, by reporting the president’s ill-advised remarks as if they were culpably, recklessly irresponsible remarks.“

Honestly people like Robb and daveP aren’t the issue. Hey Ticohans, go **** yourself for thinking it takes legions of paragraphs to reason with these people.

You’re just as guilty

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 27, 2020, 09:09:14 am
Tico has stopped taking the bait for the most part, he acknowledges its a waste of time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 27, 2020, 09:14:10 am
The problem with the NYT is that, because of their status as the paper of record, they try to be too evenhanded with their reporting on Trump. For example, when trump is spouting off about injecting disinfectant, their reporting was “some experts say this is dangerous” rather than “insane man makes a deadly suggestion” which is the correct way to describe what happened.  The reality of how horrible this president and his supporters are should not be understated but the NYT constantly does it out of some perverse sense of fairness. The bottom line is that Trump is a dangerous sociopath and the people that support are complicit in the destruction of everything he touches.  Robb, you are a horrible, stupid, irresponsible person for standing by this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 27, 2020, 09:29:07 am
Tico has stopped taking the bait for the most part, he acknowledges its a waste of time.

Fair enough. But he caped for a guy who has repeatedly spouted racist, homophobic shi* for years on this forum.
ticohans
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3965
View Profile  Email  Personal Message (Offline)


Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
« Reply #3050 on: February 15, 2020, 06:36:47 pm »
Quote
Robb, don’t take the bait.“
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 27, 2020, 10:33:32 am
I think that was in response to a post by Ron Green, we're pretty sure that is just Jes Beard's new name. I think Tico was saying dont go down that road with Jes its not worth the effort.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 27, 2020, 11:03:41 am
I think that was in response to a post by Ron Green, we're pretty sure that is just Jes Beard's new name. I think Tico was saying dont go down that road with Jes its not worth the effort.

I apologize Tico; that was rude and out of order.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 27, 2020, 11:07:15 am
There seems to be a lot of rudeness on this thread lately.  It might feel good, but it accomplishes nothing else.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 27, 2020, 11:59:39 am
There seems to be a lot of rudeness on this thread lately.  It might feel good, but it accomplishes nothing else.
I'd say a few cases of quarantine fatigue are now appearing at the Bleacher Bums forum.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 27, 2020, 12:10:25 pm
There seems to be a lot of rudeness on this thread lately.  It might feel good, but it accomplishes nothing else.

In retrospect a lot of people got away with a lot of shi* for decades
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 27, 2020, 12:27:54 pm
The two sides are like ships in the night.  It's better to try to find common ground than to demonize the opposition.  Not easy when so much of our politics and media coverage is so polarizing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 27, 2020, 12:30:59 pm
The two sides are like ships in the night.  It's better to try to find common ground than to demonize the opposition.  Not easy when so much of our politics and media coverage is so polarizing.

Where would you personally begin to find said ground? As a longtime bbf’er
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 27, 2020, 12:36:23 pm
Fact-based discussion of policies related to the many issues our country faces.  Without resorting to personal attacks/pejoratives.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 27, 2020, 12:40:06 pm
Fact-based discussion of policies related to the many issues our country faces.  Without resorting to personal attacks/pejoratives.

Nominating you to distinguish facts from alternative facts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 27, 2020, 01:15:48 pm
The last couple pages in this topic have been... confusing.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 27, 2020, 01:24:20 pm
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1254832719495868416?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 27, 2020, 05:50:26 pm
This won’t last.  The only part of the job he likes are the campaign rallies. These are a stand in for those and he’s not going to have any rallies for awhile so he’ll eventually bring back the longer press conferences.  He won’t be able to help himself.

He took two days off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 27, 2020, 05:53:21 pm
He’s the most narcissistic person in America. He can’t stand being out of the spotlight.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 27, 2020, 06:22:32 pm
He took two days off.

Like a fly to ****, he needs it.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 27, 2020, 06:30:45 pm
Any Texans on the board that voted for Abbott? If so what was the appeal there?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 27, 2020, 08:14:26 pm
On a different note, how is everyone doing at their respective jobs? everything ok? troublesome? Not just in terms of your job, but your industry, curious to see what the impact is that folks are seeing.

I work in RE development, this past month our YoY April rent collectibles are down 38%.... half the portfolio is S8, so the effective number is much higher in terms of actual rent payers. We are a LIHTC company, so all of our tenants fall into the low income bracket.  In terms of future prospects, the value of the tax credits have collapsed almost as much as 2009. Metro area pricing has fallen from .96-1.02 a taxcredit to .80-.86. Further pain is expected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 27, 2020, 08:20:46 pm
I'm not supposed to go into my lab so I'm working from home.  We need preliminary data for a grant, so it's hurting me.  But it could be a lot worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 27, 2020, 09:07:41 pm
I have been retired for years, so I am unaffected by most of the bad stuff.  However, my 401k became a 201k for a while, although at least now it is closer to a 301k.  I had moved into another house, but when I was unable to sell the old one at what I considered a reasonable price, I rented it out.  Fortunately, the renter is an 10 year Army recruiter, so his paycheck is about as secure as it comes.

Fortunately, my three daughters and their husbands are in jobs that can be done at home, so they are economically secure at this time.

The ones that really have it tough are those with jobs that can not be done remotely, especially those whose work is generally done in close quarters.  Having worked for decades in the food industry, I can understand why there are so many problems developing in meat packing plants, dairies, and among food processors. 

With so many restaurants closed down, companies that served them can not generally switch to producing food for supermarkets, since the packaging equipment is totally different and can not be altered.  A dairy can not switch from producing milk in 5 gallon cans to producing quart or half gallon cartons.  And it moves down the chain.  Dairy farms that service the nearby "restaurant" dairy can not ship their product far enough to service much more distant "Super Market" dairies.  And since most of them were already working at capacity, they could not accept the milk anyway.  problems have been local and relatively small so far, but if we keep the economy closed down for much longer, the supply chain is going to have a lot of problems.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 27, 2020, 09:19:25 pm
BlueJay - is this just another Facebook Scam?  It seems rather long for the typical crap that gets posted.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6122858/?fbclid=IwAR1KWHt_ZE6N_ok-KlAZIfhhMJ72qtaQGFGNcc3RW6BQ2sDCD6eRHJYTJJA

Short answer is yes a very expensive scam used by quacks.

Longer answer
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ultraviolet-blood-treatment-revisited/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 27, 2020, 09:38:13 pm
Thanks, BlueJay
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on April 28, 2020, 08:42:09 am
The problem with the NYT is that, because of their status as the paper of record, they try to be too evenhanded with their reporting on Trump. For example, when trump is spouting off about injecting disinfectant, their reporting was “some experts say this is dangerous” rather than “insane man makes a deadly suggestion” which is the correct way to describe what happened.  The reality of how horrible this president and his supporters are should not be understated but the NYT constantly does it out of some perverse sense of fairness. The bottom line is that Trump is a dangerous sociopath and the people that support are complicit in the destruction of everything he touches.  Robb, you are a horrible, stupid, irresponsible person for standing by this.
I will agree with you for once.  I am stupid for trying to have a conversation here.  As usual this grows tiresome. I'll be putting this thread on ignore again going forward. Feel free to continue your echo chamber without further disruption.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on April 29, 2020, 01:13:10 pm
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_158811461219313.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=300)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on April 29, 2020, 05:50:15 pm
I think it is idiotic to open the beaches at this time.  However, Florida was able to contact trace the known cases on the Gulf Coast, and findings indicate that the vast majority of cases stemmed from the bars and restaurants surrounding the beaches, rather than the beaches themselves.  This is consistent with the findings that indicate that the virus can live on an aerosol speck up to one hour in an cool inside area, while it lasts little more than a minute and a half in warm sunshine ultraviolet light.  Regardless, it can still spread outside, especially if social distancing is not maintained.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 30, 2020, 04:26:57 pm
Absolutely absurd. Racism doesn’t exist.

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1255966109142069255?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 30, 2020, 04:28:07 pm
That “Liberate Michigan” tweet was just rhetoric.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 30, 2020, 04:30:37 pm
Absolutely absurd. Racism doesn’t exist.

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1255966109142069255?s=21

Come on, it really isn't a problem. If a white Mormon dude in Utah isn't experiencing it, then who would?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on April 30, 2020, 05:02:57 pm
Flu Klux Klan
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 01, 2020, 11:00:27 am
Absolutely absurd. Racism doesn’t exist.

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1255966109142069255?s=21

A mob of the MAGA persuasion
Conducted a statehouse invasion.
Though heavily armed,
They parted unharmed,
And that’s how you know they‘re Caucasian.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 01, 2020, 01:33:11 pm
Canada is better than the United States.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/01/world/canada-assault-style-weapons-ban-trnd/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 02, 2020, 10:08:36 am
Trump voters here. They aren’t very subtle.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EW9O98yWoAE4U1Y.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 02, 2020, 10:34:22 am
More, from a primary source of news for Trumpers.  Pekin on the Bears board is a big fan. There can be no doubt what these folks are all about.

Quote
Laura Ingraham retweets article from white nationalist group VDare blaming immigrant workers for coronavirus hotspots

https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/laura-ingraham-retweets-article-white-nationalist-group-vdare-blaming
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 02, 2020, 11:31:51 am
Jack - when a photo posts as large as that you can change the last word of the URL to medium or small.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 03, 2020, 12:19:15 am
Was always a bullshit grift and as usual Fox promoted it non-stop and the rubes bought into it

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1256737691137425410?s=21

Nearing 70K body count for the hoax
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 03, 2020, 10:39:01 am
Was always a bullshit grift and as usual Fox promoted it non-stop and the rubes bought into it

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1256737691137425410?s=21

Nearing 70K body count for the hoax

They are committed to it even at the expense of something that might actually help.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/02/donald-trump-coronavirus-remdesivir-229765
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 03, 2020, 01:27:37 pm
Imagine protesting a virus that has killed hundreds of thousands worldwide after losing your **** because a black man kneeled in defiance of police brutality.

Real sound thinkers
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 03, 2020, 02:04:28 pm
https://twitter.com/tyreebp/status/1256813343764918272?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 05, 2020, 01:36:17 pm
Racism is not an issue anymore.

Quote
A man has been spotted wearing a racist Ku Klux Klan (KKK) hood to a grocery store in San Diego County, Calif., where face masks are mandatory in public under local coronavirus rules.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/a-symbol-of-hatred-shopper-spotted-in-kkk-hood-under-coronavirus-mask-rule-in-california/ar-BB13AyNB?ocid=st

(https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB13AwVq.img?h=1016&w=1526&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 05, 2020, 03:23:30 pm
Come on.  Maybe he's a Conehead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on May 06, 2020, 01:18:14 am
Not classy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 06, 2020, 08:37:33 am
https://twitter.com/davidbegnaud/status/1257737290786443266?s=21

No charges filed, no arrests made. No racism.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 06, 2020, 08:45:23 am
https://twitter.com/davidbegnaud/status/1257737290786443266?s=21

No charges filed, no arrests made. No racism.

They literally hunted him down and yet they are getting off on a self-defense excuse.  Business as usual in this non-racist country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 06, 2020, 09:46:54 am
That is absolutely brutal to watch.

IF that were a white kid chased by 3 black guys... how big would the police response be? tulsa all over again?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 06, 2020, 10:22:33 am
Lot of folks with the self defense argument in the comments... so you arnt allowed to defend your self when people chase you down in trucks with guns? i wouldn't have personally touched that gun... but jesus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 06, 2020, 10:29:06 am
Lot of folks with the self defense argument in the comments... so you arnt allowed to defend your self when people chase you down in trucks with guns? i wouldn't have personally touched that gun... but jesus.

What a **** world. He's out for a run, gets hunted by guys with guns, and THEY are the ones who needed to defend themselves?  This is completely insane.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 07, 2020, 02:33:07 pm
Damn...was so excited to see TOTAL EXONERATION!

https://twitter.com/scotusreporter/status/1258442187521523712?s=21

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 07, 2020, 02:37:36 pm
This is just unreal.

https://twitter.com/kendilaniannbc/status/1258473274616565761?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 07, 2020, 04:04:10 pm
I hope Trump and Barr's destruction of the justice department is not permanent.  What they have done, capped off by letting Flynn walk, is historically bad and will be the blackest mark on an already very dark moment in our history.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 12, 2020, 11:22:48 pm
https://getpocket.com/explore/item/people-with-extreme-political-views-have-trouble-thinking-about-their-own-thinking?utm_source=pocket-newtab
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 14, 2020, 02:00:34 pm
I think the above article explains why too many Trump supporters cannot confess that their support of him is ill placed.  To do so is to admit they were wrong.   It also explains like labeling people socialists, racists, liberals, and greedy does more to entrench people than get them to reconsider their positions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on May 15, 2020, 09:33:00 pm
Trump is on to something.  He says there would be fewer Covid cases if there were less testing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 15, 2020, 09:42:46 pm
Trump is on to something.  He says there would be fewer Covid cases if there were less testing.

Next up, that elusive cure for cancer.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 15, 2020, 10:26:01 pm
Trump is on to something.  He says there would be fewer Covid cases if there were less testing.

That's been the core of Japan's strategy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 18, 2020, 03:53:52 pm
Trump now claims he has been taking hydroxychloroquine for the last week and a half because he has heard good things about it.

So he's either lying (which is probably the case), or he has found a doctor to prescribe it who should probably no longer be allowed to practice medicine. Either way, more idiots are going to try to take this drug they don't need now because Trump went on national TV and said he's doing it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 18, 2020, 04:24:05 pm
2 more studies where published that Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin had no effect on COVID-19. Maybe next he’ll try drinking bleach or surgically implanting a UV light. I can’t imagine what it has be to be like to be his doctor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 18, 2020, 04:33:42 pm
Trump now claims he has been taking hydroxychloroquine for the last week and a half because he has heard good things about it.

So he's either lying (which is probably the case), or he has found a doctor to prescribe it who should probably no longer be allowed to practice medicine. Either way, more idiots are going to try to take this drug they don't need now because Trump went on national TV and said he's doing it.

I hope it’s true and I hope it destroys his heart.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 18, 2020, 06:47:37 pm
I can’t imagine what it has be to be like to be his doctor.
Trump's doctor once made the mistake of telling him he would be listed as obese.  Trump's answer was to say he should be listed as 6'3" instead of 6'1" so his weight would be acceptable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 18, 2020, 08:19:52 pm
I hope it’s true and I hope it destroys his heart.

Unless he is on another QT prolonging drug or has a prolonged QT interval it is unlikely to have much of an effect one way or the other.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 18, 2020, 08:52:21 pm
Just wow. Hydroxycloroquine is used by some folks for sucide...

This is what the president of the United States is pretending to be a good prophylactic treatment.

He is literally murdering people imo.



 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on May 19, 2020, 12:17:11 am
Trump is a tough guy, right? He can fight off the bad guys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEDP5-O9MZI
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 19, 2020, 02:24:36 am
Trump is a tough guy, right? He can fight off the bad guys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1AU4qi7tWg


Gotta watch out for bone spurs, too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 19, 2020, 08:32:10 am
Unless he is on another QT prolonging drug or has a prolonged QT interval it is unlikely to have much of an effect one way or the other.

I don’t know what that means but it doesn’t sound good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 19, 2020, 01:16:11 pm
I don’t know what that means but it doesn’t sound good.

It involves the electrical conduction is the heart and that is what the medication affects.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 19, 2020, 05:49:34 pm
Please, he's not really taking it, he's just trying to pump sales for the company he owns stock in that sells it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 20, 2020, 09:34:06 am
Shithead trying to steal another election. Democrats should be civil and reasonable about it all.

https://twitter.com/jocelynbenson/status/1263089382690631680?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 20, 2020, 09:39:41 am
Just so we are clear, Georgia cancelling an election and appointing a republican is fine

https://twitter.com/kentremendous/status/1263109415722352642?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 20, 2020, 11:58:50 am
Do you have a link for that.  The two Georgia senate electionss will be conducted in November.  I can't find anything that says that one of them will be appointed instead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 20, 2020, 12:11:27 pm
It’s a Georgia Supreme Court justice that is being appointed, not a senator.

Republicans aren’t even pretending to want a fair judicial system anymore.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 20, 2020, 03:06:14 pm
Enjoying watching Jocelyn dunk on that morbidly obese POS

https://twitter.com/jocelynbenson/status/1263185929726025729?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 20, 2020, 03:27:03 pm
I wish I could find a copy of this chart to post

What Georgia did was to sequence the chart of new cases by highest totals on the left and lowest totals on the right instead of chronological order.  That made it look as if new cases were declining.

Quote
Where does Sunday take place twice a week? And May 2 come before April 26?

The state of Georgia, as it provides up-to-date data on the COVID-19 pandemic.


https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/just-cuckoo-state-latest-data-mishap-causes-critics-cry-foul/182PpUvUX9XEF8vO11NVGO/



They have since apologized.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 20, 2020, 04:04:54 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EYOvKyeXQAQnSLZ?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 21, 2020, 08:31:56 am
Florida also fired the person in charge of their website counter. The website was previously widely praised and according to the designer it was because she wouldn’t manipulate the data to make it look better.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 21, 2020, 11:22:33 am
The stupidest person on earth is president.

https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/1263459814442704896
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 21, 2020, 01:20:02 pm
Obama wore a tan suit once
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 21, 2020, 07:04:24 pm
But her emails.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 21, 2020, 07:51:33 pm
https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1263574116667289600

Not even a dog whistle anymore
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 21, 2020, 07:55:05 pm
But her emails.

Its not emails this time around, its the actual mail, billions of fake mail in votes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 21, 2020, 09:52:59 pm
Its not emails this time around, its the actual mail, billions of fake mail in votes.

The funny thing is, there's increasing evidence that in many places, mail-in voting actually helps Republicans.  But the core principle of disenfranchising voters is so ingrained in Trump and the modern Republican Party that they can't allow themselves to budge an inch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 21, 2020, 10:13:57 pm
The other funny thing is that the only large scale voter fraud scandal with mail-in ballots involved Republicans stealing votes in North Carolina in 2018. He's worried about something that only his party has a history of doing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 22, 2020, 01:53:21 am
He wont get reelected now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 22, 2020, 04:09:22 am
The other funny thing is that the only large scale voter fraud scandal with mail-in ballots involved Republicans stealing votes in North Carolina in 2018. He's worried about something that only his party has a history of doing.

He's not worried about it - he knows it's BS and only Republicans do it.  It's just part of the act.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 22, 2020, 09:04:59 am
Shocker... so... a drug used by some to induce heart arrhythmias for sucide, increases risks of heart arrhythmias....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-hydroxychloroquine/drug-touted-by-trump-as-covid-19-treatment-tied-to-increased-risk-of-death-study-idUSKBN22Y1UW

Seriously ill Covid-19 patients who were treated with hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine were more likely to die or develop dangerous heart arrhythmias, according to a large observational study published Friday in the medical journal The Lancet.

Researchers analyzed data from more than 96,000 patients with confirmed Covid-19 from 671 hospitals. All were hospitalized from late December to mid-April, and had died or been discharged by April 21.

Just below 15,000 patients were treated with the antimalarial drugs hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, or one of those drugs combined with an antibiotic.

All four of those treatments were linked with a higher risk of dying in the hospital. About 1 in 11 patients in the control group died in the hospital. About 1 in 6 patients treated with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine alone died in the hospital. About 1 in 5 treated with chloroquine and an antibiotic died and almost 1 in 4 treated with hydroxychloroquine and an antibiotic died.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 22, 2020, 09:49:47 am
Shocker... so... a drug used by some to induce heart arrhythmias for sucide, increases risks of heart arrhythmias....

Fake news
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 22, 2020, 10:04:07 am
Add me to the list of people who believe Trump was never really taking hydroxychloroquine
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 22, 2020, 10:40:23 am
Do I even want to check out the Bears forum?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 22, 2020, 10:44:49 am
Study is wrong, it requires zinc to work, hit job against trump.

Saved you the time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 22, 2020, 10:59:49 am
Pekin is also doubling down on his "COVID-19 is a bullshit hoax" theory.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 22, 2020, 11:00:19 am
Add me to the list of people who believe Trump was never really taking hydroxychloroquine

I think that's right. The letter his doctor put out didn't actually say he prescribed hydroxychloroquine or that Trump was taking it. It just said he and Trump had multiple conversations and agreed the potential benefit outweighed it's risks.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/18/politics/trump-physician-on-hydroxychloroquine/index.html

And by yesterday (or maybe Wednesday?), Trump was saying that he was going to stop taking it in a day or two. So he's probably not claiming he's still taking it at this point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 22, 2020, 12:13:25 pm
Do I even want to check out the Bears forum?

Here’s a taste from just the last few minutes.

HCQ is perfectly safe when prescribed by a doctor in the correct amounts.  Anyone telling you differently is at best ignorant and at worst purposefully lying to you.  Which is a disgrace because they are keeping you from using a potentially cheap and effective life saving drug strictly for their own political purposes.

Doctor after doctor has gone on record saying it has been very effective against Covid 19 especially when a patient is first diagnosed.  The studies showing it is not effective are the ones that are given to patients on deaths door already.

I know a person who has been on it for years because they have Lupus.  It is given as a prophylactive (even to pregnant women) for people visiting areas that have malaria.  It has been around for decades and millions of people have taken it.

method you believe anything anyone tells you as long as it fits your very narrow political view.

It's sickening watching the media and others try desperately to accuse Trump of pushing this terrible, horrible drug that's killing people when in actuality it's been around for decades and used safely and has a good safety record. If you give it in much higher doses than intended it, along with pretty much any other drug, could kill you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 22, 2020, 12:16:44 pm
That's doctor speak for I prescribed it because my patient is an idiot and brow beat me into giving to him, because he is also my boss.

Study is wrong, it requires zinc to work, hit job against trump.

Saved you the time.

I would imagine tin foil hats also make it work better.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 24, 2020, 10:24:50 am
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1264558926021959680?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 24, 2020, 10:42:30 am
Voter suppression and gerrymandering is the only thing that keeps the Republicans in power. And they figured out that stocking the judiciary is their ticket to holding down the will of the people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 24, 2020, 10:58:53 am
Voter suppression and gerrymandering is the only thing that keeps the Republicans in power. And they figured out that stocking the judiciary is their ticket to holding down the will of the people.

Convincing people to vote against their own interests (see the Bears board) has also been quite effective.  As long as there are white folks threatened by a multi-cultural world, there will always be some folks who are willing to make their lives a little worse to make others a lot worse. Just have to hope the numbers that are out there willing to do this dwindle over time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 24, 2020, 11:02:26 am
I think your statements are a little too far... I don't think the rank and file Republicans are racist at the core... They're just economically disadvantaged in some manner and they are striking out at the unknown.

Has the GOP done a phenomenal job of stoking those flames and making these people behave in a certain manner Yes.

But are there at their core on an individual basis bad people I don't think so... At least I hope not so. But that might be my own naivette.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 24, 2020, 11:11:05 am
I think your statements are a little too far... I don't think the rank and file Republicans are racist at the core... They're just economically disadvantaged in some manner and they are striking out at the unknown.

Has the GOP done a phenomenal job of stoking those flames and making these people behave in a certain manner Yes.

But are there at their core on an individual basis bad people I don't think so... At least I hope not so. But that might be my own naivette.

There were a lot of studies that all suggest the reason Trump won was not economic anxiety but racial issues. It’s not a great thing to talk about and admit in the 21st century but, unfortunately, it was the main factor behind his movement.  We all want to think we are past that (see Robb’s comments about the state of racism in America) but we are not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 24, 2020, 02:22:25 pm
There were a lot of studies that all suggest the reason Trump won was not economic anxiety but racial issues. It’s not a great thing to talk about and admit in the 21st century but, unfortunately, it was the main factor behind his movement.  We all want to think we are past that (see Robb’s comments about the state of racism in America) but we are not.

Jack I'm going to assume that you are a white man.. and your experience of racism falls drastically short of what those of us who are not white actually experience. I empathize and I'm grateful for your thoughts.. but trying to pretend that anybody that sports Donald Trump is just a racist is not okay. In my personal experience it's by and large a economic problem not a racist problem.

And I want to say that with a giant f****** grain of salt.... Racism is alive and well here in the south. I experience it on a regular basis
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 24, 2020, 03:00:25 pm
Honestly yes racism did tip the board in Donald Trump's favor.... But to say it's the majority factor is a lie... That's just not the case..

and believe me I genuinely believe that Donald Trump is a 1000% racist. but I do not believe the electric shows him because of his racism. maybe 10% of his overall support was from those racists and that definitely took the favor in his balance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 24, 2020, 03:14:00 pm
I think your statements are a little too far... I don't think the rank and file Republicans are racist at the core... They're just economically disadvantaged in some manner and they are striking out at the unknown.

Has the GOP done a phenomenal job of stoking those flames and making these people behave in a certain manner Yes.

But are there at their core on an individual basis bad people I don't think so... At least I hope not so. But that might be my own naivette.

Yes they are. It’s ridiculous that Dems make concessions all the time for them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 24, 2020, 04:15:19 pm
https://twitter.com/arappeport/status/1264628611228860417?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on May 24, 2020, 04:43:22 pm
Being a racist should disqualify one from being President in the eyes of the electorate.  It is beyond appalling that this doesn't seem to be the case in our country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 24, 2020, 06:45:36 pm
Is Donald Trump a racist. yes.

Are all the people that are signing up for the nationalist movement racist as well. No.

It is just as important for us to reach out to those who are disenfranchised on the right as we expect them to reach out to us on the left.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 24, 2020, 06:59:07 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/25/new-zealand-pm-jacinda-ardern-live-tv-earthquake-wellington?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1590359539

The President would have wet himself and pulled the closest child on top of himself as a shield by 0:51.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 24, 2020, 07:34:48 pm
Is Donald Trump a racist. yes.

Are all the people that are signing up for the nationalist movement racist as well. No.

It is just as important for us to reach out to those who are disenfranchised on the right as we expect them to reach out to us on the left.

Yeah I disagree entirely; the only way Trump is an outlier is how brazen all the corruption is and how grossly perverse and racist his tone is (others have touched his level but Trump just lives in it). The breaking of institutions and ignoring laws was extremely on front street during GWB and Reagan. The negative impact of both is on similar levels to Trump, pre-pandemic GW was unquestionably worse.

It’s the same GOP playbook for decades, it's just more ope. The long term effects from Reagan etc was literally a Trumpian character.

Meanwhile...

https://twitter.com/abbydphillip/status/1264707779471818757?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 24, 2020, 07:43:58 pm
Trump is not the cause of the decline of the Republican party into neo-fascism and despotism - he's the result.  The difference is that he takes what's been mostly implicit in their words and actions and makes it explicit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 24, 2020, 08:06:23 pm
Yeah I disagree entirely; the only way Trump is an outlier is how brazen all the corruption is and how grossly perverse and racist his tone is (others have touched his level but Trump just lives in it). The breaking of institutions and ignoring laws was extremely on front street during GWB and Reagan. The negative impact of both is on similar levels to Trump, pre-pandemic GW was unquestionably worse.

It’s the same GOP playbook for decades, it's just more ope. The long term effects from Reagan etc was literally a Trumpian character.

Meanwhile...

https://twitter.com/abbydphillip/status/1264707779471818757?s=21

My comments did not address Trump's corruption in any way shape or form. He's legitimately the most corrupt president ever... 

My only point is saying that not everybody that falls under his umbrella it's as bad as him.... It's a lot like Nazi Germany all over again some people just don't see the forest for the trees.

It's important for us to reach out to those folks and make sure that we don't make them our enemies because it does not help this country in any way shape or form. This our duty we must reach out to those that we can save.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 24, 2020, 08:09:48 pm
I used to work with this black girl that had a shitty attitude and was lazier than hell and when she got called out for it she'd pull the race card.

I suspect that's the majority of the racism folks around here get.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 24, 2020, 08:12:23 pm
My comments did not address Trump's corruption in any way shape or form. He's legitimately the most corrupt president ever... 

My only point is saying that not everybody that falls under his umbrella it's as bad as him.... It's a lot like Nazi Germany all over again some people just don't see the forest for the trees.

It's important for us to reach out to those folks and make sure that we don't make them our enemies because it does not help this country in any way shape or form. This our duty we must reach out to those that we can save.

Wtf? How do you think we got here???
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 24, 2020, 08:28:33 pm
I guess the reason racism seems stronger in the South is we arent scared to call folks out for pulling the race card and everywhere else is.

We call a spade a spade regardless of race or color.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 24, 2020, 08:28:51 pm
Wtf? How do you think we got here???

Personally, I think continually calling every Republican racist made most people just started to tune it out.

I also think that there are large swaths of America where contact to somebody who isn’t white is very limited. My high school in Iowa was around 95% white and so my experiences where rather limited with other cultures. When people talked about racism in the past I would default to people aren’t wearing Klan stuff anymore so it isn’t a problem. The last few years I have started to learn that it can be way more subtle than that. Without the exposure to people of other ethnicities and races it is a lot harder to understand.  People can learn and change and Method’s approach is going to change more minds than just flat out saying your a racist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 24, 2020, 08:34:57 pm


Personally, I think continually calling every Republican racist made most people just started to tune it out.


I also think that there are large swaths of America where contact to somebody who isn’t white is very limited. My high school in Iowa was around 95% white and so my experiences where rather limited with other cultures. When people talked about racism in the past I would default to people aren’t wearing Klan stuff anymore so it isn’t a problem. The last few years I have started to learn that it can be way more subtle than that. Without the exposure to people of other ethnicities and races it is a lot harder to understand.  People can learn and change and Method’s approach is going to change more minds than just flat out saying your a racist.

The ostrich method.

This is a real problem, no question.  Writing off 40% of the population as unsalvageably racist and ignorant is not a good long-term formula for the country.  But the fact is, ignoring the fact that the 40% are mostly racist and almost entirely ignorant (half of Trump voters believe the sun revolves around the Earth) is not the right response. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 24, 2020, 08:40:00 pm
Personally, I think continually calling every Republican racist made most people just started to tune it out.

I also think that there are large swaths of America where contact to somebody who isn’t white is very limited. My high school in Iowa was around 95% white and so my experiences where rather limited with other cultures. When people talked about racism in the past I would default to people aren’t wearing Klan stuff anymore so it isn’t a problem. The last few years I have started to learn that it can be way more subtle than that. Without the exposure to people of other ethnicities and races it is a lot harder to understand.  People can learn and change and Method’s approach is going to change more minds than just flat out saying your a racist.

But it hasn’t. It’s gotten substantially worse. This isn’t a Trump problem. It has lasted for decades, centuries really.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 25, 2020, 09:51:50 am
This is the cost of incompetent and corrupt leadership.

@sbg1: 100,000 dead:

22 Iraq wars
33 9/11s
41 Afghanistan wars
42 Pearl Harbors
25,000 Benghazis https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/24/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-death-toll.html

https://twitter.com/sbg1/status/1264915616877686785
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 25, 2020, 04:09:10 pm
Definitely can change their minds if we just please and thanks em!

https://twitter.com/clairecmc/status/1264927307933908992?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 25, 2020, 05:59:56 pm
Trump is being xenophobic by calling it the "China virus" again.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1265013797334507521

The World Health Organization released new guidelines five years ago saying that new diseases shouldn't be named after parts of the world because "The use of names such as ‘swine flu’ and ‘Middle East Respiratory Syndrome’ has had unintended negative impacts by stigmatizing certain communities or economic sectors...We’ve seen certain disease names provoke a backlash against members of particular religious or ethnic communities, create unjustified barriers to travel, commerce and trade, and trigger needless slaughtering of food animals. This can have serious consequences for peoples’ lives and livelihoods.”

So in other words, WHO acknowledged five years ago that it's nothing but bigotry.

https://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/notes/2015/naming-new-diseases/en/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 25, 2020, 06:04:55 pm
What worries me about WHO is if Trump stops the US portion of their funding.  Then a WHO member nation creates a Covid-19 vaccine and the US is told "sorry, members only" or "members first".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 25, 2020, 06:58:46 pm
Tremendous essay

https://twitter.com/waltshaub/status/1264975985822359555
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 25, 2020, 07:14:50 pm
Trump is being xenophobic by calling it the "China virus" again.

That's nothing more than his standard operating procedure.  The next day he'll brag about how well he gets along with the Chinese premier.

No matter what happens later he can brag about having been right all along.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on May 25, 2020, 07:45:49 pm
Tremendous film

https://twitter.com/i/status/1224906560616316930
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 25, 2020, 08:58:56 pm
What worries me about WHO is if Trump stops the US portion of their funding.  Then a WHO member nation creates a Covid-19 vaccine and the US is told "sorry, members only" or "members first".

There are a large number of US based vaccines and the US has provided funding to other countries as well. In addition to get a mass produced vaccine most would have to partner with a late pharmaceutical company. Those companies won’t want to risk losing the US market for their drugs by ticking off US politicians. What would Trump’s response be if he is still in office when this happens?  How about the liberal wing of the Democrat party who already thinks they are evil.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 25, 2020, 09:42:37 pm
False equivalency 202.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 26, 2020, 07:25:09 am
You don’t think AOC and a Bernie would lose their minds if a large pharmaceutical company had a vaccine and wouldn’t sell in the US?  Sure, they seem to often have well thought responses to large pharmaceutical companies.  Either party in control would throw a gigantic fit if the vaccine was sold outside the US, because the other party would be hammering them for being a failure.

None of that matters though because the US is funding most of the promising research outside of China to make sure that we get it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 26, 2020, 12:49:33 pm
Some of the videos that have been showing up lately are not helping Robb’s “racism is not a problem” narrative.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 26, 2020, 01:55:40 pm
Some of the videos that have been showing up lately are not helping Robb’s “racism is not a problem” narrative.

Good thing they’re recorded or we would have fewer black men alive today
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 26, 2020, 02:06:47 pm
Nope, I should have known better


https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1265305335096467457?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 26, 2020, 02:07:46 pm
Good thing they’re recorded or we would have fewer black men alive today

Two of the most recent three feature murders.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 26, 2020, 03:22:14 pm
Dude looked like Marcellus Wiley.

He would have kicked all their asses and ran away still handcuffed if they didnt restrain him and lets not forget that he didnt get in that situation by eating too many cookies.

He was a criminal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 26, 2020, 03:29:40 pm
Remember, Dusty’s wife isn’t white so he can’t be racist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 26, 2020, 03:32:43 pm
Dude looked like Marcellus Wiley.

He would have kicked all their asses and ran away still handcuffed if they didnt restrain him and lets not forget that he didnt get in that situation by eating too many cookies.

He was a criminal.

Oh, in that case, he deserved to be murdered.  Glad you cleared that up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 26, 2020, 03:44:08 pm
You all are just a bunch of snowflakes who look to be offended.

The cops arrest a dude and we dont applaude the cops but instead take up for the criminal.

Thats not normal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 26, 2020, 03:48:39 pm
You all are just a bunch of snowflakes who look to be offended.

The cops arrest a dude and we dont applaude the cops but instead take up for the criminal.

Thats not normal.

Do you know what he did to get arrested (I don't)?  Why should the police be applauded for arresting a guy? Does simply getting arrested mean that death could be a justifted outcome?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 26, 2020, 04:06:56 pm
https://twitter.com/_SJPeace_/status/1265320823201714176?fbclid=IwAR2vkvuOlMsY2CGAZj6nFpuP833b7AfI1bO5y52ni1m8LYHgH0CZeGuDT4o

Watch that clip dusty... its hard to watch. they literally murder the guy while people are pointing out that is what he's doing.

They could have tased him or a number of other NON LETHAL actions to subdue the guy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 26, 2020, 04:07:54 pm
Y’all really respond to that jackass? Why? That’s wild.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 26, 2020, 04:23:12 pm
Im just saying that he didnt get in that situation from doing anything productive.

He was charged with forgery so in other words theft so this dude is living that stealing and drugs life.

If he was stealing from you I dont suspect you'd be too pissed off about his treatment.

Lets also remember he was resisting arrest.

Something else he brought upon himself.

Self inflicted wounds.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 26, 2020, 04:23:34 pm
Y’all really respond to that jackass? Why? That’s wild.

I'm a glutton for punishment. I can't resist responding to him or checking in on the Bears guys.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 26, 2020, 04:26:01 pm
And I cant resist poking at non Christian snowflakes who live their lives in fear and are pissed off if their not pissed off.

Not everyone here is that way though I might add.

I get a lot more private messages here than you'd believe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 26, 2020, 04:38:01 pm
That youve had children is a damn shame.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 26, 2020, 04:52:41 pm
And I cant resist poking at non Christian snowflakes who live their lives in fear and are pissed off if their not pissed off.

Not everyone here is that way though I might add.

I get a lot more private messages here than you'd believe.

So, people agree with your idiocy but aren't willing to say so in public on this forum with anonymous user names?  Pretty strong support there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 26, 2020, 05:05:49 pm
Twitter finally does the bare minimum and adds a fact check link to one of Trump's many lies:


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EY-VsmmXsAg_OPk?format=png&name=small)


They still haven't done anything about the disgusting Joe Scarborough conspiracy theories he's been tweeting out, though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on May 26, 2020, 09:32:11 pm
That youve had children is a damn shame.

lets hope that doesn't happen to his son someday by a racist cop
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 26, 2020, 10:27:05 pm
Probably just a coincidence.

Quote
Tragic video highlights systemic problem: Minneapolis police kill black people 13 times more than white people

https://news.yahoo.com/tragic-video-highlights-systematic-problem-minneapolis-police-kill-black-people-13-times-more-than-white-people-205152964.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 27, 2020, 07:36:25 am
lets hope that doesn't happen to his son someday by a racist cop

That kid or kids are **** regardless.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 27, 2020, 09:03:42 am
Here we have the president threatening to silence speech he doesn’t like and restrict voting from people likely to vote against him. This is so perfectly aligned against typical American ideals and the best illustration of why trump is the most dangerous president in history.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZBY4fDXYAACaPI.png?format=png&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 27, 2020, 01:19:22 pm
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/26/trump-asks-whether-he-should-taking-insulin-despite-not-being-diabetic/5263965002/

I have not had a chance to fact check this but somebody please tell me this is fake news....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 27, 2020, 02:28:30 pm
https://twitter.com/eoinhiggins_/status/1265485017767124995?s=21

F’n disgusting.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 27, 2020, 03:02:35 pm
That kid or kids are **** regardless.

My kids would be **** if they were a timid,soft,liberal like you.

Do you have self confidence issues?

Do you struggle to make eye contact with true alpha males like me?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 27, 2020, 03:18:57 pm
My kids would be **** if they were a timid,soft,liberal like you.

Do you have self confidence issues?

Do you struggle to make eye contact with true alpha males like me?

It's interesting that you equate institutional racism with "confidence" and "alpha males."  I wonder how confident you'd be if the balance of power were to shift?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 27, 2020, 03:20:31 pm
My kids would be **** if they were a timid,soft,liberal like you.

Do you have self confidence issues?

Do you struggle to make eye contact with true alpha males like me?

Ah so there are more than one? Damn shame. Surprised you’re still alive tbh.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 27, 2020, 03:48:23 pm
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/26/trump-asks-whether-he-should-taking-insulin-despite-not-being-diabetic/5263965002/

I have not had a chance to fact check this but somebody please tell me this is fake news....

I mean the man just has an amazing ability to understand medicine. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 27, 2020, 04:21:57 pm
Ah so there are more than one? Damn shame. Surprised you’re still alive tbh.

Those of privilege do not understand what occurs. I know you mentioned that you cannot believe that people still engage folks like Dusty.  My point again to you sir is we must. The only way we change what's occurring is by reaching out to go d damned fuc king morons like Dusty.

As soon as we stop trying to do that in my personal opinion we're just as bad as them.

I'm not sure where you live in this country goblue but I hope to have a drink with you someday.

Likely dusty is never a traffic stop from dying... Some of us are. he will never really understand what that means unless somebody reaches out to him and teaches him
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 27, 2020, 04:33:43 pm
Dusty double check your like based on my edit...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 27, 2020, 05:10:11 pm
I come to this thread to rile people up so whatever flack I get in the process is asked for so I cant complain about it but to put a bow on this Ill say this.

Yes I am a Southern,white,Christian and I know that's not very popular around these parts but I do want to make one thing perfectly clear.

I have been called the derogatory word towards blacks with a W instead of an N more times than youll ever understand.

I dont live the hunting,drinking, redneck lifestyle in any way and honestly despise it.

I dont understand the struggle of non whites anymore than non Christian's will understand the struggle of Christians.

I dont vote,dont give a damn who the president is,and only concern myself with taking care of me and mine.

You can call me several other things that would be correct but a racist is not correct.

I judge people based on how they treat me.

Might I disagree with their lifestyle or beliefs?

Of course but Ill never tell them or show it.

I fight the good fight,keep the faith,and intend to finish my course in the best manner possible.

Now Ill leave your thread.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 27, 2020, 06:09:57 pm
The White House has said Trump is signing an executive order tomorrow that has something to do with social media.

Since many of the things he tweets would get almost anyone else kicked off Twitter, it would be great if Twitter would respond by banning him the next time he violates their terms.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 27, 2020, 09:09:29 pm
I dont understand the struggle of non whites anymore than non Christian's will understand the struggle of Christians.

Yes, it is very difficult being part of the cultural majority (vast majority) in the culturally dominant country. Really rough.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 27, 2020, 09:23:31 pm
I come to this thread to rile people up so whatever flack I get in the process is asked for so I cant complain about it but to put a bow on this Ill say this.

Yes I am a Southern,white,Christian and I know that's not very popular around these parts but I do want to make one thing perfectly clear.

I have been called the derogatory word towards blacks with a W instead of an N more times than youll ever understand.

I dont live the hunting,drinking, redneck lifestyle in any way and honestly despise it.

I dont understand the struggle of non whites anymore than non Christian's will understand the struggle of Christians.

I dont vote,dont give a damn who the president is,and only concern myself with taking care of me and mine.

You can call me several other things that would be correct but a racist is not correct.

I judge people based on how they treat me.

Might I disagree with their lifestyle or beliefs?

Of course but Ill never tell them or show it.

I fight the good fight,keep the faith,and intend to finish my course in the best manner possible.

Now Ill leave your thread.
we

If you do not vote it's time to just shut the f*** up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on May 27, 2020, 11:25:14 pm
Please do not encourage him to vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 28, 2020, 02:52:23 am
Please do not encourage him to vote.

Or procreate any further - enough damage done there already.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 28, 2020, 04:36:51 pm
From Dexter Fowler. The MAGA crowd from the BFIB (lots of them) are going to go nuts.

Quote
ified
Here’s the thing. I know it’s hard to fully grasp why black people are outraged.
It’s hard to grasp unless you’ve seen people hold their purses tighter when you walk by, when you have people refer to you as “not black” when you’re not “ghetto”. When your parents have to give you a talk when you’re just a kid. “you can’t act like your white friends. you’ll get killed. they won’t”
This is a generational discussion EVERY black family has. It terrifies you as a kid, and as an adult.
You don’t understand why we know, those officers didn’t flinch at murdering that man, because he is black.
The race card. We hold it. You tell us “it’s not about race” if we ever hold you to it. You don’t want us to have even that 1 bone chilling “privilege” of defense. You don’t want us to hold any privilege.
We don’t hold the privilege of being a criminal, making a mistake, or simply taking a jog, the same as a white man, and being treated the same.
He couldn’t breathe. He was murdered. They were gently fired from their jobs. This isn’t right. This can’t go on.
(if you assume “you”, is you, and you’re upset about the generalization...... just think about that for a second)

https://www.instagram.com/p/CAvfX52hejf/?igshid=19fzeicy4pt6x
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 28, 2020, 09:16:05 pm
Posts like Dexter’s are how I realized I was wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 29, 2020, 09:13:46 am
Twitter is now pointing out when Trump violates their terms, but they aren't actually deleting his tweets or suspending him. This kind of trolling might just as effective at making him melt down, though.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZL8_mzWsAIva1E?format=png&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 29, 2020, 10:15:50 am
Nah, this is a Godsend for Drumpf. Plays right into his hands.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 30, 2020, 12:42:35 am
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_4fc7a473-4b19-4619-80a7-f10eecdb1307.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=400)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 30, 2020, 08:56:10 am
I want to hear more from Robb about how racism is no longer an issue in the US.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on May 30, 2020, 09:13:45 am
Amazing.

https://twitter.com/harikondabolu/status/1266570082903261185?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 30, 2020, 12:40:20 pm
Amazing.

https://twitter.com/harikondabolu/status/1266570082903261185?s=21
Fu ck the police. Those who seek order more than justice are part of the problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on May 30, 2020, 12:54:36 pm
Dave Kaplan with a strong statement on George Floyd's murder. First time I've seen him do anything like this.

https://twitter.com/thekapman/status/1266742748171898881/photo/1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on May 30, 2020, 12:59:02 pm
Seems to be evidence building that much (if not most) of the violence occurring is either being committed or instigated by white provocateurs: white racists and possibly also Antifa anarchists.

https://twitter.com/Freeyourmindkid/status/1266598693647638528
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 30, 2020, 01:10:47 pm
Seems to be evidence building that much (if not most) of the violence occurring is either being committed or instigated by white provocateurs: white racists and possibly also Antifa anarchists.

https://twitter.com/Freeyourmindkid/status/1266598693647638528
Same as Ferguson and other places.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 30, 2020, 01:31:59 pm
Seems to be evidence building that much (if not most) of the violence occurring is either being committed or instigated by white provocateurs: white racists and possibly also Antifa anarchists.

https://twitter.com/Freeyourmindkid/status/1266598693647638528
"Some of them are probably good people"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 30, 2020, 03:09:21 pm
Very enlightening comments today from Trump:
Quote
MAGA is make America great again. By the way, they love African-American people, they love black people. MAGA loves the black people.

A bit of a tell that MAGA and black people are separate. The rest of it is gibberish nonsense but the separation of his movement and African-Americans, while probably not something he meant to say, is a real tell. Not exactly breaking news but it is new to hear Trump say it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on May 30, 2020, 03:20:50 pm
Seems to be evidence building that much (if not most) of the violence occurring is either being committed or instigated by white provocateurs: white racists and possibly also Antifa anarchists.

https://twitter.com/Freeyourmindkid/status/1266598693647638528

100000%

https://www.google.com/amp/s/bringmethenews.com/.amp/minnesota-news/who-is-the-umbrella-man-who-started-damage-at-autozone

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on May 30, 2020, 03:58:20 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZSGuDGWkAE_tJo.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on May 30, 2020, 11:59:08 pm
Right now is the time for The Rock to cut a promo MLKJ style and call for peace.

He'd be the next president without a doubt.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on May 31, 2020, 09:42:56 am
Right now is the time for The Rock to cut a promo MLKJ style and call for peace.

He'd be the next president without a doubt.
Especially if he has Ric Flair as his running mate, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 31, 2020, 11:33:53 am
Flair wouldn't settle for VP.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 01, 2020, 11:29:00 am
**** the police.

https://twitter.com/_SJPeace_/status/1266695195808186369

https://twitter.com/i/status/1267319103167107072

https://twitter.com/i/status/1266945268567678976

https://twitter.com/chadloder/status/1266994073501487104

https://twitter.com/i/status/1266884475268616197

https://twitter.com/Mufaa6/status/1267265994583674883

Racism isnt a problem, and **** the police.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on June 01, 2020, 12:16:40 pm
Seems to be evidence building that much (if not most) of the violence occurring is either being committed or instigated by white provocateurs: white racists and possibly also Antifa anarchists.

https://twitter.com/Freeyourmindkid/status/1266598693647638528

The two fires that were set during the Nashville protests, one at the courthouse and the other at a well known boot store in downtown, were both set by white provocateurs.  The jackhole who set the fire at the courthouse was arrested yesterday, and it's not really clear what his motives were.

Thankfully things calmed down pretty quickly in Nashville, and much of everything was quiet yesterday.  I think the Antifa/white nationalists and other bad actors realized they weren't going to spark any widespread violent reactions here and got out of town pretty quickly. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 01, 2020, 01:42:10 pm
https://twitter.com/DaleMurphy3/status/1267273725335883778

Dale Murphy's son shot in the eye at a peaceful protest.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 01, 2020, 02:54:30 pm
Dale Murphy understands that there is endemic racism that must be acknowledged and fought against.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 01, 2020, 02:55:17 pm
The audio from Trump’s call with the governors this morning is literally frightening. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-governors-george-floyd-protests/2020/06/01/430a6226-a421-11ea-b619-3f9133bbb482_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 01, 2020, 02:56:05 pm
Dale Murphy understands that there is endemic racism that must be acknowledged and fought against.

Well, Dale Murphy needs to talk to Robb and get straightened out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 01, 2020, 03:35:13 pm
I'm sorry, I didn't realize this was a political issue. The dirtbags responsible for killing that innocent man were in a police department run by a democrat mayor in a democrat state. They very well could all be democrats. The officer who shot his son with a rubber bullet could be a democrat. The idiots setting fires and looting and rioting could be left-win or right wing or both, (which I think most likely). The point? A horrible thing has happened, those guilty should be brought to justice and pay the full price of their heinous act as much as possible. But if you think burning minority businesses, abusing officers who had nothing to do with it and put their lives on the line every day, many of whom are people of color, and stealing TV's from Target are a social statement about the actual crime then you are more ignorant than come across. Which, by the way, is hard to believe possible.

Many of those organizing protests were people of color wanting to do so peacefully. Many of them ended up having to protect their neighborhoods from the people shipped in to incite violence. Whoever they are, right left, middle, black , white or purple, they should be prosecuted and put in hard labor the rest of their miserable lives to pay back at least a small part of what they have done.

I grew up in a different America than this. I was taught by my grandmother, a blue as blue democrat and her red as red husband to love this country. This division has been growing  since the Clinton years. Every administration since has divided us more. Every politician has divided us more. Our country is burning and what are we doing? Pointing at the other "side."  We should all be appalled at all of this. We are supposed to be Americans first, nor Republicans and Democrats. But both sides are so antagonistic of each other that I fear this is just the beginning. This will only end with sides truly drawn, and arms taken up against each other. I hope to God that I am wrong. But if this topic is any indicator, my hope is in vain. I have tried to have a real discussion with you, a discussion of differences of opinion, but ending in name calling, venom, and lies and aspersions being cast on me because I disagree with you. If you want to truly protest what is happening in America and bring us back from the brink, then start with yourselves.  And I am talking to those who perhaps didn't join in but remain silent. Just like the the other officers who watched that as their fellow officer sat on a man's neck long enough to kill him and did nothing. Yes, it is a harsh example but until we can talk with each other with empathy and understanding, not emotion and anger, this will continue to escalate until you will finally have your civil war. And may God help us all if that happens. I'll just say this. It does put to bed the argument we had about why I need my Ar-15 with 30 round clips. To protect my family, home and business from the lawless mobs that are burning our cities right before our eyes.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 01, 2020, 04:18:07 pm
I'm sorry, I didn't realize this was a political issue. The dirtbags responsible for killing that innocent man were in a police department run by a democrat mayor in a democrat state. They very well could all be democrats. The officer who shot his son with a rubber bullet could be a democrat. The idiots setting fires and looting and rioting could be left-win or right wing or both, (which I think most likely). The point? A horrible thing has happened, those guilty should be brought to justice and pay the full price of their heinous act as much as possible. But if you think burning minority businesses, abusing officers who had nothing to do with it and put their lives on the line every day, many of whom are people of color, and stealing TV's from Target are a social statement about the actual crime then you are more ignorant than come across. Which, by the way, is hard to believe possible.

Many of those organizing protests were people of color wanting to do so peacefully. Many of them ended up having to protect their neighborhoods from the people shipped in to incite violence. Whoever they are, right left, middle, black , white or purple, they should be prosecuted and put in hard labor the rest of their miserable lives to pay back at least a small part of what they have done.

I grew up in a different America than this. I was taught by my grandmother, a blue as blue democrat and her red as red husband to love this country. This division has been growing  since the Clinton years. Every administration since has divided us more. Every politician has divided us more. Our country is burning and what are we doing? Pointing at the other "side."  We should all be appalled at all of this. We are supposed to be Americans first, nor Republicans and Democrats. But both sides are so antagonistic of each other that I fear this is just the beginning. This will only end with sides truly drawn, and arms taken up against each other. I hope to God that I am wrong. But if this topic is any indicator, my hope is in vain. I have tried to have a real discussion with you, a discussion of differences of opinion, but ending in name calling, venom, and lies and aspersions being cast on me because I disagree with you. If you want to truly protest what is happening in America and bring us back from the brink, then start with yourselves.  And I am talking to those who perhaps didn't join in but remain silent. Just like the the other officers who watched that as their fellow officer sat on a man's neck long enough to kill him and did nothing. Yes, it is a harsh example but until we can talk with each other with empathy and understanding, not emotion and anger, this will continue to escalate until you will finally have your civil war. And may God help us all if that happens. I'll just say this. It does put to bed the argument we had about why I need my Ar-15 with 30 round clips. To protect my family, home and business from the lawless mobs that are burning our cities right before our eyes.

Robb, i believe you live in Utah...  So I'll post you a link here right below this.  This is not about racism as much as it is about police brutality towards everybody it is definitely tinged with racism because it affects people of color way more than it does white people.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.abc4.com/news/salt-lake-city-riots/abc-4-news-captures-police-officer-armed-in-protest-gear-pushing-down-man-with-cane/amp/

Are you calling for this officer who pushed that elderly white man with a cane down to the ground for no reason whatsoever to be fired or disciplined in any way? Are you running to your congressman?  are you riding to the local prosecutor or the police chief?  You doing anything whatsoever to address the rampant police brutality or are you just waiting for this to go away as well because racism and police brutality apparently don't exist?

I can post many more videos of cops in different cities macing members of the press, beating up white people who are protesting as well, beating up peaceful black protesters for no reason, where's your outrage where is the anger that should come against the police state?

Are you just sitting here on a website telling people that you give a s*** or are you doing something in your life to live up to your faith that you obviously care about so much.

Jesus would not approve of what the police are doing pretty sure he'd be on the side of the fence.

The department of Justice under Donald Trump has taken away all protections and all ability of the federal government to investigate local police departments for the acts of brutality.  and it's pretty obvious to anybody paying attention that the police are back to their normal way of f****** over minorities.

I'm so f****** fired up about this I'm literally going to go unplug my router right now and not be on there enough for the next 24 hours.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 01, 2020, 04:23:27 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZclwfYU8AEGx-d.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 01, 2020, 04:48:57 pm
This division has been growing since the Clinton years. Every administration since has divided us more. Every politician has divided us more.

I will never understand what Republicans think Obama did that was so divisive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 01, 2020, 05:02:26 pm
I will never understand what Republicans think Obama did that was so divisive.

It’s not what he did...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 01, 2020, 05:09:46 pm
Pop not holding back:  https://www.yahoo.com/sports/gregg-popovich-unleashes-fiery-statement-on-trump-what-we-have-is-a-fool-in-place-of-a-president-184310589.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 01, 2020, 05:12:10 pm
I remember the health care reform and early on he called the Republicans in for a bipartisan discussion at the White House. Paul Ryan laid out what the Republicans would be interested in discussing and basically President Obama said “ I won” and shut it down.

He isn’t close to same league as what President Trump has been. He was just a run of the mill partisan who didn’t help the discussion at all. Their are certainly people that didn’t like him because of the color of his skin.

Omaha is sadly going to add to this mess. A young African American protestor was shot by a bar owner.  The bar owner may have been shooting a gun into the protestors before the altercation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 01, 2020, 05:51:00 pm
Yes the divisiveness that Obama propagated was healthcare for all...

meanwhile Republicans have been propagating tax cuts for the rich for a long time and ain't nobody getting killed.

There is no dark scale insurrection towards Republican b*******.

I sent this on the bears board I'll say it again here.  F*** the goddamn police
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 01, 2020, 06:24:37 pm
Yes the divisiveness that Obama propagated was healthcare for all...

meanwhile Republicans have been propagating tax cuts for the rich for a long time and ain't nobody getting killed.

There is no dark scale insurrection towards Republican b*******.

I sent this on the bears board I'll say it again here.  F*** the goddamn police

Medicare for all was never on the table under Obama. It was on how to get more people covered, which is a good thing. Sadly it was a poorly written bill and the. The Republicans under Trump put the nail in the coffin. It was close to actually being a really good bill. They made the penalty for not having insurance too low, made the plans stink and killed health savings accounts. A few minor tweaks and it really could have put the country in a much better place.  President Obama set the tone for his administration in that meeting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 01, 2020, 08:54:39 pm
I deal with ACA on the coverage end and for some in the right income range it is awesome. For the rest it has been a nightmare. Many of my clients who could afford coverage cannot now afford it or even come close.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 01, 2020, 09:09:17 pm
Robb, i believe you live in Utah...  So I'll post you a link here right below this.  This is not about racism as much as it is about police brutality towards everybody it is definitely tinged with racism because it affects people of color way more than it does white people.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.abc4.com/news/salt-lake-city-riots/abc-4-news-captures-police-officer-armed-in-protest-gear-pushing-down-man-with-cane/amp/

Are you calling for this officer who pushed that elderly white man with a cane down to the ground for no reason whatsoever to be fired or disciplined in any way? Are you running to your congressman?  are you riding to the local prosecutor or the police chief?  You doing anything whatsoever to address the rampant police brutality or are you just waiting for this to go away as well because racism and police brutality apparently don't exist?

I can post many more videos of cops in different cities macing members of the press, beating up white people who are protesting as well, beating up peaceful black protesters for no reason, where's your outrage where is the anger that should come against the police state?

Are you just sitting here on a website telling people that you give a s*** or are you doing something in your life to live up to your faith that you obviously care about so much.

Jesus would not approve of what the police are doing pretty sure he'd be on the side of the fence.

The department of Justice under Donald Trump has taken away all protections and all ability of the federal government to investigate local police departments for the acts of brutality.  and it's pretty obvious to anybody paying attention that the police are back to their normal way of f****** over minorities.

I'm so f****** fired up about this I'm literally going to go unplug my router right now and not be on there enough for the next 24 hours.
I did not see the footage or  even hear of the incident of a cop pushing an old lady down. If he did then I am all for him being punished according to the law. I believe most of you missed my point entirely. Some of you may join the protests on the streets tonight as your way of showing you do not condone the lawless behavior of those officers. If you are peaceful I do stand by your right to do so. If you smash windows and burn and loot businesses and physically harm those who might not have the same opinion as you then I hope you are arrested and serve every minute of the sentence you deserve.

Perhaps I didn't make my point clearly enough so I will try again. In your righteous anger for this man, (anger shared by every conservative I know, read or listen to by the way,) you are not seeing the endgame or you are encouraging it. If conservatives and liberals, Democrats and Republicans cannot be civil with each other, worse still view the other side as uneducated idiots, then the cretins among us on the far left and right will rule the day. The parties are moving further and further to their extremes. Freedom in this country is now being interpreted as contingent upon you agreeing with my viewpoint. This ride we are on is downhill and leads to a crash at the bottom. Whether or not I denounce a particular incident or a certain bill or even the president is beside the point. It is how I treat my fellow countrymen, especially those I disagree with, that will determine the fate of our union. If the vitriol I receive here simply for believing differently than you do is any indication, we are doomed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 01, 2020, 09:21:05 pm
I'm really upset this evening so I'm just going to shut the f******.  I'll comment again tomorrow morning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 01, 2020, 09:25:37 pm
Method, I can respect that. I will do the same. Have as good an evening as you can.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 01, 2020, 09:34:26 pm
This is an excellent article about how authoritarian rulers happen but really about the collaborators who make it possible. Remember, it can happen here and we are in the middle of it right now.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/07/trumps-collaborators/612250/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 01, 2020, 11:12:10 pm
Since this is a baseball board, here's a retweet by Sean Doolittle that documents a completely peaceful protest broken up so the big, tough, "law and order" president could feel safe walking across the street.

https://twitter.com/whatwouldDOOdo/status/1267652682271031299
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 01, 2020, 11:51:29 pm
Since this is a baseball board, here's a retweet by Sean Doolittle that documents a completely peaceful protest broken up so the big, tough, "law and order" president could feel safe walking across the street.

https://twitter.com/whatwouldDOOdo/status/1267652682271031299

Once again.  F*** the police.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 02, 2020, 12:41:48 am
Good for Dale Murphy (not so good for what happened to his son).

Dale Murphy
@DaleMurphy3
 · May 31
Last night, my son was shot in the eye with a rubber bullet while peacefully protesting for justice for George Floyd. His story is not unique. Countless others have also experienced this use of excessive police force while trying to have their voices heard.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2020/06/01/dale-murphys-son-shot-rubber-bullet-while-protesting-denver/5306896002/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 02, 2020, 07:52:23 am
Omaha is sadly going to add to this mess. A young African American protestor was shot by a bar owner.  The bar owner may have been shooting a gun into the protestors before the altercation.

Well, I’m sure a guy raised by the legendary civil rights activist Joe Ricketts will be just the guy to calm everything down.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 02, 2020, 08:33:29 am
Derek Chauvin and CB Bucknor have something in common:  They both belong to unions that have become entirely too powerful.

I don’t know where the line is but 12 complaints of police brutality is way too many.  Chauvin should have been terminated years ago.  Sadly, in his case, he would not have had much trouble finding employment in another jurisdiction.

Fixing this union situation isn’t the only change that should come out of the George Floyd murder, but it would be a good place to start.

(https://www.snopes.com/tachyon/2020/05/030dfdff.jpeg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on June 02, 2020, 09:01:29 am
Apparently many "good" cops leave after a few years because they see the abuses swept under the rug
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 02, 2020, 09:31:51 am
The president of the united states gassed peaceful protesters exercising their 1st amendment rights for a photo opp. What world is this?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on June 02, 2020, 10:26:18 am
Desperate measures for desperate times
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 02, 2020, 11:08:58 am
Well, I’m sure a guy raised by the legendary civil rights activist Joe Ricketts will be just the guy to calm everything down.

He was doing ok until he had a meeting with African American leaders and let out his inner Joe for a second.


Dave Sund
@davesund
Pastor Jarrod Parker of St. Mark’s Baptist Church in Omaha: In a meeting with black pastors, other black leaders, the Mayor, and the Police Chief, Gov. Pete Ricketts said “The problem I have with you people...” #JusticeForJamesScurlock

Rob McCartney
@KETVRob
Mike, the Governor's office sent us this response tonight: "I chose my words poorly, and apologized when it became apparent that I had caused offense."

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 02, 2020, 11:15:15 am
He was doing ok until he had a meeting with African American leaders and let out his inner Joe for a second.


Dave Sund
@davesund
Pastor Jarrod Parker of St. Mark’s Baptist Church in Omaha: In a meeting with black pastors, other black leaders, the Mayor, and the Police Chief, Gov. Pete Ricketts said “The problem I have with you people...” #JusticeForJamesScurlock

Rob McCartney
@KETVRob
Mike, the Governor's office sent us this response tonight: "I chose my words poorly, and apologized when it became apparent that I had caused offense."

In times of stress, it's hard to hide who you really are.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 02, 2020, 11:26:46 am
It is nice to see that since Ben Sasse won his primary he can go back to being Anti-Trump again.  I'd respect him more if he would have stuck with it the entire time, but he's basically the only Republican that can get my vote in November.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 02, 2020, 01:36:40 pm
Here's a thread documenting that many Republican senators are just pretending like they didn't see Trump's speech and photo-op last night. Murkowski is the only one who even bothered to indirectly say anything that could be taken as a criticism. And Ted Cruz was the worst: Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, when asked if what we saw at the White House last night was an abuse of power: “By the protestors, yes.” That's just awful, even for Cruz.

https://twitter.com/kasie/status/1267863275548663808
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 02, 2020, 01:46:15 pm
It is nice to see that since Ben Sasse won his primary he can go back to being Anti-Trump again.  I'd respect him more if he would have stuck with it the entire time, but he's basically the only Republican that can get my vote in November.

Has Sasse actually done anything anti-Trump like vote against one of his unqualified judge or appointments?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 02, 2020, 03:48:05 pm
A quick google search showed he voted against Robert Lightizer for US trade represenative for some reason.  538 has him voting with Trump 86.4% (only 13 Senate Republicans voted with Trump less) of the time, the other senator 91.7%.  For comparison the House of Representatives guys vote with him 94.1%, 95.8%, 94.6% since 2017.  Only Supreme Court votes are listed.  Another site has him voting for Gorsuch, Oldham, Kavanaugh, Kobes, Kacsmaryk and against Wilhemina Wright for judicial appointments. 

Nebraska is a deep red state, Ben Nelson is about as liberal as you are going to get and he probably couldn't get elected now.  Omaha might elect a moderate democrat for the House of Representatives, but of course the Democrats had to nominate the more liberal person so Don Bacon likely gets reelected, unless Trump really pisses people off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 02, 2020, 05:36:10 pm
People seem pretty pissed off right now....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 02, 2020, 06:45:02 pm
One of many photos of bricks mysteriously appearing near potential riot sites with no construction going on in the area.  I saw one report about a guy paying demonstrators to throw them.

(https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2020/06/brick4.jpeg?w=620)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 02, 2020, 07:01:15 pm
Has Sasse actually done anything anti-Trump like vote against one of his unqualified judge or appointments?

There​​'s no one better at sounding indignant and doing absolutely nothing about it.  If you need that done, Sasse is your guy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 02, 2020, 07:17:04 pm
People seem pretty pissed off right now....

Bacon beat his opponent in 2018 in a bad year for Republicans and the only poll showing her up is from the DNCC and that is only by 1%.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN23831W
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 02, 2020, 07:18:04 pm

There​​'s no one better at sounding indignant and doing absolutely nothing about it.  If you need that done, Sasse is your guy.


I don't know, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski are right there with him. 

Mitt Romney is a step behind the other three only because he did the bare minimum and voted to remove on one of the two articles of impeachment (even though he knew his vote meant nothing).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 02, 2020, 07:26:17 pm
There​​'s no one better at sounding indignant and doing absolutely nothing about it.  If you need that done, Sasse is your guy.

Trump won Nebraska by 25%, the fact that any Nebraska politician stands up to him is a shock.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 02, 2020, 07:28:48 pm

I don't know, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski are right there with him. 

Mitt Romney is a step behind the other three only because he did the bare minimum and voted to remove on one of the two articles of impeachment (even though he knew his vote meant nothing).

Sasse is better at the righteous indignation part though.  He really sells the moment.

I would actually say Murkowski is a hair’s breadth better than the others (apart from maybe Romney) in that she has, very rarely, actually defied the party on votes that matter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 02, 2020, 07:41:25 pm
Well, in any case, I think we can agree that all four of them are almost always too gutless to actually back up the anti-Trump things they say.

On a different topic, where were all the second amendment worshipers expressing outrage today? They constantly yell about how they need unfettered access to guns to defend themselves against an oppressive government. But after the president broke up a peaceful protest using military police with tear gas for a photo op yesterday, they're nowhere to be found. In fact, these self-proclaimed defenders from tyranny cheered it on.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 02, 2020, 07:48:50 pm
Well, in any case, I think we can agree that all four of them are almost always too gutless to actually back up the anti-Trump things they say.

On a different topic, where were all the second amendment worshipers expressing outrage today? They constantly yell about how they need unfettered access to guns to defend themselves against an oppressive government. But after the president broke up a peaceful protest using military police with tear gas for a photo op yesterday, they're nowhere to be found. In fact, these self-proclaimed defenders from tyranny cheered it on.

They are eagerly buying the party line that it was actually just a couple smoke bombs (as if that’s acceptable) and wasn’t any big deal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 02, 2020, 09:03:56 pm
Well, in any case, I think we can agree that all four of them are almost always too gutless to actually back up the anti-Trump things they say.

On a different topic, where were all the second amendment worshipers expressing outrage today? They constantly yell about how they need unfettered access to guns to defend themselves against an oppressive government. But after the president broke up a peaceful protest using military police with tear gas for a photo op yesterday, they're nowhere to be found. In fact, these self-proclaimed defenders from tyranny cheered it on.
You need to check your sources.  There was no tear gas used.  They were smoke cannisters because the crowd had begun throwing bottles and other projectiles at the police.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 02, 2020, 09:07:54 pm
Well, in any case, I think we can agree that all four of them are almost always too gutless to actually back up the anti-Trump things they say.

On a different topic, where were all the second amendment worshipers expressing outrage today? They constantly yell about how they need unfettered access to guns to defend themselves against an oppressive government. But after the president broke up a peaceful protest using military police with tear gas for a photo op yesterday, they're nowhere to be found. In fact, these self-proclaimed defenders from tyranny cheered it on.
I am a second amendment believer and this situation is a perfect reason why.  You may agree with the rioters wholeheartedly but that won't stop them from burning your business or beating you to death.  You take your outrage, I'll load my guns,  yes the AR-15 with 30 round clips and defend my family with deadly force if necessary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 02, 2020, 09:14:02 pm
In case you think I'm making it up.  https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/02/media-falsely-claimed-violent-riots-were-peaceful-and-that-tear-gas-was-used-against-rioters/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 02, 2020, 09:27:25 pm
Well, if the famously honest Trump admin says that’s what happened, it must be true.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 02, 2020, 09:59:21 pm
It wasn’t tear gas as first reported.  The chemical irritant was pepper balls fired by Park Police. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/500786-interior-department-faces-questions-over-response-to-lafayette%3famp
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 02, 2020, 10:11:52 pm
In rather good news for once Steve King, the racist GOPer from Iowa, lost his primary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 02, 2020, 10:13:00 pm
My sentiments exactly:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/02/politics/george-will-donald-trump/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 02, 2020, 10:14:29 pm
You need to check your sources.  There was no tear gas used.  They were smoke cannisters because the crowd had begun throwing bottles and other projectiles at the police.

I've seen many videos, it was clear it was peaceful and the police got violent. Did you see the clip where the Australian journalist got attacked unprovoked? The Australian government did and are now asking for an investigation.

And I'm curious why you think throwing smoke canisters at a peaceful protest (so that Trump can get his photo op outside a church that didn't want him there) is substantially better than tear gas. Either way, they were looking to get a peaceful crowd to disperse by choking them.

I am a second amendment believer and this situation is a perfect reason why.  You may agree with the rioters wholeheartedly but that won't stop them from burning your business or beating you to death.  You take your outrage, I'll load my guns,  yes the AR-15 with 30 round clips and defend my family with deadly force if necessary.

The only clip I've seen of violence in Utah is that guy who pulled out the bow and arrow and was aiming at protesters...so I think you're safe, you're on the bad actor's side (politically, at least). But my post was specifically about the situation in DC, where the president ordered military police to break up a peaceful protest (with either tear gas or smoke, doesn't matter) so he could walk across the street and pretend he was religious (and since I know you are a very religious person, that should really offend you).

Second amendment worshipers constantly have wet dreams about an opportunity to fight back against government tyranny. I can't think of many (any?) times in my life where there was a more obvious example of a president trampling the Constitution. The fact that they're on board with what happened yesterday means that they're full of ****.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 02, 2020, 10:15:28 pm
In rather good news for once Steve King, the racist GOPer from Iowa, lost his primary.

That's the best news I've read in months.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 02, 2020, 10:30:00 pm
My neighborhood Facebook page had the tough guy that was going to protect the neighborhood from protesters that didn’t get within about 170 blocks of us. Things could have certainly gotten ugly here, but they haven’t. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 02, 2020, 11:10:19 pm
Shocking that the cultist chud has an aR-15 lmao.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 03, 2020, 08:49:25 am
You need to check your sources.  There was no tear gas used.  They were smoke cannisters because the crowd had begun throwing bottles and other projectiles at the police.

It was tear gas, at least according to the CDC:

Quote
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: “Riot control agents (sometimes referred to as “tear gas”) are chemical compounds that temporarily make people unable to function by causing irritation to the eyes, mouth, throat, lungs, and skin.”
And, according to the CDC, “several different compounds” fall under this definition, and are employed by security forces, including military and police, in riot control situations.
Among others, they include chloroacetophenone (CN), more commonly referred to as “mace,” or pepper sprays — in other words, the compound that was deployed in Lafayette Square — and chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile (CS), “one of the most commonly used tear gases in the world,” according to an article in the British Medical Journal.

It this a matter of semantics?  Yeah, probably, but you are in a position to defend the use of this stuff so your dear leader could get an extremely cynical photo op. There is no doubt whatsoever that you prefer brutal authoritarian tactics over peaceful protest.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 03, 2020, 09:33:41 am
Peaceful protest? F you, the dear leader needs his photo op.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZi9PqgWkAEwQ_g.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 03, 2020, 11:36:54 am
Brjones, I live in a safe area where 100 people protested downtown to show they were appalled by the murder of an innocent man by the very people hired to protect them.  I do not think Trump should have gone to the church for his photo op. What were his motives? The left thinks the worst. The right thinks he was simply trying to show resolve and calm to the country at a place that had been attacked the night before. I think the latter but also think him misguided in doing so. Also at play I believe were the commentators and Twitter folks calling the President out for going to the White House bunker when the protests outside the White House turned violent. So Trump was most likely showing them he wasn't afraid. Stupid, but what politician isn't a narcissist? Especially ones who run for President.

In answer to something else you said. I do not have "Wet dreams" about killing anybody. That is in fact the most horrible thing I could ever imagine having to do. But if this situation continues to escalate and move to neighborhoods. If rioters tried to enter my home, I will defend myself. I would hope even then that brandishing my weapons would be enough to deter them. I would hope if I had to fire that I could wound but not kill, but in the end, if they were determined I would kill everyone of them I could to keep them from my wife and small children. I am not sure how that constitutes a wet dream. But keeping living the fantasy the police could protect you in that instance. The police are moments away when seconds matter, if they can come at all. I am sure that would never happen in America, though. Right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 03, 2020, 01:09:04 pm
I do not think Trump should have gone to the church for his photo op. What were his motives?

Even if we're going to give Trump the benefit of the doubt here: it. doesn't. ****. matter. what. his. motives. were.

Peaceful protesters were SHOT and GASSED (and by the way, whether it was pepper spray or pepper balls or tear gas it doesn't matter: these are ALL forms of CHEMICAL WARFARE and quite literally BANNED BY THE GENEVA CONVENTION; the POLICE and the TRUMP ADMINISTRATION are enacting VIOLENCE against the CITIZENS of this country in a manner that is deemed so HEINOUS it is NOT ALLOWABLE in WAR) in order to stage a PHOTO OP in front of a church he does not attend and holding a book he's never read a word of.

If he *had* read the book he's holding so awkwardly, he'd know that they contain "the words of a pregnant, brown teenage Jew, living under military occupation, born into poverty, who said that one day the powerful would be cast down from their thrones and the rich sent away empty, and that this would be the work of God."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 03, 2020, 03:43:50 pm
Why are people scared of the riots and looting?

The flu kills way more people every year.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 03, 2020, 07:20:17 pm
The audio from the Rickett’s meeting leaked online and in stead of saying you people he said you guys. It was in an argument over what Ricketts meant by safety and he was apparently working to get something passed that would have helped prevent this and the leaders from north Omaha weren’t helping him to get it passed.

I listened a little bit to President Obama’s townhall. While I rarely agreed with him, it would be nice to have competency in the White House again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 03, 2020, 07:55:28 pm
Everyone should be required to read this before the next election.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/james-mattis-denounces-trump-protests-militarization/612640/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 03, 2020, 07:58:41 pm
Mattis can suck it.  He was a collaborator and an enabler for two years and sat silent as Trump has trashed the constitution ever since.  His hands are stained with this blood almost as much as Trump's.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 03, 2020, 08:05:18 pm
This is not at all troubling.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZoJSEqX0AUYeT-.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 03, 2020, 08:08:02 pm
The truly terrifying thing is that there are still people who support Trump.  Anyone who still thinks having Trump as a president is a good idea is either 1) successfully deluded into thinking he's a good human being (ie, a rube), or 2) evil.

The longer I live, the worse an idea "one person, one vote" seems.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 03, 2020, 08:08:35 pm
Mattis can suck it.  He was a collaborator and an enabler for two years and sat silent as Trump has trashed the constitution ever since.  His hands are stained with this blood almost as much as Trump's.

Yeah, that's close to how I feel.. I'm glad he's saying it now instead of never, and it's a well-written statement that might be persuasive for some people. But the abuse of power didn't start last week. If he wasn't going to at least step up and say something before the Senate removal vote (preferably much earlier, but that was the last chance for him), his reputation gets little to no rehabilitation in my mind.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 03, 2020, 08:09:18 pm
This is all in preparation for what the streets will be like after Trump declares the election results null and void (or cancels it altogether if his polls continue to tank).  Anyone who still thinks he's ever going to voluntarily surrender power is deluding themselves.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 03, 2020, 08:17:24 pm
Mattis had a principled reason to not say anything thus far, he's from an older generation. I applaud him for speaking up now and not after the trump presidency as he had initially planned.

Not everyone is perfect, but we need to thank anyone that stands up to him at this point. Not admonish them for their past stance.

This election is going to be a total dog fight. Trump has the entire Cambridge analytica staff reassembled and Brad Pascale is using all of their tactics at this point.  He's out raised the dems by being in fund raising mode for 4 years.

His bullshit racist populism has enchanted a LOT of people. Everyone that speaks up now is to be hailed imo.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 03, 2020, 08:25:45 pm
If you want to see how much his brand has taken over, just gander on over at the Bears forum.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 03, 2020, 08:27:48 pm
What were his motives? The left thinks the worst. The right thinks he was simply trying to show resolve and calm to the country at a place that had been attacked the night before.

I don't believe for a second that the right actually believes that. That might be how they're rationalizing it. But once the police started shooting smoke/tear gas/pepper spray/whatever at a peaceful protest, there was no showing "calm to the country" after that.

Quote
Also at play I believe were the commentators and Twitter folks calling the President out for going to the White House bunker when the protests outside the White House turned violent. So Trump was most likely showing them he wasn't afraid.

That's exactly what it was. It was the most thin-skinned president in the history of this country getting his feelings hurt because "#BunkerBitch" was trending on Twitter, so he felt he had to do something to show his was tough. And in his warped mind, attacking (dominating) a group of peaceful protesters so he can walk down the street is the epitome of tough.

Quote
In answer to something else you said. I do not have "Wet dreams" about killing anybody. That is in fact the most horrible thing I could ever imagine having to do.

Well then I wasn't referring to you. When I referred to "second amendment worshipers," I'm pretty sure it didn't cross anyone else's mind here that I was talking about you. When I use that term, I think most here realize I'm talking about the idiots with AR-15s protesting at the Michigan legislature a few weeks ago because they couldn't go out to Applebee's. I was also talking about the insecure losers who, in more normal times, carry AR-15s on their back when they go to Chipotle. Or the social media tough guy groups who openly fantasize about a future where they're able to stand up to the tyrannical US government who has decided the rights guaranteed by the first amendment (including the right to assemble) have been removed.

This is why Fox News and talk radio are so toxic. They have convinced you that everyone who isn't conservative wants to take all your guns and oppress you in every way. So when I say "second amendment worshipers," you interpret that as me saying "anyone who wants any gun rights at all" because that's what Fox News has told you that liberals believe. And they've set up that same ridiculous strawman with many issues. That's why the word "socialism" doesn't mean anything anymore and why Republicans think Planned Parenthood is the ultimate evil.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 03, 2020, 08:38:31 pm
Mattis had a principled reason to not say anything thus far, he's from an older generation. I applaud him for speaking up now and not after the trump presidency as he had initially planned.

Not everyone is perfect, but we need to thank anyone that stands up to him at this point. Not admonish them for their past stance.

This election is going to be a total dog fight. Trump has the entire Cambridge analytica staff reassembled and Brad Pascale is using all of their tactics at this point.  He's out raised the dems by being in fund raising mode for 4 years.

His bullshit racist populism has enchanted a LOT of people. Everyone that speaks up now is to be hailed imo.

He's toast in anything remotely close to an honest election.  We won't have anything close to one with voter suppression and closing of polling places in minority neighborhoods, plus Russian interference to whatever extent they can exert it - not to mention COVID-19 potentially wreaking havoc on turnout.  Even so he's still probably toast (his numbers are historically awful for an incumbent), but he won't surrender power voluntarily.  In the end if he's removed from the White House it's likely only going to be in handcuffs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 03, 2020, 08:41:20 pm
Mattis had a principled reason to not say anything thus far, he's from an older generation. I applaud him for speaking up now and not after the trump presidency as he had initially planned.

Not everyone is perfect, but we need to thank anyone that stands up to him at this point. Not admonish them for their past stance.

This election is going to be a total dog fight. Trump has the entire Cambridge analytica staff reassembled and Brad Pascale is using all of their tactics at this point.  He's out raised the dems by being in fund raising mode for 4 years.

His bullshit racist populism has enchanted a LOT of people. Everyone that speaks up now is to be hailed imo.

I think there are some people at the start of the administration that joined hoping the could help move things in a better direction. When the couldn’t they left.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 03, 2020, 09:09:10 pm
Biden is finally the betting favorite in Vegas.  By a hair.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 03, 2020, 09:25:03 pm
It's exactly 5 months until election day. It looks like Fivethirtyeight released their general election model on June 8 in 2016 (exactly 5 months until election day), so this year's model could be coming any day. I'll be interested to see where they have this race and how it compares to four years ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 03, 2020, 09:45:51 pm
This is all in preparation for what the streets will be like after Trump declares the election results null and void (or cancels it altogether if his polls continue to tank).  Anyone who still thinks he's ever going to voluntarily surrender power is deluding themselves.

He can’t cancel the election unless Congress agrees and that’s not going to happen. The election for President, Senate, and Congress is happening whether he likes it or not. And, the constitution mandates when his term ends so this term will expire in January.  The only way to get any real shenanigans is if the states screw around with the electors they send to vote in the electoral college. If it’s really close and there is a state or two that have Republican control but go for Biden, they could appoint electors who will vote for Trump and go against the will of the voters in that state. 

Trump is going to lose and how he reacts to that will be frightening. I’m less worried about his departure but what he does in his (and probably the Republican Senate’s) lame duck weeks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 03, 2020, 09:51:17 pm
Trump is going to lose and how he reacts to that will be frightening. I’m less worried about his departure but what he does in his (and probably the Republican Senate’s) lame duck weeks.

If Biden wins and the Democrats take the Senate, then a Supreme Court spot opens up in November or December, I am 100% confident that Trump and McConnell will try to push someone through.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 03, 2020, 10:10:59 pm
He can’t cancel the election unless Congress agrees and that’s not going to happen. The election for President, Senate, and Congress is happening whether he likes it or not. And, the constitution mandates when his term ends so this term will expire in January.  The only way to get any real shenanigans is if the states screw around with the electors they send to vote in the electoral college. If it’s really close and there is a state or two that have Republican control but go for Biden, they could appoint electors who will vote for Trump and go against the will of the voters in that state. 

Trump is going to lose and how he reacts to that will be frightening. I’m less worried about his departure but what he does in his (and probably the Republican Senate’s) lame duck weeks.

You're making the same mistake people have been making for three years, assuming that because there's no precedent for something Trump "can't" do it.  If no one stops him, he can do whatever he wants.  His presidency has proved that without the will to enforce them, our constitutional safeguards are weak and vulnerable.  He's not a democratically-elected leader who respects the bounds of the law - the playbook he uses is well-worn from use by the totalitarian leaders he idolizes and aspires to emulate.

Think "it can't happen here?"  The Trump administration suggests otherwise.  He's not giving up power voluntarily any more than Putin or Erdogan would. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 03, 2020, 10:19:58 pm
You're making the same mistake people have been making for three years, assuming that because there's no precedent for something Trump "can't" do it.  If no one stops him, he can do whatever he wants.  His presidency has proved that without the will to enforce them, our constitutional safeguards are weak and vulnerable.  He's not a democratically-elected leader who respects the bounds of the law - the playbook he uses is well-worn from use by the totalitarian leaders he idolizes and aspires to emulate.

Think "it can't happen here?"  The Trump administration suggests otherwise.  He's not giving up power voluntarily any more than Putin or Erdogan would.

We are not guaranteed a peaceful transfer of power and trump may very well be the first guy to break the long line of peaceful transition. But he really can’t stop the election. This is one time that having all elections run at the local level is a huge advantage. There is no guarantee that the election will be honest but it will happen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 03, 2020, 10:31:36 pm
He can stop it by delegitimizing it.  If he orders it cancelled and only the states controlled by the Democrats defy him and hold it anyway, that's mission accomplished.  He can also allow it to happen and declare the results null and void because of "massive voter fraud" - and again, if no one stops him, no one stops him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 04, 2020, 10:01:17 am
Trump can throw a temper tantrum in a bunker all he wants, but unless military leaders and the rank and file are willing to throw their oaths away he isn't stopping an election or transfer of power. 

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 04, 2020, 11:01:58 am
But he can invite massive violence by whipping up his racist, gun-owning, conspiracy-theory-believing base. It’s basically a terrorist sleeper (and sometimes not-so-sleeper) cell at this point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 11:07:42 am
But he can invite massive violence by whipping up his racist, gun-owning, conspiracy-theory-believing base. It’s basically a terrorist sleeper (and sometimes not-so-sleeper) cell at this point.

This is exactly what he's going to do. He's going to say mail in ballot fraud is why he lost, and patriots need to mobilize... and his racist base will show up with their AR's.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 11:08:25 am
Looks like Norvell lied in the media to say he reached out to each FSU player... the players are now staging a walkout and refusing to practice. Sucks for FSU.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 04, 2020, 11:53:55 am
But he can invite massive violence by whipping up his racist, gun-owning, conspiracy-theory-believing base. It’s basically a terrorist sleeper (and sometimes not-so-sleeper) cell at this point.

I agree that he won’t go quietly.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 04, 2020, 12:05:10 pm
But he can invite massive violence by whipping up his racist, gun-owning, conspiracy-theory-believing base. It’s basically a terrorist sleeper (and sometimes not-so-sleeper) cell at this point.

That won't keep him in office though.  I think he like the idea of being president, but not the actual job of being president.  When he looks at what his post presidency years are going to be a smooth transition to Biden and the then a talking head jig on Fox News or Trump News is going to appeal to him a lot more.

If he did try and gin something up it would leave him open to federal charges and at his age even a 10 year sentence could mean a life sentence.  I don't doubt that the thought will cross his mind, but no one will be dumb enough to follow him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 04, 2020, 12:11:25 pm
It pleases me that the military is speaking up.  I've had a long time fear that the election in November would be disputed by Trump and he'd refuse to leave.   I kept telling myself that every policeman, every politician, and every member, officers and enlisted, take the same oath as Trump did.  To defend the United States and the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 04, 2020, 01:25:42 pm
It's exactly 5 months until election day. It looks like Fivethirtyeight released their general election model on June 8 in 2016 (exactly 5 months until election day), so this year's model could be coming any day. I'll be interested to see where they have this race and how it compares to four years ago.
They called the election at 74% Clinton, 28% Trump but I'm guessing they didn't take into account those Russian Facebook ads.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 04, 2020, 01:41:45 pm
I think you guys are working yourselves into a frenzy here. Calm down. If Trump loses he will leave office Jan 20, 2021. The election will be held as usual. The polls being this close should worry you. Trump outperformed his polls by a significant margin last time so Biden will need a 15 point edge heading into election night to win.

As angry as all of you are at Trump, his supporters are just as angry. He was impeached on the flimsiest of charges, he was wiretapped on false information, his administration was investigated for 3 years on the dossier that even the author said was crap. Biden supporters will be motivated, no doubt. But Trump supporters are just as much devoted to the man. And if you think Nancy Pelosi's stunt at the State of the Union endeared swing voters, you might need to have your head checked. One last thing, getting on here and stating that people who disagree with you politically are evil or deranged is the reason we don't talk about our differences any more, we take to the streets with violence. I do not advocate it on either side. But if you think your hands are clean when you make statements like that then kettle, meet pot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 01:45:12 pm
I think swing voters are a lot more concerned about the absentee president during national riots than they are about pelosi ripping up a speech.  You have to live in quite a bubble to compare the two things.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 04, 2020, 01:56:49 pm
Method, what should the President do on these riots? If he invokes the Insurrection Act as he has threatened, then he is a dictator who will use the military to destroy our freedom. If he leaves it to the states then he is absentee. If he tries to calm the country with propaganda, then he is a fake. I am interested in what you would have the man do. And then I wish I could see what your reaction would be if he did it. I am guessing he could walk on water across to the Washington Monument, enact peace on earth, cure all disease and the climate and you would be criticizing him for overreaching.

Having felt that Obama was a terrible President I empathize with you. I too had a hard time seeing anything the man did as good. Obama did do things I agreed with, and I felt dirty for even acknowledging it. I assume that is how you would feel if Trump did something you agreed with. Or you would simply change your mind and call him an idiot for having done so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 04, 2020, 01:58:42 pm
I think you guys are working yourselves into a frenzy here. Calm down. If Trump loses he will leave office Jan 20, 2021. The election will be held as usual. The polls being this close should worry you. Trump outperformed his polls by a significant margin last time so Biden will need a 15 point edge heading into election night to win.

The polls are not really that close and a lot of the details are not good for Trump. Maybe he can turn things around but this insane dictator role he’s playing is probably not going to help.

As for 2016, the average of the final polls had Clinton 48.8% and Trump 43.6% and the actual results were Clinton 48.2% and Trump 46.1% so the national polls were not that far off.  The final electoral map that reflected the state polls had Clinton 272 and Trump 266. The misses were WI, MI, and PA and he won two of those states by a tiny margin, well within any poling margin of error. So, I’m not so sure the polls were really that wrong in 2016 and that Trump outperformed that much. He did do better than expectations, for sure, but the gap was pretty narrow going into Election Day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 04, 2020, 02:05:29 pm
Leaving it to the states and not throwing gas on the fire would be a great start.  If he wanted some bonus points having empathy and actually listening to what people are saying would be even better. At the minimum hiding in a bunker and not talking or tweeting would be an improvement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 04, 2020, 02:49:35 pm
They called the election at 74% Clinton, 28% Trump but I'm guessing they didn't take into account those Russian Facebook ads.

This isn't the "gotcha" you think it is. Americans apparently don't understand basic math and probabilities, because 71% (their actual forecast on election day for Clinton) isn't the same as 100%. And something that has a 28% likelihood of happening actually ends up happening pretty often--baseball players who hit .280 are usually pretty good, for example.

A Clinton win was more likely than not, but the fact that she didn't win wasn't necessarily a failure of the model or the polls. What actually happened (Clinton winning the popular vote pretty easily with Trump very narrowly winning WI, MI, and PA) was always a plausible scenario based on the polls.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 04, 2020, 03:22:36 pm
When an individual relies solely on news sources that are one sided, this kind of polarizing occurs.   I know some Trump supporters.  They live and breathe Fox National News, Rush Limbaugh, and anyone else that echoes their basic beliefs.  They've become numb to any other voices.  When you point out how this guy has alienated allies, abandoned allies, put Americans at risk at home and abroad, their common responses are, "Yeah, but he's doing what he promised."  Has he?  He said he was going to fill the Cabinet with the best minds...then not only does he fail, he fires the only ones worth a ****.  He promised to build a wall.  Nope, not erected.  He promised a strongly economy, then turned his back on farmers and a lot of factory workers.  He's taken some shots that were bogus, but it's his own fault.  He started the war with the media.

But several people on here have voiced my opinion.  We will have to work together to get this mfer out of office.  President Bush has weighed in with negatives.  George Will has changed course.  Not all Republicans have caved.  And we desperately need the ones that haven't and the Independents who lean right to join the left in getting rid of the blockhead.

Our system is to blame.  Republican and Democratic Senators and Congressman fear countermanding their superiors because they can be stripped of chairmanships, committee memberships, and more if they don't toe the line.  That has to change for us to get true Congressional action.   Do you believe every Republican opposes Choice?  Do you think every Democrat supports Choice?  Give me a break.  On many topics they cannot, must not, dare not voice their true opinions.  So calling all Republicans racists or all Democrats socialist or worse only increases the polarization.

BTW: Biden was EXTREMELY Presidential in his comments the other day.   That's how he'll win.  How WE will win.  Remind us all at how a true President behaves and let Trump keep shooting himself in the foot, the ass, the mouth, and the brain.  JMO
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 04, 2020, 04:20:35 pm
Final polling in 2016 per RCP.

Very close to actual popular vote.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 04, 2020, 04:21:43 pm
Trump can throw a temper tantrum in a bunker all he wants, but unless military leaders and the rank and file are willing to throw their oaths away he isn't stopping an election or transfer of power. 


So far no one who had the power to stop him has refused him.  No reason to assume that will change because of an election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 04, 2020, 04:58:42 pm
But...but...isnt Biden a ped o phile and isnt he on tape doing the same thing Trump got impeached for?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 04, 2020, 05:06:06 pm
I get it. You all hate Trump for his apparent divisiveness and racism so you want the exact opposite. A man who wants to cuddle and caress everyone...

https://youtu.be/wcpX2wYUr88
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 04, 2020, 05:08:15 pm
Its a good thing that Ive learned that the opinion of this board isnt necessarily the opinion of America.

Maybe I should have been a Braves fan so I could communicate with good,God fearing,Southern,folks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 04, 2020, 05:32:37 pm
But...but...isnt Biden a ped o phile and isnt he on tape doing the same thing Trump got impeached for?

No
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 04, 2020, 05:57:24 pm
But...but...isnt Biden a ped o phile and isnt he on tape doing the same thing Trump got impeached for?

I don't normally respond to this sort of thing. However, of all of the things you've said over the years, this is by far the dumbest and most outrageous.  And that's a high bar to exceed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 04, 2020, 06:09:37 pm
Its a good thing that Ive learned that the opinion of this board isnt necessarily the opinion of America.

Maybe I should have been a Braves fan so I could communicate with good,God fearing,Southern,folks.

Here are a few Braves fans.  You’d certainly be more comfortable with these guys.

Quote
Ahmaud Arbery was hit with a truck before he died, and his killer allegedly used a racial slur, investigator testifies

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/04/us/mcmichaels-hearing-ahmaud-arbery/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 06:15:01 pm
Here is dusty's hero on trump.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2894707-the-rock-posts-video-to-donald-trump-where-is-our-leader
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 06:29:35 pm
Robb,

Wanna share with me how racism doesn't exist?

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268542081066323969

https://twitter.com/rosagaliciaa/status/1268587788963737600

This one is my favorite, cops trying to force a weapn into his hand, so they can then probably kill him.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268601795770802180

FU CK THE POLICE

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 04, 2020, 06:35:32 pm
Maybe I should have been a Braves fan so I could communicate with good,God fearing,Southern,folks.

Dusty, you must not have viewed the Access Hollywood tape.  Here's your chance:

https://youtu.be/fYqKx1GuZGg
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 07:33:28 pm
If anyone can watch the things on twitter under #bluefall, and not immediately demand large scale firings of cops involved... you've lost your humanity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 07:35:41 pm
Another one for you robb.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268662567649542145

They let the white girl go, arrest the black girl.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 04, 2020, 07:44:02 pm
I wish I could say this is unbelievable.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZsr_qdWkAAV1JC.jpg?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 07:44:56 pm
Several clips of cops destroying property...

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268602796300832768
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 07:46:05 pm
https://twitter.com/i/status/1268589620234682368

Those guys totally deserved to get shot.. clean shoot.. .rubber bullets or not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 07:53:06 pm
They just killed someone using this tactic... so why stop now.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268587658806247424

Kicking over a pepper sprayed protester thats not fighting back.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268586934533832709

Peaceful protester, being maced in the face and arrested... someone should share with me what he did wrong here... maybe i'm missing something.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1267964699800412160

This 14 year old deserved this...

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268577811717140480

More video of cops damaging property to blame protestors.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268581107781402624

Police destroy medical tent... attack EMTS.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268565476143247360

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268563017362477057

Cops slam a woman holding a child to the ground.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268558878297423875

Separated from other protesters, cop looks around to see if they are being watched... and beat the **** out of him

https://twitter.com/i/status/1268548879236190210
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 07:58:12 pm
I think this is where someone tells me there are good cops... i saw a lot in those video's standing by while their fellow officers do fuc ked up ****. F the police.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 08:00:09 pm
Twitter is now taking all these vid's and tweets down... cant have the people know what the police really do... that would i dont know... cause some sort of protests?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 08:05:01 pm
https://twitter.com/_akait0/status/1268704525449408515

I am seeing the same things, videos are being posted about police brutality and just immediately going away. Meanwhile orange moron can lie 24/7 on twitter with no consequences.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 04, 2020, 08:10:35 pm
https://twitter.com/i/status/1268635560752697349

I think he puts it pretty well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 04, 2020, 08:10:46 pm
Meanwhile orange moron can lie 24/7 on twitter with no consequences.

Speaking of that, a guy started a Twitter account last Friday and just started copying every Trump tweet verbatim. By Monday, the account was suspended for 12 hours.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/bot-banned-from-twitter-for-repeating-trumps-tweets-verbatim/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 04, 2020, 09:33:34 pm
Dusty's trolling.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 04, 2020, 11:07:44 pm
"Tripped and fell"

https://twitter.com/KenTremendous/status/1268722962376429569
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 04, 2020, 11:57:31 pm
Two cops suspended for that one.  They'll be back on the beat(ings) within a week though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 05, 2020, 12:29:39 am
You know how older folks get light headed and lose their balance sometimes.

I was told at a young age that if you go looking for trouble you'll find it.

He wouldnt have busted his head at home in his recliner.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on June 05, 2020, 03:30:08 am
remembering Bunkerbitch's Famous Quotes
Trump: Cruz 'holds up the Bible and then he lies'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BL4OEMU8tk

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 05, 2020, 04:16:37 am
You know how older folks get light headed and lose their balance sometimes.

I was told at a young age that if you go looking for trouble you'll find it.

He wouldnt have busted his head at home in his recliner.

One of the sad consequences of Trump is that vile cockroaches who used to feel like they had to be a little careful about showing their true colors now feel like it’s safe to scurry around with the lights on.  Trump has validated their disgusting impulses and made a home for them in the public debate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 05, 2020, 08:25:37 am
Perhaps it's better in the long run to have the chips on the table.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 05, 2020, 08:32:38 am
Perhaps it's better in the long run to have the chips on the table.

As long as you don't mind having cockroaches scurrying around your floors in broad daylight.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 05, 2020, 08:46:11 am
It's not that I don't mind, but I prefer to know what I'm up against.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 05, 2020, 09:15:55 am
An under reported side effect of the protests is a fair number of medical experts are giving the recent protests a pass saying it is for a good cause and they shouldn't be criticized for mass gatherings in a time of a pandemic.  That is just going to fuel the right wing nut jobs that this is all a political ploy to target Trump.  There needs to be a way to express support for the cause and still say it isn't a good idea. 

The Bears board is going to have enough with the Lancet retracting a study on Plaquenil showing increased deaths because a Chicago based company is unable to upload the data used for study for further analysis.  This VA study is still in place showing increased deaths with Plaquenil and a double blinded, placebo controlled study out of Minnesota showed it had no effect on preventing infection in health care workers as well.  No way I'm heading over to the Bears board, because Dusty looks like a reasonable person compared to them and I don't want my head to explode.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 05, 2020, 09:27:44 am
I was there a couple days ago, they are calling you a fake republican and wondering where you disappeared to.

I'm just marking that board as read from now on... its not worth trying to break into that group think.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 05, 2020, 10:22:38 am
Trump says a lot of stupid things, but this might be the stupidest and most offensive:

https://twitter.com/adamcancryn/status/1268920561746481155
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 05, 2020, 10:23:05 am
Method

You might appreciate this story about former Cub Bobby Scales and why he has a lime green cell phone.

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/why-former-cub-bobby-scales-now-baseball-exec-needed-make-my-voice-known
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 05, 2020, 10:23:48 am
I guess I'm pretty much a RINO now, so they aren't wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 05, 2020, 10:31:03 am
I personally have an orange phone... These are the types of things most American's do not even consider in their day to day decisions.

I also keep my insurance/title/registration in my visor above my head, so the officer can see I am not reaching anywhere else in the car, and only reach for it AFTER he's come up to me and asked. DL is always tricky as my wallet is usually in the cup holder when I am driving, however being proactive and reaching above me ahead of the time puts the cops at ease.  I live in Florida, and my window's are not tinted so there is no bs about we couldn't see him due to the tint. Its cynical way to deal with things, but imo the prudent move.

I have only had 2 poor run-ins with cops. I'm lucky, but I was educated at a young age that cops are not your friends. They are their to arrest you, and put you in jail, treat them with respect, but do not in the least think their job is to "protect and serve". Even though my children are only half Indian, and my son doesn't look Indian at all, these are lesson's they will be taught as well.

I am grateful for these protests and the video's that are coming out. This is not only about racism (although that plays a huge part), this is about police brutality and the overreach of the police state.

*edited for terrible grammar, which still exists*
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 05, 2020, 10:58:50 am
I have not personally experienced your America, method.  I feel both guilty and thankful.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 05, 2020, 01:04:53 pm
Donald Trump just said he hopes George Floyd is looking down from heaven and likes the unemployment numbers...

WHAT.THE.ACTUAL.FU.CK
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 05, 2020, 01:23:38 pm
I personally have an orange phone... These are the types of things most American's do not even consider these things in their day to day decisions.

I also keep my insurance/title/registration in my visor above my head, so the officer can see I am not reaching anywhere else in the car, and only reach for it AFTER he's come up to me and asked. DL is always tricky as my wallet is usually in the cup holder when I am driving.  I live in Florida, and my window's are not tinted so there is no bs about we couldn't see him due to the tint. Its cynical way to deal with things, but imo the prudent move.

I have only had 2 poor run-ins with cops. I'm lucky, but I was educated at a young age that cops are not your friends. They are their to arrest you, and put you in jail, treat them with respect, but do not in the least think their job is to "protect and serve". Even though my children are only half Indian, and my son doesn't look Indian at all, these are lesson's they will be taught as well.

I am grateful for these protests and the video's that are coming out. This is not only about racism (although that plays a huge part), this is about police brutality and the overreach of the police state.

“Putting yourself in someone else’s shoes” is advice that is often easier said than done.  No matter how hard I try, I’m quite sure I cannot get a complete understanding of what this is like to experience first hand.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 05, 2020, 01:30:22 pm
One of the eye opening moments in my life, was when I realized on my 10th trip after 9/11 through an airport, that I was selected for additional screening 8 of 10 times
I went to the airport in 2007 with a co-worker and she offered to wait on me while we were running late. I told her, go to the gate, don't wait on me or we'll both miss the flight. She was literally 5 people in front of me as we went through security. I was selected, unsurprisingly for additional screening, and missed the flight as they went through all of my bags and made sure there were no explosive traces on my possessions or person. She made the flight and saved both our jobs..

I am sure the rest of the people in line felt... confident and happy that TSA was doing their job. Its an illusion of security, not actual security.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 05, 2020, 01:35:47 pm
I was there a couple days ago, they are calling you a fake republican and wondering where you disappeared to.

I'm just marking that board as read from now on... its not worth trying to break into that group think.

This is the house view over there as of this morning:

In case it is not obvious to everyone yet the Democrat mayors and governors are literally allowing their cities and businesses to be looted and burned all to try and keep President Trump from being re-elected.

They are now talking about defunding their own police departments. 

The Democrat DC mayor won't allow the police to protect the White House.  She has even kicked the national guard troops out of the hotels.  Not even sure how that is legal but that was the order tonight.

Does anyone realize what will happen if rioters break the White House perimeter?    Dogs and bullets.

They will be killed and rightfully so.

The Democrat mayor has done everything she can do to make that happen.  The Democrats  on the hill are now trying to get rid of the security around the White House.  Schumer and Pelosi want to know who it is that is protecting it.  Why?  So they can get rid of the protection leaving only the secret service to do the job.  They know there is not enough of them.  Is this sinking in yet?  We are watching not a silent coup anymore but an actual banana republic type coup. 

THAT is what the Democrats want.  They want their useful idiots to break the perimeter and be killed so they can keep President Trump from being re-elected.  They desire power that much that they care nothing about human life.  Even those that support them.

Can you imagine if a poor innocent protester is killed going to the people's house?  Never mind if it is a Antifa anarchist wearing a covid approved mask carrying a bomb.

They are doing Communist China's bidding.  China has made them rich while destroying our middle class.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 05, 2020, 01:56:25 pm
Until I got married I would frequently be pulled for additional screenings, but it was usually just a pat down and quick look through the my carry on.  Much like temperature checks it is theater to make people seem safer than they are.

I guess my just cursory check is another example of white privilege. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 05, 2020, 09:54:42 pm
But he can invite massive violence by whipping up his racist, gun-owning, conspiracy-theory-believing base. It’s basically a terrorist sleeper (and sometimes not-so-sleeper) cell at this point.

In case anyone thinks this is alarmist, here’s what just happened out where I live in Sequim, WA. The owner of a local gun shop got on Facebook and claimed to have “intel” that “antifa” was sending “bus-loads” of rioters to the area to loot and vandalize. He put out a call to “patriots” to message him directly to set up “security” in local towns, saying “qualified shooters only.” Right-wing vigilantes in the area answered the call and sprang into action, showing up at small peaceful protests armed to the teeth.

A multi-racial family in the nearby town of Forks (yes, of Twilight fame) stopped into a local supply store to restock while on a camping trip. Unfortunately, several of these fully-armed “vigilantes” were gathered at the supply store, where they harassed and accosted the family of 4, asking if they were part of ”antifa.” They made it difficult for the family to leave the store, then, carrying their assault rifles, got into 3 pickup trucks and followed them out of town.

The family got to their intended camping spot, but after realizing they had been followed and hearing gunfire and chainsaws, decided they needed to leave for their safety. As they attempted to depart the campsite, they found the “vigilantes” had felled several trees and laid them across the road to block their path.

Thankfully, some local high school students got wind of what was going on, and showed up to the site where the family was now trapped with chainsaws of their own. They cleared the trees blocking the way, and the family was able to escape safely.

The *ONLY* reason *ANY* of this happened is because of the vile, hateful, and inflammatory rhetoric coming from the White House about “antifa.” The “vigilantes” who perpetrated this hate crime believe there are hoards of violent “antifa” rioters driving around the country burning houses down. This is literally the kind of language used by the gun shop owner who put out the call to local “patriots” to take up arms.

What are these people going to do when Trump begins to claim that the election is begin stolen by the deep state or other nonsensical boogeymen?



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 05, 2020, 10:17:23 pm
It hasn't really been in doubt since Super Tuesday, but Biden officially has the delegates to be the Democratic nominee.

https://apnews.com/bb261be1a4ca285b9422b2f6b93d8d75?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 05, 2020, 11:52:12 pm
Everyone knows antifa is real.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 06, 2020, 01:28:47 am
Cockroach sighting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 06, 2020, 05:40:02 am
Acab

https://twitter.com/satellit3heart/status/1268863536299675648?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 06, 2020, 10:02:49 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZzKJymWsAYQ7Xr.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 06, 2020, 01:18:19 pm
In case anyone thinks this is alarmist, here’s what just happened out where I live in Sequim, WA. The owner of a local gun shop got on Facebook and claimed to have “intel” that “antifa” was sending “bus-loads” of rioters to the area to loot and vandalize. He put out a call to “patriots” to message him directly to set up “security” in local towns, saying “qualified shooters only.” Right-wing vigilantes in the area answered the call and sprang into action, showing up at small peaceful protests armed to the teeth.

A multi-racial family in the nearby town of Forks (yes, of Twilight fame) stopped into a local supply store to restock while on a camping trip. Unfortunately, several of these fully-armed “vigilantes” were gathered at the supply store, where they harassed and accosted the family of 4, asking if they were part of ”antifa.” They made it difficult for the family to leave the store, then, carrying their assault rifles, got into 3 pickup trucks and followed them out of town.

The family got to their intended camping spot, but after realizing they had been followed and hearing gunfire and chainsaws, decided they needed to leave for their safety. As they attempted to depart the campsite, they found the “vigilantes” had felled several trees and laid them across the road to block their path.

Thankfully, some local high school students got wind of what was going on, and showed up to the site where the family was now trapped with chainsaws of their own. They cleared the trees blocking the way, and the family was able to escape safely.

The *ONLY* reason *ANY* of this happened is because of the vile, hateful, and inflammatory rhetoric coming from the White House about “antifa.” The “vigilantes” who perpetrated this hate crime believe there are hoards of violent “antifa” rioters driving around the country burning houses down. This is literally the kind of language used by the gun shop owner who put out the call to local “patriots” to take up arms.

What are these people going to do when Trump begins to claim that the election is begin stolen by the deep state or other nonsensical boogeymen?

This makes me cry. But this is America.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 06, 2020, 05:47:45 pm
Some positive news...


Covid "deaths" are being systematically overcounted making it appear more deadly than the flu. While everyone who dies Covid positive according to Dr Birx should be counted as a Covid death regardless of actual cause... the flu has never been counted that way. In fact, flu deaths among the elderly are often just called "natural causes".

CDC recently buried a significant stat. Only 7% of those counted as Covid deaths actually have Covid-19 listed as the singular cause of death according to the attending medical provider. The other 93% died from some degree of Covid-19 as a comorbidity that accelerated someone's death from another cause to a case where being Covid positive was purely incidental to their death. George Floyd was reportedly Covid positive when he died. According to Birx, he should be counted as a Covid death.

EVEN CONSIDERING THAT... we now know that...

... the actual infection fatality rate is no greater than about .26% assuming asymptomatic/unreported mild cases are only 35% (which is absurdly low).

... less than 20% and likely closer to 10% of any given population will become infected with or without symptoms- the immune systems of the rest will fight it off

.... about 50% of Covid positive deaths are in people 80 or older.... 75% are 70 or older... 90% are 60 or older... 1% or less under 30..

... and inside these numbers.... the average Covid positive death had 2.5 comorbidities... other things that caused or contributed heavily to their death... these are unhealthy, primarily older people... not kids or football players

... hospitalization rates are low by comparison

... if you are under 50 your chances of dying from the flu are higher than your chances of dying from Covid-19

... the virus essentially does not spread outside according to a study in China, the virus is dispersed into concentrations unlikely to cause an infection and is destroyed quickly in outdoor conditions

... spread through surface contact is rare if it exists at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 06, 2020, 05:53:44 pm
And yes Ill do my part.

Lets love one another regardless of race,sex,or religion.

My bible says "Love thy brother" not love them if they're like you or agree with you.

Ill put forth a better effort to do that and preach that stronger to my son.

I honestly dont feel a sense of hate for people of a different race but instead for homosexuals and non Christian's but even my bible says that's wrong so that's 100% on me.

Ill honestly try harder to improve with that.

Everyone deserves a chance for a peaceful life.

And lastly no Im not a Trump supporter and wont vote for him.

I do think Im a Republican but I dont believe in our Republican option.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 06, 2020, 05:55:40 pm
I guess I'm pretty much a RINO now, so they aren't wrong.
  I don't think you're a RINO, Doc.  Like me, you're just an R.   The true RINO's are those asses with the R behind their names who have no cajones to stand up to the RINO in chief.  I have said for years, Trump is NOT a Republican.  Real Republicans are repudiating him.  He's an interloper who was taunted into running for President.  Looking over the field, he realized he could not beat Hillary for the Democratic nomination, but he had a shot against the large field of Republicans.  He didn't have to score big, just enough to stay in the race.  And the guy who had registered as a Democrat most of his life and had funded many Democratic politicians became the darling of the Republicans.  Our two party system is broken.  Trumpers are not Republicans. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 06, 2020, 06:05:10 pm
Bush supports Biden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 06, 2020, 06:07:02 pm
Dusty, your troll schtick has turned you into a caricature of yourself.

The horse is dead.  Stop beating it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 06, 2020, 06:28:10 pm
  I don't think you're a RINO, Doc.  Like me, you're just an R.   The true RINO's are those asses with the R behind their names who have no cajones to stand up to the RINO in chief.  I have said for years, Trump is NOT a Republican.  Real Republicans are repudiating him.  He's an interloper who was taunted into running for President.  Looking over the field, he realized he could not beat Hillary for the Democratic nomination, but he had a shot against the large field of Republicans.  He didn't have to score big, just enough to stay in the race.  And the guy who had registered as a Democrat most of his life and had funded many Democratic politicians became the darling of the Republicans.  Our two party system is broken.  Trumpers are not Republicans.

Trump is definitely a Republican- he’s the head of the party and has a cult like control over it. You probably need to engage with the possibility that you are not a Republican anymore.

FYI - Trump has been a registered R since 2009, he started talking about running for president as an R in 2011, and really ramped up his bonafides as a R during his endless and racist attacks on President Obama.  There was zero chance he was running for President as a Democrat in 2016.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 06, 2020, 06:28:42 pm
Some positive news...


Covid "deaths" are being systematically overcounted making it appear more deadly than the flu. While everyone who dies Covid positive according to Dr Birx should be counted as a Covid death regardless of actual cause... the flu has never been counted that way. In fact, flu deaths among the elderly are often just called "natural causes".

CDC recently buried a significant stat. Only 7% of those counted as Covid deaths actually have Covid-19 listed as the singular cause of death according to the attending medical provider. The other 93% died from some degree of Covid-19 as a comorbidity that accelerated someone's death from another cause to a case where being Covid positive was purely incidental to their death. George Floyd was reportedly Covid positive when he died. According to Birx, he should be counted as a Covid death.

EVEN CONSIDERING THAT... we now know that...

... the actual infection fatality rate is no greater than about .26% assuming asymptomatic/unreported mild cases are only 35% (which is absurdly low).

... less than 20% and likely closer to 10% of any given population will become infected with or without symptoms- the immune systems of the rest will fight it off

.... about 50% of Covid positive deaths are in people 80 or older.... 75% are 70 or older... 90% are 60 or older... 1% or less under 30..

... and inside these numbers.... the average Covid positive death had 2.5 comorbidities... other things that caused or contributed heavily to their death... these are unhealthy, primarily older people... not kids or football players

... hospitalization rates are low by comparison

... if you are under 50 your chances of dying from the flu are higher than your chances of dying from Covid-19

... the virus essentially does not spread outside according to a study in China, the virus is dispersed into concentrations unlikely to cause an infection and is destroyed quickly in outdoor conditions

... spread through surface contact is rare if it exists at all.

I’d love to see the source for this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 06, 2020, 06:48:58 pm
I mean flu deaths are just estimates so they aren’t actually counted. If you only count confirmed positives then the Swine flu only killed 3,000 or so people instead of the estimated 12,000.  Colorado actually breaks the numbers down by people who died that had a positive test and those who died from COVID-19. Colorado report 1,574 people died that had a positive test. The number that died from COVID-19 is 1274. So +253, but then you really need to look at the underreported deaths as well. NYC was having around an extra 200 people/day die at home during there peaks. The unexplained deaths during Feb-June was significantly higher in America than what usually occurs. The death numbers are lower that what the virus has actually caused.

The comorbidty thing is just plain stupid. I rarely list just 1 thing on a death certificate. If you take a patient with Emphysema, it could be Covid-19 and COPD on the death certificate, just like I would list it for Pneumonia. It would be both Pneumonia and COPD.  Make no mistake it was the pneumonia that killed the patient, just like COVID-19.

The facility rate for COVID-19 is 0.4, which is 4x as deadly as the flu with the extreme measures we have taken. It would be considerably higher without those measures.

I just can’t with stupid people anymore.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 06, 2020, 07:24:13 pm
Trump is whatever he deems to be expedient at the time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 06, 2020, 07:44:33 pm
Quote
When the U.S. government’s official jobs report for May came out on Friday, it included a note at the bottom saying there had been a major “error” indicating that the unemployment rate likely should be higher than the widely reported 13.3 percent rate.

The special note said that if this “misclassification error” had not occurred, the “overall unemployment rate would have been about 3 percentage points higher than reported,” meaning the unemployment rate would be about 16.3 percent for May.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/05/may-2020-jobs-report-misclassification-error/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 06, 2020, 08:21:36 pm
Trump is definitely a Republican- he’s the head of the party and has a cult like control over it. You probably need to engage with the possibility that you are not a Republican anymore.

For example, Lisa Murkowski--supposedly one of the few Republicans who occasionally is "concerned" or "troubled" about things Trump does--was asked about the Mattis editorial a couple days ago:

Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1
Sen. Lisa Murkwoski praised Jim Mattis's scathing rebuke of Trump as "true and honest and necessary" and admitted she's "struggling" over whether to vote for Trump. "I thought General Mattis's words were true and honest and necessary and overdue.

Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1
Murkowski: "When I saw Gen. Mattis's comments yesterday I felt like perhaps we’re getting to the point where we can be more honest with the concerns we might hold internally and have the courage of our convictions and speak up."


In those comments she admits that Mattis is right about Trump, and that she (along with other Republicans) haven't had the "courage of our convictions to speak up" over the last three years. In other words, they've just gone along with what he wants even though they know he's wrong. And on top of that, she still says she's "struggling" with whether or not to vote for him this year--if she's considering voting for Trump, it's out of party loyalty only. And again, this is coming from one of the 3-5 Republicans in federal government who is least likely to blindly follow Trump. It's mostly his party now.

I say "mostly" because I think you have to give some blame to Mitch McConnell for turning the party it into its current toxic form. His continued attempts to turn the courts into a branch of the Republican party is at least as damaging as anything Trump has done. So McConnell's a minority owner of the party too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 06, 2020, 08:50:54 pm
This is going to be shocking but the DC Parks police and the Trump admin may have lied about the use of tear gas.  A DC news org found canisters at the scene that held tear gas (and not “just” pepper spray).

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZ31LCYXYAAMlTM.jpg?format=jpg)

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/dc/tear-gas-washington-dc-protests-st-johns-church/65-7e9a67c7-e40b-47a2-8060-3f7d908139dd
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 06, 2020, 10:04:05 pm
Trump is definitely a Republican- he’s the head of the party and has a cult like control over it. You probably need to engage with the possibility that you are not a Republican anymore.

FYI - Trump has been a registered R since 2009, he started talking about running for president as an R in 2011, and really ramped up his bonafides as a R during his endless and racist attacks on President Obama.  There was zero chance he was running for President as a Democrat in 2016.
  Jack, thank you.  You may have Trump's party evolution more correct than mine, but I still don't feel he's a Republican.  You are right, maybe I'm not a Republican anymore, but I didn't leave the party, the party left me.  The hope is that I can find somewhere a branch to light.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 07, 2020, 09:59:12 am
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1267797639334166529?s=21

Another example of the psychotic, heavily-armed “patriots” that are an increasing danger to this country. They are nothing less than a hyper-right terrorist sleeper cell, and Trump’s rhetoric pushes them closer to the edge with each passing day. This is not a stunt. This is a woman with deeply held convictions about conspiracy theories that is ready to kill people, and who is credibly running for office with this insane violence a key part of her political platform.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 07, 2020, 10:15:15 am
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1267797639334166529?s=21

Another example of the psychotic, heavily-armed “patriots” that are an increasing danger to this country. They are nothing less than a hyper-right terrorist sleeper cell, and Trump’s rhetoric pushes them closer to the edge with each passing day. This is not a stunt. This is a woman with deeply held convictions about conspiracy theories that is ready to kill people, and who is credibly running for office with this insane violence a key part of her political platform.

Some other things she probably believes

The Holocaust never happened
The moon landing was a hoax
Vaccines do more harm than good
Second hand smoke is not harmful
Global climate change is a farce
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 07, 2020, 02:30:52 pm
There used to be Republican leaders I respected.  Almost none now.  Lots of people (eg George Will) labeling them as collaborators.  They sold their soul.  I hope they pay the price for it.

It feels like the tide might be shifting a little bit (Mattis, George W. Bush, Colin Powell coming out against Trump -- I know, too little, too late), and I would hate to see people like Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham wriggle off the hook.  To say nothing of Moscow Mitch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 07, 2020, 03:17:33 pm
I don't think Bush voted from him in the last election either. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 07, 2020, 03:38:37 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-republican-enablers-are-complicit-in-the-state-of-our-democracy/2020/06/04/311ee55c-a69f-11ea-bb20-ebf0921f3bbd_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 07, 2020, 05:41:31 pm
Quote
Another example of the psychotic, heavily-armed “patriots” that are an increasing danger to this country.

This is case-in-point for the tragedy of what Fox News and its ilk (Rush) have done to our society.  They've created a mass of willfully-ignorant rubes.  The strategy worked great for them (the Republican Elite) when they had the rubes under control and could get them to vote the way they wanted (Pledge of Allegiance, Willie Horton, Boston Harbor), but the unintended consequence was that they were lying there waiting for a telegenic sociopath like Donald Trump to pick them up and take advantage of them.  Most of the Republican party was probably horrified at Trump, but none of them had the guts to stand up to him for fear of being savaged by their own creation.

There's no hell hot enough for Roger Ailes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 07, 2020, 06:51:47 pm
So Minneapolis is going to get rid of their police department. Any clue how that will work?  I saw something about sending social workers or medical teams to deal with drug abuse or mentally ill patients, but how are things like traffic laws, violent crime going to be dealt with?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 07, 2020, 07:10:55 pm
This is case-in-point for the tragedy of what Fox News and its ilk (Rush) have done to our society.  They've created a mass of willfully-ignorant rubes.  The strategy worked great for them (the Republican Elite) when they had the rubes under control and could get them to vote the way they wanted (Pledge of Allegiance, Willie Horton, Boston Harbor), but the unintended consequence was that they were lying there waiting for a telegenic sociopath like Donald Trump to pick them up and take advantage of them.  Most of the Republican party was probably horrified at Trump, but none of them had the guts to stand up to him for fear of being savaged by their own creation.

There's no hell hot enough for Roger Ailes.

I'm not wholly convinced that consequence was unintended. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 08, 2020, 01:55:50 am
https://twitter.com/mittromney/status/1269758561720156160?s=21

Welcome to the resistance.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 08, 2020, 01:57:14 am
Really cool to see more of the seasoned posters finally being vocal in this thread. That’s what’s up
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 08, 2020, 08:28:30 am
It would be nice to have a more diverse set of views represented.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 08, 2020, 09:23:12 am
It would be nice to have a more diverse set of views represented.
No, you drive off anyone who doesn't join the echo chamber.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 08, 2020, 09:45:14 am
It would be nice to have a more diverse set of views represented.

Unfortunately, P2, there’s a dearth of principled, informed, rational, and humane conservative leadership. As a result, the conservative movement as a whole doesn’t have a whole lot to contribute at the moment other than backwards thinking.

When establishment conservatism disavows voices like Romney, McCain, George Will, Bill Kristol, David Jolly, David French, Jennifer Rubin, Charlie Sykes, etc.; and instead guzzles down the outright lies and racist, nationalist paranoia of people like Hannity, Carlson, and Ingraham, the result is a conservative movement that quite simply has nothing to say.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 08, 2020, 10:23:03 am
I miss Jes.  He is someone who believes in facts and argues based on evidence.  Of course, I strongly disagree with some of his premises.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 08, 2020, 10:33:09 am
I used to peek into the Politics & Religion section periodically, only to confirm that my views were not welcome here at that time.  It was dominated by right and right leaning views. I was shocked when I recently dropped in to find such a profound change.  And I am really heartened to see rock ribbed conservatives being so outspoken in their disgust for Trump and those who enable him..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 08, 2020, 03:43:58 pm
It would be nice to have a more diverse set of views represented.

Really in here pining for that racist homophobic energy?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 08, 2020, 05:55:41 pm
I don't believe that everyone with different views than mine is a racist homophobe.  Intolerance comes in many forms.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 08, 2020, 11:37:21 pm
Theo Epstein:

“I’d like to start just by offering my condolences to the families of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery and the countless victims who keep losing their lives to racist violence in this country year after year, decade after decade, century after century,” Epstein said. “I join my colleagues at the Cubs in standing up in support of the Black Lives Matter movement and the protesters who are doing their best to make this a real inflection point in our history. At this moment in time, silence is complicity and it’s important that all of our voices are heard. Thank you for allowing me the time to stand up in order to do that.”


https://theathletic.com/1861109/2020/06/08/silence-is-complicity-theo-epstein-speaks-out-on-racism-and-inclusivity/?source=emp_shared_article
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 09, 2020, 12:02:14 am
I miss Jes.  He is someone who believes in facts and argues based on evidence.  Of course, I strongly disagree with some of his premises.

Jes is the most successful troll I've ever seen on the internet. He never did anything but quibble over semantics and take contrarian positions just because he wanted to argue. But somehow, none of us caught on for years. I'm surprised he didn't move on from this relatively small Cubs forum to troll bigger audiences long before he did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 09, 2020, 12:11:16 am

Unfortunately, P2, there’s a dearth of principled, informed, rational, and humane conservative leadership. As a result, the conservative movement as a whole doesn’t have a whole lot to contribute at the moment other than backwards thinking.


When establishment conservatism disavows voices like Romney, McCain, George Will, Bill Kristol, David Jolly, David French, Jennifer Rubin, Charlie Sykes, etc.; and instead guzzles down the outright lies and racist, nationalist paranoia of people like Hannity, Carlson, and Ingraham, the result is a conservative movement that quite simply has nothing to say.


Adding to this...I think there's more disagreement here than it seems--if we dug into healthcare or the economy or law enforcement, I think we'd find a diversity of opinions. But there is just so much low hanging fruit to condemn on the Republican Trump side right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 09, 2020, 12:16:42 am
Jes is the most successful troll I've ever seen on the internet. He never did anything but quibble over semantics and take contrarian positions just because he wanted to argue. But somehow, none of us caught on for years. I'm surprised he didn't move on from this relatively small Cubs forum to troll bigger audiences long before he did.

Some of us did - I blocked Jes years and years ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 09, 2020, 01:51:06 am
I didnt mean to dislike that post obviously.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 09, 2020, 09:16:57 am
BlueJay - there are several outlets reporting that WHO has announced that the spread of covid 19 by asymptomatic people is very rare.  I have not found any report by a news outlet that I have ever heard of.  Have you seen any such report?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 09, 2020, 09:19:52 am
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1270333484528214018?s=21

https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1270346444092907521?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 09, 2020, 10:21:45 am
BlueJay - there are several outlets reporting that WHO has announced that the spread of covid 19 by asymptomatic people is very rare.  I have not found any report by a news outlet that I have ever heard of.  Have you seen any such report?

WHO is walking that back now
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 09, 2020, 10:34:35 am
BlueJay - there are several outlets reporting that WHO has announced that the spread of covid 19 by asymptomatic people is very rare.  I have not found any report by a news outlet that I have ever heard of.  Have you seen any such report?

The WHO has left a lot to be desired with their response to COVID-19, but they are walking those comments back now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on June 09, 2020, 02:56:02 pm
Thanks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 09, 2020, 04:03:04 pm
There has never been a bigger troll job than Stephen Miller preparing a speech on race relations. Trump is just taunting us now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 09, 2020, 05:12:39 pm
Just when you think Trump can’t outdo himself, he does

https://youtu.be/RB0GtiRJcRE

Donald J. Trump  @realDonaldTrump
Buffalo protester shoved by Police could be an ANTIFA provocateur. 75 year old Martin Gugino was pushed away after appearing to scan police communications in order to black out the equipment. @OANN  I watched, he fell harder than was pushed. Was aiming scanner. Could be a set up?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 09, 2020, 05:47:11 pm
Really, Bennett?  This by Trump surprises you? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 09, 2020, 08:37:40 pm
Dude has a full-on Amerinazi in Miller writing his speech on race relations.  I honestly don't think theres anything he could say or do at this point that would surprise me.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 10, 2020, 09:37:00 am
Current voter suppression in Georgia is beyond criminal. For those of you whining about being civil and understanding of the opposition, **** off.

https://twitter.com/brent_peabody/status/1270379173383733249?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 10, 2020, 09:39:47 am
Abrams wins there easily if Kemp hadn’t stolen the election.  And Georgia is probably full-on swing state territory now at the presidential level.  If it actually had a fair election, that is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 10, 2020, 09:41:06 am
https://twitter.com/rbreich/status/1270440932882518016?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 10, 2020, 02:33:17 pm
The Lincoln Project:  A lot of people don't know this, but the technical name for a group of Republican senators is a "coward."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 10, 2020, 02:43:58 pm
I'm really at the point where I hope the Republicans get destroyed in the election and the party dies off.  I really can't see how even if the Trumpism is driven out that the party can rebound and form into something better.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 10, 2020, 02:51:04 pm
Somehow the two party system needs to marginalize the 20-25% of citizens who are wackos.  Rather than building a party in which they are essential players, as Trump has done.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 10, 2020, 03:16:47 pm
Somehow the two party system needs to marginalize the 20-25% of citizens who are wackos.  Rather than building a party in which they are essential players, as Trump has done.

I've thought that it would be nice if we had a multiparty system, but that would just make it more likely that the wackos could get control. 

Conservatives laid the ground work for destroying things back in the 90's and the fringe left picked up on it too.  I don't really know how the horse gets put back in the barn anymore.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 10, 2020, 03:23:19 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optional_preferential_voting

That there is what we need.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 10, 2020, 05:04:52 pm
I've thought that it would be nice if we had a multiparty system, but that would just make it more likely that the wackos could get control. 

Conservatives laid the ground work for destroying things back in the 90's and the fringe left picked up on it too.  I don't really know how the horse gets put back in the barn anymore.

Multiparty systems are nearly impossible to have in our first past the post system.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 10, 2020, 05:41:39 pm
Multiparty systems are nearly impossible to have in our first past the post system.

What does " first past the post system" mean?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 10, 2020, 06:06:53 pm
What does " first past the post system" mean?

A election in which there is a single winner and that winner can win with a plurality of the vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 10, 2020, 07:29:51 pm
Multi-party democracy is also strongly depressed in a system with direct election of a strong executive, as opposed to a parliamentary system where the largest legislative party generally decides the head of government. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 11, 2020, 04:44:24 pm
The cruelty of the Trump admin knows no bounds:

Quote
Trump administration eases restrictions on killing bear cubs and wolf pups in their dens in Alaska

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-ends-obama-ban-killing-bear-cubs-wolf-pups-alaska/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 11, 2020, 06:01:18 pm
The cruelty of the Trump admin knows no bounds:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-ends-obama-ban-killing-bear-cubs-wolf-pups-alaska/
I heard most of those cubs and pups grow up to vote Democrat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 11, 2020, 09:28:08 pm
I wish I could joke about shlt like that but it just infuriates me too much. Just abject evil.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 12, 2020, 06:38:43 pm
I think it’s important to remember that, with Trump, the cruelty is not a by product but the entire point.

@NPR: BREAKING: The Trump administration just finalized a rule that would remove nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ people in health care and health insurance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 12, 2020, 06:56:25 pm
No comment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 12, 2020, 07:04:02 pm
I think it’s important to remember that, with Trump, the cruelty is not a by product but the entire point.

@NPR: BREAKING: The Trump administration just finalized a rule that would remove nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ people in health care and health insurance.


He is also trying to eliminate further defections from his rapidly shrinking base.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 12, 2020, 07:10:32 pm
Marge Schott would have been a charter member of Trump's base.

http://www.espn.com/espn/wire?section=mlb&id=29303797
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 12, 2020, 07:12:36 pm
It's an odd strategy.  His base clearly isn't enough, and is already sticking with him at higher than historical averages.  He's tanking because he's getting killed with independents and moderates.  Yet every move he makes - like his dog-whistle rally in Tulsa on the anniversary of the abolition of slavery - is targeted at his most racist and reactionary followers.

That's your clue that Trump has no intention of allowing the election to happen and accepting the results.  There will be no voluntary transition of power with this administration.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 12, 2020, 07:38:56 pm
No comment.

You don’t need to comment. Your bigotry is well known.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 12, 2020, 08:06:43 pm
I didnt say a thing and am trying to be better at accepting others and allowing them a chance at a peaceful life.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 12, 2020, 08:12:41 pm
Joe Biden got a little heat last week for saying that about 10-15% of Americans just aren't very good people. But Trump's base is something like 30% of the population, and this move was made specifically to pander to them. So maybe Biden should get heat for that comment, because his estimate was clearly low by at least 15%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 12, 2020, 09:43:23 pm
I didnt say a thing and am trying to be better at accepting others and allowing them a chance at a peaceful life.

No comment really is a comment.  The only thing you are changing is you are being a tiny bit more subtle about expressing your disapproval for LGBQT folks. If you really were trying to be more accepting, this would be a very easy place to start and you could say “hey, that’s **** up that these people can be denied healthcare just because of who they are” because it is **** up and cruel.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 13, 2020, 01:16:55 am

He is also trying to eliminate further defections from his rapidly shrinking base.

In the 2016 Republican primaries, Trump ended up with 44.9% of the R primary popular vote. Cruz, Kasich, Rubio actually got more primary votes combined—-and Rubio dropped out in April (before Pennsylvania) and Cruz/kasich before the June Calif/NJ primaries. So, 44.9% primary vote is inflated.

The actual Trump “base”—the dihards, the Trump rally participants—starts from the 2016 primary voters who preferred him over the alternatives. It’s not all that large.

The folks who vote for him in a binary election and who say “approve” in the polling include that “base” plus all the other folks who simply vote Republican year in and year out and probably would still prefer some other Republican than Trump but simply will not vote Democratic, period. A lot of these folks are single-issue voters (guns, abortion).

Then there is the matter of appeals to race—-which is ever-present but hard to put a number on. Would call it significant but not substantial. Definitely a factor in a close election with a skilled marketer on race like Trump.

Of course, the popular vote itself doesn’t decide the winner but I think, to prevail in a binary vote, Trump—given the limits of his actual “base”— needs a really poor opponent to win, such as Hillary, or somebody scary to some, like Bernie, along with the usual shenanigans with voter suppression. Add a pinch of outside interference from abroad too.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 13, 2020, 02:17:48 am
Funny how Trump wasn't a racist until he ran for president. The guy had close friendships with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, lent his plane to Nelson Mandela for his first tour of America , won awards from the NAACP for his work and support of African American communities, hired/hires many African Americans in his businesses and administration yet he is now a racist? Eventually this every four years strategy of beating this dead horse isn't going to work. In fact,  it may not work this fall.  We'll see. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 13, 2020, 02:18:57 am
Very funny how you suggest Trump may not accept the results of this election when that is exactly what you have been doing the last four years. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 13, 2020, 03:04:45 am
Funny how Trump wasn't a racist until he ran for president. The guy had close friendships with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, lent his plane to Nelson Mandela for his first tour of America , won awards from the NAACP for his work and support of African American communities, hired/hires many African Americans in his businesses and administration yet he is now a racist? Eventually this every four years strategy of beating this dead horse isn't going to work. In fact,  it may not work this fall.  We'll see.

You need to learn a little about transactional relationships (“close friendships”) in the “upper echelon” of society, especially in New York City and Washington.

The Clintons attended Trump and Melania’s wedding and their daughters are/were “good friends.” These kind of folks do things for each other on a transactional basis—for show, for money contributions, for public good will, for the amusement of it all, to get a favor back later, etc. A rascal like Roy Cohn was embraced for many years by New York high society for amusement, gossip, pungent lawyerly advice.

These folks—mostly in politics, high finance, celebrity marketing of one kind or another, have parallel lives when it suits them and work and live in overlapping social circles. Purely transactional, by and large.

If you think the examples you cited are actually “close friendships” in the way that regular human beings understand that term, you need to get into a few social circles in these parts and make some friends.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 13, 2020, 05:22:54 am
The notion that Trump was never a racist until he ran for president is so laughable on the face of it that it hardly bears response. But his family has a long and August history of KKK connections, his father was a notorious racist slumlord, and he was the ringleader of the race-baiting lynch mob after the 1989 Central Park attacks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 13, 2020, 11:07:39 am
Funny how Trump wasn't a racist until he ran for president.

This just isn't true. It takes about 10 seconds to go to Google and type "Donald Trump racism before presidency." Here are a few links:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-racist-meme/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump#Pre-presidency

https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racist-racism-history

The guy had close friendships with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, lent his plane to Nelson Mandela for his first tour of America , won awards from the NAACP for his work and support of African American communities, hired/hires many African Americans in his businesses and administration yet he is now a racist? 

Three of these four claims are basically the "some of my best friends are black" defense, which does not prove anything. The other claim about the NAACP award is false as far as I can tell:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-naacp_n_580ac881e4b000d0b156e6e2
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 13, 2020, 01:21:31 pm
From an article in the Hill, hardly a right wing news outlet: https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/456523-donald-trumps-no-racist-as-past-acts-and-presidential-record-prove


Donald Trump is no racist. I have known him since 1973 and have never seen any indication or any form of racism. In fact, quite the contrary.
 
When I was Manhattan Borough president and president of the New York City Council, I asked him numerous times to help black or Hispanic groups, and he always came through, many times without publicity. When a hurricane ravished Puerto Rico in the mid 1980s, I asked many big companies to give various forms of assistance — but the problem was how to get all of this aid down to Puerto Rico. I called Donald Trump, and he provided us with a 727 jet to take all of the donated material down to the island, and he didn’t ask for any publicity for that generous act.
 
My friend, Rev. Floyd Flake, the minister of the largest black church in Queens, asked for some help for his senior center. Again, I called Donald Trump and he wrote a big check.
 
One day I met an African American woman on the street with her two adorable young kids. She was homeless, and I gave her some money — and then asked Donald to get her into some low-income housing in Queens. He came through, and did so without any fanfare.
 
When President Trump recently attacked Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), he was not doing so because Rep. Cummings is black but because the president is a counter-puncher. And he is right that Cummings has been a congressman for 22 years and that Baltimore, part of which is in his congressional district, is a mess. The city has gotten worse during his tenure: more poverty, more drugs and more crime.
 
The president is honest and doesn’t parse his words, like most politicians, and that drives the media crazy. But his honesty is refreshing, and he is usually right, if not always diplomatic.
 
African American and Hispanic unemployment under his presidency is the lowest it has been in 60 years. The president pushed through criminal justice reform and has created empowerment zones that help economically distressed communities — and their poorer residents — through tax incentives and grants. In short, he has done more for minorities in three years than President Obama did in eight, and he deserves credit instead of rebuke.
 
I truly do not believe that Barack Obama is a racist — but some of his actions during his presidency could make people wonder.
 
Obama listened to Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s vile sermons every Sunday for years; Rev. Wright frequently and viciously attacked whites, Jews and America itself.
 
Barack Obama had many meetings in Chicago with Rev. Louis Farrakhan and said many nice things about the Nation of Islam leader. He attended many of Farrakhan’s rallies, where Farrakhan set a new low for anti-Semitic attacks, calling Jews a “gutter religion” and white people “devils.”
 
In addition, President Obama had Rev. Al Sharpton, one of the country’s highest-profile race-baiters, as a guest in the White House dozens of times.
 
In order to protect President Obama, the media largely ignored these and many other questionable things — but these things happened, and they are far worse than anything President Trump has done.
 
The point is that President Obama was not a racist but he did things that could be construed as racially divisive — and yet, he was never widely criticized for it, nor was he publicly condemned as a racist. President Trump is not a racist, either — and yet, he is being condemned as one by his critics on the left, and by much of the mainstream media.
 
Race should not play a part in our politics. For too long, it has been a scar on our country. We should focus instead on the issues, and on what’s going to help make America strong for everyone.
 
Andrew J. Stein is a former president of the New York City Council and a former president of Manhattan Borough.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 13, 2020, 01:51:21 pm
I don't know if there is a term for someone who explicitly exploits the racism of others for his own political benefit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 13, 2020, 01:54:26 pm
That's an editorial from one of Trump's friends. He's a New York politician who has probably needed favors from Trump for years, so he's not exactly an unbiased source. And most of what he said is just a variant on the "some of my best friends are black" defense. Just because he occasionally does nice things for black people doesn't mean he's not racist.

That editorial did nothing to explain how his well-documented housing discrimination wasn't racist. Or his comments about the Central Park five. Or his villification of Native American casino owners. Or his birtherism. Or his remarks about people from "shithole countries." Or his continued racist behavior and remarks concerning immigrants. People call him racist for reasons like those. No one is arguing that he's racist because he doesn't help people of color enough.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 13, 2020, 02:10:15 pm
Trump’s trustworthy friend cited above.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-newyork-plea/former-top-new-york-official-pleads-guilty-to-tax-evasion-idUSTRE6B067120101201
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 13, 2020, 02:14:27 pm
By the way, regarding above link, Stein and his friends persuaded the judge not to sentence him to prison on even the reduced charge—-a classic example of how New York high society often works to take care if its own.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 13, 2020, 02:38:56 pm
This just isn't true. It takes about 10 seconds to go to Google and type "Donald Trump racism before presidency." Here are a few links:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-racist-meme/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump#Pre-presidency

https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racist-racism-history

Three of these four claims are basically the "some of my best friends are black" defense, which does not prove anything. The other claim about the NAACP award is false as far as I can tell:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-naacp_n_580ac881e4b000d0b156e6e2
So as a source you quote Snopes? Wikepedia? Vox and the Huffpost? Basically as bad as if I quoted Foxnews, National Review and Breitbart. In every case that I can find there is either not enough evidence, the charge is skewed beyond the words or you have to view comments and actions in the worse light possible. As far as his being condemned for actions of his father that proves nothing. There are two sides to every story.

I am more interested in policy and results anyway. Trump passed criminal justice reform, which Obama gave lip service to but never got done. He moved the embassy to Jerusalem and declared it the capital of Israel, which 3 presidents before had promised but neglected to do. He has helped out many families of color without seeking or asking for publicity or acknowledgement. These are not the acts of a racist. Supposed dog whistles and words that were signals to his racist base are mostly projections by reporters who want him destroyed no matter the cost. Before he had enacted any laws, before he was sworn in the media coverage was 90% negative. Since these things were tracked every president has enjoyed positive coverage during the transition. If you were attacked from day one, your campaign bugged, your campaign accused of colluding with the enemy which all turns out to be a hoax, you might have a bunker mentality too. you might decide to attack instead of just taking it. You want to know the reason why 96% of Republicans back Trump? Many who didn't in the last election? Because they are sick of wimpy leaders who do not stand up for their principals and way of governing. For once conservatives, despite all of Trump's warts have a man who doesn't take the attacks of the left lying down. I have watched all of this conflicted, because I want a President who sets a good example, is dignified, is a good communicator, who shows some humility and doesn't have the history with women this one does. but reasonable, good, non-racist Americans support Trump because they believe the alternative would be worse, far worse.

If you think defunding the police is a winning argument with the average American, please run on that in the fall. Same goes with late term abortion right up to the moment of birth, and the green new deal. You may be able to find the right pollster who samples the right people to get the numbers you want. But again, please write your candidates and have them run on those policies in the fall. Then we will see if Biden is truly 14 or 15 points ahead. I will give the media/Democrat party credit though. Coming into the year I don't think the election was in doubt. Trump was going to win in a landslide. Starting in January you had the flimsy impeachment, the CoronaVirus/shutdowns/reopenings, and now the protesting, rioting and looting, (which somehow was not a Corona spreading concern.) In the next six months the media will be hard-pressed to keep up the new crises of the day, but I am sure they will try. And in every case the blame will be laid at Trump's feet. The administration is not guiltless, but to blame the crap in Minneapolis on Trump is not just disingenuous, it is delusional. The governor, mayor, city council and the chief of police are democrats or appointed by one. Trump's comments had nothing to do with a rogue police officer killing a man. In fact, nearly every major city, the hubs of crime in our country, are run by Democrats and have been for 50 years. Worse crime areas, worse run state governments, worse poverty. Name a place that is Republican run and I can name you 10 more that are run by Democrats. So if the left is so virtuous, so good for minorities, so right as a solution for the future of our impoverished against the evils of corporatist Republicans, then where have they been the past fifty years? Why are black babies being killed at such a high rate that more babies are aborted in New York city than are born? The Democrats are best at accusing others for what they are doing. Perhaps they are the true racists: the ones who need to keep the minority voter angry at those racist Republicans every four years in order to keep their bloc vote. They point the finger everywhere but at themselves: the governors, mayors, city councils, senators, congressman and even Presidents who have promised a better, safer upward mobility and delivered the opposite. If you think the right is tired of hearing about racism, or as I have been accused, of downplaying it because, you guessed it, I'm a racist!!!! Just wait until the minorities wake up and see that it is the left's policies that have put them and kept them where they are. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 13, 2020, 02:48:17 pm
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/if-it-looks-3zbpbr.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 13, 2020, 02:53:53 pm
That's an editorial from one of Trump's friends. He's a New York politician who has probably needed favors from Trump for years, so he's not exactly an unbiased source. And most of what he said is just a variant on the "some of my best friends are black" defense. Just because he occasionally does nice things for black people doesn't mean he's not racist.

That editorial did nothing to explain how his well-documented housing discrimination wasn't racist. Or his comments about the Central Park five. Or his villification of Native American casino owners. Or his birtherism. Or his remarks about people from "shithole countries." Or his continued racist behavior and remarks concerning immigrants. People call him racist for reasons like those. No one is arguing that he's racist because he doesn't help people of color enough.

He says some stupid things but calling third world countries ****-hole countries is hardly indicative of racism. I would term it more elitism. Have you been to a third world country? I would use different language for sure, but referring to a third world country in such a way doesn't indicate racism unless you are looking for it. 

Quick question, are you okay with Joe Biden's racist views? Taken from LEFTVOICE.ORG  yes, a left wing site. https://www.leftvoice.org/joe-biden-is-a-racist-who-loves-police-brutality

Biden’s history of enthusiastic racism stretches back decades. From the moment he entered the U.S. Senate in the early 1970s, he vocally opposed busing to achieve school desegregation. Today he disputes this fact, claiming he only opposed federally mandated busing. Nevertheless, “opposing busing” has long been racist code for opposing Black and brown children going to school with white children. At a time when “separate but equal” was beginning to become politically unpalatable, Biden’s leadership against busing, in the most generous possible interpretation, provided cover for segregationists to continue their work.

Biden represented Delaware in the Senate, a state that essentially refused to desegregate schools through a combination of hair-splitting laws and white parents shifting their children to private schools en masse. Private school enrollment in Delaware is now among the highest in the nation, at 17.6 percent in Biden’s hometown of Wilmington — the vast majority of them white. Meanwhile, disproprotionately Black public schools are systematically starved of funds. This kind of de facto segregation is exactly what Joe Biden promoted in his anti-busing campaign.

Perhaps the most egregious example of Biden’s racist use of power is 1994’s Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the crime bill he wrote and continues to support vocally to this day. The bill is a laundry list of the worst aspects of the mass incarceration state. It led to a boom in the number of police officers and prisons, lengthened prison sentences, and created financial incentives to keep people in jail. It created 60 new death penalty offenses as well as the infamous “three strikes and you’re out” rule, which inflicted a life sentence for almost any crime, even ones considered very minor, if there were two prior convictions for “serious” or “violent” crimes. Since then, people have died in prison for things like stealing a dollar in loose change from a parked car, possessing less than 1 gram of a drug, and attempting to break into a soup kitchen. Biden had also co-written the Anti-Drug Abuse Act a few years earlier, during the so-called crack epidemic. It amplified sentencing disparities between crack **** users, who were mostly Black, and powder **** users, who were mostly white.

Listen to his speeches on the senate floor prior to passing this bill. He would be excoriated for using that kind of language today. In fact, after he said, "“If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.” He was condemned by the left and right. I guess the good thing about Joe is he might not remember he was a racist, so at least you have that going for you.

So if you simply look at legislation, Trump's policies have actually repaired the racist elements of the Biden crime bill. You can argue the semantics, but actual laws are more important than perception, and Trumps sentencing reform has helped black people, who were incarcerated at much higher rates because of Biden's law. By the way, Biden still stands by the bill, or at least his handlers tell him he is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 13, 2020, 02:56:39 pm
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/if-it-looks-3zbpbr.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 13, 2020, 03:48:26 pm
So as a source you quote Snopes? Wikepedia? Vox and the Huffpost? Basically as bad as if I quoted Foxnews, National Review and Breitbart. In every case that I can find there is either not enough evidence, the charge is skewed beyond the words or you have to view comments and actions in the worse light possible. As far as his being condemned for actions of his father that proves nothing. There are two sides to every story.

Snopes is center, and the fact the the right wing tries to paint it as a leftist site reveals their own refusal to accept facts. They're not perfect in their reporting, but they fairly debunk both sides when they report incorrect news.

By design, Wikipedia is not inherently biased. Every claim is cited. In the specific section I linked to about Trump's pre-presidency history on racial issues, there were citations to sources like New York Times, PBS Newshour, ABC News, NBC News, Time, and the Washington Post (and others). I know people on the right don't like to accept anything to the left of Fox News as true (and even Fox News is too liberal for some), but those are respected news outlets.

Huffpost and Vox are left leaning, but also typically factual sources. The Huffpost article was posted because it specifically debunked the claim you made about hims receiving an NAACP award. You can find many links that explain the award that he actually received. But that one specifically showed the source of the NAACP claim (disgraced former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen) and also repeatedly cited a NY Times article in its explanation of the actual award.

Quote
I am more interested in policy and results anyway.

Your claim this morning was that no one considered him a racist before he was president. I pointed out evidence that he's been called a racist since at least 1973. Your response was to post an editorial by one of his friends and go on a Fox News talking points rant about policy and results. Policy and results are irrelevant to the conversation about Trump's history of racism, though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 13, 2020, 04:08:14 pm
He says some stupid things but calling third world countries ****-hole countries is hardly indicative of racism. I would term it more elitism. Have you been to a third world country? I would use different language for sure, but referring to a third world country in such a way doesn't indicate racism unless you are looking for it. 

Quick question, are you okay with Joe Biden's racist views? Taken from LEFTVOICE.ORG  yes, a left wing site. https://www.leftvoice.org/joe-biden-is-a-racist-who-loves-police-brutality

A couple things...

Trump's exact quote was "Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” The clear implication is that the people from those countries have nothing to offer the United States. That's bigoted. Some would call it racist. I guess if you want to get technical, you could consider it to be more xenophobic than racist. But he was also reported to have followed that up by saying he wanted more people coming from places like Norway, which is one of the whitest countries in the world...so maybe it was just racism.

Second thing...without digging into it, I'm going to guess that leftvoice.org article was written by a Bernie Bro who thinks the DNC stole his nomination twice. I'm assuming that because I've already seen it from Bernie conspiracy theorists on my Facebook timeline. Biden does have some issues in his history, but it's also clear he's made a concerted effort to move towards racial justice over the last couple of decades.

Biden was far from my favorite candidate--my preference was more in the Kamala Harris/Cory Booker lane. But he's what we have now, and there's no doubt in my mind he's a far, far, far better candidate than Trump on race issues.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 13, 2020, 04:58:19 pm
I am kind of astonished that anyone here continues to bother to respond to Robb's defenses of Donald Trump, particularly his racism. Is there some point in doing so? Am I correct in recalling that Robb recently said he doesn't believe racism is a serious problem in the U.S.  So why would it be any surprise he doesn't think Trump is a racist? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 13, 2020, 06:47:36 pm
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/if-it-looks-3zbpbr.jpg)

If the hood fits...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 13, 2020, 07:04:10 pm

I am more interested in policy and results anyway.

His policies are incredibly racist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 13, 2020, 07:07:48 pm
His policies are incredibly racist.

And his results make Buchanan look like Teddy Roosevelt.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 13, 2020, 09:54:16 pm
Independent of anything else, Trump's performance at that ghastly West Point commencement he forced to happen was harrowing. This is clearly a man in the midst of a steep mental and physical decline - he's obviously hiding some sort of serious neurological impairment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 13, 2020, 10:08:24 pm
He’s not really hiding it at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 13, 2020, 10:35:14 pm
"Trying" is the operative word.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 13, 2020, 10:39:05 pm
I'm not a fan of speculating on Trump's health when there are so many obvious policy and personality based problems. Biden often appears old and impaired too.

Biden is clearly much, much better on the issues and temperament. But if it turns into an argument about which septuagenarian is declining faster, it's easy to "both sides" the issue. So I'd rather focus on Trump's racism and authoritarianism than his health.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 13, 2020, 11:22:21 pm
Biden stumbles over his words occasionally, which is normal for a 77 year-old.  Trump is showing clear signs of either a stroke or some other neurological condition - slurring his words, difficulty walking, tremors.  It's not remotely comparable, nor is it remotely irrelevant in debating his fitness to serve as president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 13, 2020, 11:38:16 pm
Trump's health is the least of his negative traits.  By a lot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 13, 2020, 11:41:00 pm
These folks are echoing my comments in this topic and are expressing my feeling of disenfranchisement.  Right now, I believe, the only thing that could destroy Biden's Presidential hopes is picking a very weak running mate.  I think Klobuchar would have been terrific until the Floyd situation probably   Harris would probably be okay unless she p issed off Joe in the first couple of debates.   

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/13/politics/arizona-voters-trump-biden/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 13, 2020, 11:46:21 pm
I'm not a fan of speculating on Trump's health when there are so many obvious policy and personality based problems. Biden often appears old and impaired too.

Biden is clearly much, much better on the issues and temperament. But if it turns into an argument about which septuagenarian is declining faster, it's easy to "both sides" the issue. So I'd rather focus on Trump's racism and authoritarianism than his health.

Biden has always had a penchant for gaffes. This is nothing new and has nothing to do with his age. I had not realized until recently that a lifelong stuttering issue had contributed to that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 14, 2020, 12:00:14 am
And Biden likes to love on children and women inappropriately...

https://youtu.be/DAUOurZIVfI
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 14, 2020, 01:42:48 am
https://twitter.com/101_woke/status/1272036597047885824?s=09
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 14, 2020, 07:23:21 am
It would be nice to not have to choose between 2 70 year old white men for President is my feeling on age.  Neither health long term is going to be a positive against the other.

At this point Biden could pick Bernie as his VP and I don't think I'd really care.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on June 14, 2020, 10:56:53 am
Both choices are awful.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 14, 2020, 08:07:58 pm
Quote
Both choices are awful.

No.  That line of thinking is partially what put that **** in the White House, so shut that down now.  One choice is SO MUCH more awful that it makes the other choice seem like a breath of fresh air.  It's not close.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 15, 2020, 09:39:23 am
This is a devastating ruling for Robb and Dusty.

Quote
Supreme Court says federal law protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/supreme-court-lgbtq-employment-case/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 15, 2020, 09:44:12 am
Proper and predictable result.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 15, 2020, 09:53:20 am
Proper and predictable result.

Agreed but outrageous that, in 2020, it will be controversial.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 15, 2020, 09:57:47 am
This is a devastating ruling for Robb and Dusty.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/supreme-court-lgbtq-employment-case/index.html

Devastating for Trump too, who just removed medical protections for LGBTQ+ people on Friday. It has to sting that one of his hand-picked justices actually wrote the opinion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 15, 2020, 10:01:02 am
I wonder when the tax return ruling will come?  That will be a good view into how political this court is.  As I understand it, ruling in favor of the House and disclosure of the returns is a no brainer by the letter of the law. But, when political considerations get added, it’s murky.  If that ruling goes against him, talk about a devastation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 15, 2020, 10:18:15 am
This appears to be another big hit on Trump this morning...the Supreme Court has declined to hear a Trump administration appeal that challenges California sanctuary laws:

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-06-15/supreme-court-rejects-trumps-challenge-to-california-sanctuary-law
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 15, 2020, 10:46:36 am
And the Supreme Court also will not hear appeals on several second amendment cases:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/15/supreme-court-will-not-hear-gun-cases-blow-to-2nd-amendment-backers.html

I am looking forward to the inevitable Trump tweet storm sometime later today.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 15, 2020, 12:34:32 pm
We have the worst leadership in the western world.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EahumZJWsAEX3e9.jpg?format=jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 15, 2020, 04:33:43 pm
Gorsuch writing for majority.  Let's not lose sight of the fact that he's still going to rule like the troglodyte he is 98% of the time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 15, 2020, 04:43:11 pm
Love it. Dont under-estimate how liberal Roberts can be, conservatives were sure individual mandate was not constitutional. Roberts voted to ensure that it fell under congress right to levy taxes.

Unlike Brett/alito/Thomas, Gorsuch is likely a more principled strict constitutionalist. This is not a negative for Gorsuch. I shudder to think what Trump/mcconnell would follow Brett with.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 15, 2020, 05:01:04 pm
If you look at overall records of voting the "conservative" position, Gorsuch trails only Thomas over the last two years.  Today is an aberration, make no mistake.

Roberts is complicated.  He's no Souter, much less a liberal, but he's very fixated on P.R..  That pushes him to vote with the liberal wing when he feels doing otherwise would cast the court in too negative a light.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 15, 2020, 06:08:28 pm
I think of Gorsuch as being kind of like Justin Amash. He's one of the more conservative people in government, but he's actually principled about it. So when it comes to a ruling on an "all men are created equal" case, he has the integrity to break with the party line.

Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh are conservative in the same way Mitch McConnell is conservative...it's all party line.

It has been interesting to see how many Twitter conservatives just came out and basically admitted today that they just want to make the courts partisan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 15, 2020, 06:45:56 pm
Except that Amash isn't actually all that conservative by the current standard.  Certainly not at the Gorsuch level.

I don't disagree that Gorsuch is a capital-C conservative in the sense that he has a defined judicial philosophy and measures every decision against it.  I just disagree that it's going to tell him to vote against conservative political doctrine in contested cases more than once in a blue moon.  Kavenagh is just basically a political hack, not smart enough to pretend to have a judicial philosophy.  I think that actually makes him more unpredictable because it makes him more persuadable (and their respective track records statistically bear that out).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 15, 2020, 07:01:31 pm
I don't think Gorsuch is that conservative by the current standard either, because the current standard is Trump/McConnell. From everything I've read, he seems like a guy who is qualified for the job, even if I don't necessarily agree with his philosophy. With the Amash comparison, I was thinking more about his willingness to break with the party when it threw their values in the trash (though I'd still argue he's far closer to what conservatives claim to be than Trump, McConnell, etc.).

I do agree that Kavanaugh overall is going to be more unpredictable because he is a hack who is completely unqualified for the job (if I was going to compare him to a congressman, my first thought is Matt Gaetz). But on high profile cases like this where individual rights are at stake (and the Republicans are on the side of non-equality), I'll take my chances with Gorsuch over Kavanaugh.

And I'd trust Roberts over both of them because he really cares about not turning the Supreme Court into a kangaroo court.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 15, 2020, 07:11:20 pm
I'd trust Roberts over both of them too, but I laugh when I see him compared to Souter.  Roberts is basically a Warren Burger mainline conservative of the pre-Trump Republican Party.  If he weren't Chief Justice and self-perceived steward of the court's reputation, I suspect about 75% of his votes which break with the party line would have gone the other way.  Not that I'm complaining, you need to take what you can get.

My hunch is that Kavanagh is such a hack and intellectual blank slate that it's not inconceivable he could drift to the center over time, especially if he falls under the influence of one or two of his more persuasive liberal colleagues.  Indeed, he's already voted with the liberal wing far more often than Gorsuch (or Alito or Thomas).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 15, 2020, 07:14:51 pm
So does that make Ginsburg and Sotomayor political hacks as well since the cross lines about as much as Alito and Thomas?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 15, 2020, 07:19:30 pm
No, because they're actually qualified to be on the SC.  Like Gorsuch or Scalia.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 15, 2020, 08:09:50 pm
Fivethirtyeight.com just published an article relevant to this discussion. Here's an excerpt:

Last year, we wrote that Roberts would likely land at the ideological center of the court in Kennedy’s absence, and he did — but so did Kavanaugh, who voted in almost total lock-step with Roberts. In fact, Kavanaugh was actually slightly closer to the center than Roberts was, according to their Martin-Quinn scores, a prominent measure of judicial ideology calculated by scholars Lee Epstein and Andrew Martin of Washington University in St. Louis and Kevin Quinn of the University of Michigan using data from the Supreme Court Database.

And here's another excerpt:

Based on how they have ruled this year, there are now three justices who could reasonably be seen as “swing” votes of one kind or another: Roberts, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. And it’s possible to argue that all — or none — of these justices have replaced Kennedy as the court’s “swing” justice. Roberts and Kavanaugh are more ideologically moderate than Gorsuch, but Gorsuch was more of a loose cannon. He joined the liberals in more closely divided cases than any of his conservative colleagues. That made him the “swingiest” conservative on the court, even though it was Roberts who ultimately determined the outcome of one of the most closely watched cases of the term when he voted to keep a question about citizenship off the 2020 census form for the time being.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-supreme-court-might-have-three-swing-justices-now/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 15, 2020, 08:27:26 pm
No, because they're actually qualified to be on the SC.  Like Gorsuch or Scalia.


Qualified because you agree with them? What makes their experience different from that of Scailia and Gorusch other than one set is conservative and the other is liberal?

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 15, 2020, 08:43:37 pm
I also called Kavanaugh a hack. But personally, I wouldn't call Alito or Thomas hacks. Their philosophies seem to have been consistent over the years. I like them less than Gorsuch as justices because they are social conservatives who are going to twist themselves into pretzels finding a way to rule in favor of social conservatism (like they did today). I get the impression that Gorsuch is more willing to fall on the side of individual rights over pure social conservatism (like he did today).

I mainly called Kavanaugh a hack because of the way he acted during his confirmation hearings. His "what goes around comes around" rant probably should've disqualified him--he didn't sound like a guy who is capable of being impartial. And I didn't buy all his denials and excuses for dismissing Christine Blasey Ford's claims. So maybe "hack" isn't the right word...my impression of him is that he's untrustworthy.

By the way, anything I say about Thomas is probably not unbiased. I have a personal connection--my sister clerked for him and is still friends with him. I've also met him before with my family and we had a nice hour long conversation. Maybe if I was more politically engaged during his hearings, I'd have a different opinion (but I was 13 years old).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 15, 2020, 09:09:31 pm
All the Supreme Court Justices will have cases where they twist themselves into knots to try and get their desired outcome. Some of them just sound better when doing it.  I don’t have love for the liberal bloc of justices, but I wouldn’t call them unqualified or hacks. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 15, 2020, 11:14:30 pm
Qualified because you agree with them? What makes their experience different from that of Scailia and Gorusch other than one set is conservative and the other is liberal?


I almost never agree(d) with Scalia or Gorsuch, but I certainly acknowledge they're well-qualified.  So I'm honestly not sure where your beef is, and can only assume you've mistaken me for Reb and are trying to have an argument for the sake of doing it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 16, 2020, 10:13:46 am
Dexamthesone is the first drug shown to be effective at decreasing the fatality rate for COVID-19 patients.  For intubated patients it cut the fatality rate from 40% to 28% and those on oxygen from 25% to 20%.  It didn't show any benefit for those that didn't require any oxygen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 16, 2020, 08:34:20 pm

It has been interesting to see how many Twitter conservatives just came out and basically admitted today that they just want to make the courts partisan.

This is of course exclusive to only the right. 

I actually am glad that the courts ruled as they did.  I don't want partisan judges one way or another.  Activist judges making law as opposed to interpreting has been a blight on this country at least since Roe v Wade.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 16, 2020, 09:17:05 pm
This is of course exclusive to only the right. 

Nominating partisan justices and judges isn't exclusive to the right. But refusing to hold hearings for a Supreme Court nominee (who wasn't even especially liberal--he would've been the most centrist justice on the court) is something that only a Republican has done.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 17, 2020, 07:51:40 am
News flash: Aubrey Huff is a dick.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1273018665391099904
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 17, 2020, 07:58:47 am
News flash: Aubrey Huff is a dick.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1273018665391099904

The comments under that tweet are depressing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 17, 2020, 08:29:55 am
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll/biden-opens-13-point-advantage-as-trump-popularity-drops-to-seven-month-low-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN23O1GX
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 17, 2020, 08:39:09 am
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll/biden-opens-13-point-advantage-as-trump-popularity-drops-to-seven-month-low-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN23O1GX

If the COVID cases continue on the current trajectory, we’ll be in another world of hurt in the fall which is going to destroy Trump. This could be a serious bloodbath and nobody deserves the humiliation more.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 17, 2020, 09:55:20 am
If the COVID cases continue on the current trajectory, we’ll be in another world of hurt in the fall which is going to destroy Trump. This could be a serious bloodbath and nobody deserves the humiliation more.

Not according to Mike Pence yesterday

Quote
The media has tried to scare the American people every step of the way, and these grim predictions of a second wave are no different. The truth is, whatever the media says, our whole-of-America approach has been a success. We’ve slowed the spread, we’ve cared for the most vulnerable, we’ve saved lives, and we’ve created a solid foundation for whatever challenges we may face in the future. That’s a cause for celebration, not the media’s fear mongering.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/vice-president-mike-pence-op-ed-isnt-coronavirus-second-wave/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 17, 2020, 12:41:59 pm
Oh boy, here’s the latest from one of the most devoted Trump cultists:

Democrats and MSM screamed for more tests.  They got them.  Covid 19 is rarely deadly.  Most people get it with zero symptoms or symptoms so minor they don't even know they have it

The only reason your stats look bad is because the US has done the most testing.

Not to mention Democrat Governors FORCING nursing homes to take Covid patients where the people at the highest risk of getting severely ill lived.  It was a death sentence done all in the name of pumping up the numbers.

Covid 19 a hoax.  It was never as deadly or as easily transmitted as we were told.  Most people have no clue they even had it.  All done to crash the economy on purpose in the hopes they can get a Democrat in the white house.

They will fail at that as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 17, 2020, 01:20:55 pm
Pekin?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 17, 2020, 04:21:32 pm
Fox "News"

Quote
Tucker Carlson doesn't have an obligation to investigate the truth of statements before making them on his show and his audience doesn't expect him to report facts, a lawyer for Fox News told a New York federal judge on Wednesday.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/fox-news-defends-tucker-carlson-karen-mcdougal-slander-suit-1298999
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 17, 2020, 05:03:46 pm
He can report alternative facts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 17, 2020, 07:32:03 pm
Oh brother.  If you can't see the hypocrisy there is no hope.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 17, 2020, 07:37:58 pm
Matt Gaetz is a ****stain of a human being.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 17, 2020, 09:27:17 pm
Looking forward to all the Trumpers explaining how leveraging trade discussions with China in an attempt to prompt them to aid the re-election campaign is totally fine, normal, non-treasonous behavior.

I’ll wait.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 17, 2020, 09:31:19 pm
Oh brother.  If you can't see the hypocrisy there is no hope.

Would love to see you cite similar legal arguments (“ppl don’t expect the reporters to report facts”) from an attorney representing... ANY of the major media outlets (CNN, MSNBC, NYTimes, WaPo, Atlantic, etc.).

Until then, this is false equivalency as brazen as Trump’s calling Charlottesville Nazis “very fine people.”

Disagree with an angle, argue against a spin. But DO NOT conflate “nobody expects the truth” with “I don’t like this liberal bias.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 17, 2020, 10:07:04 pm
Would love to see you cite similar legal arguments (“ppl don’t expect the reporters to report facts”) from an attorney representing... ANY of the major media outlets (CNN, MSNBC, NYTimes, WaPo, Atlantic, etc.).

Well, there was that time when Alex Jones was at a custody hearing and his lawyer admitted he was "a performance artist playing a character."

So Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones...two peas in a pod.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 17, 2020, 11:18:06 pm
Also looking forward to hearing from Trumpers how they feel about their pro-life president supporting concentration camps in China.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 17, 2020, 11:21:59 pm
Well, there was that time when Alex Jones was at a custody hearing and his lawyer admitted he was "a performance artist playing a character."

So Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones...two peas in a pod.

Who in God's name would want custody of Alex Jones?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 18, 2020, 05:57:49 am
Also looking forward to hearing from Trumpers how they feel about their pro-life president supporting concentration camps in China.

They support concentration camps here in the US. Why would they care about China?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 18, 2020, 07:42:20 am
Would love to see you cite similar legal arguments (“ppl don’t expect the reporters to report facts”) from an attorney representing... ANY of the major media outlets (CNN, MSNBC, NYTimes, WaPo, Atlantic, etc.).

Until then, this is false equivalency as brazen as Trump’s calling Charlottesville Nazis “very fine people.”

Disagree with an angle, argue against a spin. But DO NOT conflate “nobody expects the truth” with “I don’t like this liberal bias.”
That mythical quote has been debunked enough that the only reason you still believe it is because you want to.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 18, 2020, 08:07:04 am
Debunked?  GTFO, He said it and he was referring to the people in the “Unite the Right” protest who were there to protest the removal of the Robert E. Lee statue. There were no “very fine people” in that group.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 18, 2020, 09:20:41 am
Another big L for Trump and the racist Republican Party.

Quote
Supreme Court blocks Trump from ending DACA

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/18/politics/daca-immigration-supreme-court/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 18, 2020, 09:24:29 am
Also looking forward to hearing from Trumpers how they feel about their pro-life president supporting concentration camps in China.


Trumpers won't believe it.  It's all lies!  And the rest of them can't read and don't watch the news.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 18, 2020, 10:35:54 am
SCOTUS makes POTUS eat it again!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 18, 2020, 11:56:16 am
That mythical quote has been debunked enough that the only reason you still believe it is because you want to.

Robb, I'll invite you to post legitimate sources "debunking" this.

Given Fox's recent legal arguments that their anchors have no responsibility to validate their claims and that viewers do not expect factual news, Fox is not a legitimate source, per their own admission. They officially have as much credibility as a tabloid.

Further, I would ask you to quote established, centrist sources, like USA Today, AP, WSJ (not the op-ed section; the actual paper), The Economist, etc.

No need to reference NYT, Atlantic, Vox, etc. But if the best you can do is a Federalist source, you have epistemological challenges that supersede any discussion you'd like to have about this incident.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 18, 2020, 12:00:17 pm
Omaha World-Herald  @OWHnews
Governor Pete Ricketts has informed local officials that if citizens are required to wear masks in public buildings, their governments will not receive any of the $100 million in federal coronavirus aid money.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1273589679439392768/_JN1MlB1?format=jpg&name=600x600)

https://www.omaha.com/news/state_and_regional/ricketts-tells-local-governments-they-wont-get-federal-covid-19-money-if-they-require-masks/article_d15459b9-26df-527e-9899-9f579a3d8597.html?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_OWHnews
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 18, 2020, 12:00:25 pm
Also, Robb, please comment on Trump being pro-concentration camps in China.

Or is John-effing-Bolton also a member of the Deep State conspiracy to overthrow Trump?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 18, 2020, 12:00:37 pm
John Bolton is such a liberal shill.  Probably hangs out at antifa rallies.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 18, 2020, 12:03:16 pm
Congressman Eric Swalwell  June 16 at 9:42 AM ·
John Bolton showing up on the scene now with a book is like a firefighter showing up at a building that’s already burned with a fire hose and saying, ‘hey guys, I got this’ — it’s too late.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 18, 2020, 12:07:02 pm
Seth Myers:  It's like seeing your neighbor's house on fire and instead of calling the fire department writing a book entitled "Hey, Your House is On Fire."

**** you, Bolton.  I hope everyone reads the book and the government successfully takes his money.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 18, 2020, 12:10:36 pm
All news stories talking about Bolton's dance about testifying should end with "and here are the names of Republican senators up for re-election who decided they didn't want to hear from John Bolton:  Cory Gardner, Mitch McConnell, Susan Collins,  . . . ."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 18, 2020, 12:11:38 pm
Jim Jordan.  When is that fucktard up for re-election?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 18, 2020, 12:15:13 pm
Jim Jordan.  When is that fucktard up for re-election?
Jordan is the rep from Ohio's 4th district
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 18, 2020, 12:17:31 pm
Huh.  I figured that would get ***'d out, like if I said gamble.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 18, 2020, 12:30:55 pm
Jim Jordan.  When is that fucktard up for re-election?

Every 2 years.

Omaha World-Herald  @OWHnews
Governor Pete Ricketts has informed local officials that if citizens are required to wear masks in public buildings, their governments will not receive any of the $100 million in federal coronavirus aid money.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1273589679439392768/_JN1MlB1?format=jpg&name=600x600)

https://www.omaha.com/news/state_and_regional/ricketts-tells-local-governments-they-wont-get-federal-covid-19-money-if-they-require-masks/article_d15459b9-26df-527e-9899-9f579a3d8597.html?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_OWHnews


He has really done a good job with his response, so this is disaapointing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 18, 2020, 12:36:34 pm
How are you this bored? Don’t carry water for GOP **** right now. You have to be better than that, man.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 18, 2020, 12:37:26 pm
)A group of Republican operatives has launched a new super PAC to help turn out disaffected GOP voters for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, Matt Borges, a founder of the group, confirmed to CNN.
The group, called "Right Side PAC," will focus on targeting voters in battleground states like Arizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, Borges, a former chair of the Ohio Republican Party and an alum of the George W. Bush administration, said. The group will focus on data, targeting and turnout, and does not have plans to run television or radio ads.
Borges said the group will work to turn out "that group of Republicans who feels that Donald Trump is an existential threat to the country and this party."
"We're going to make people feel comfortable with the correction option -- pulling the lever for Joe Biden this year," he said.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 18, 2020, 12:37:57 pm
How are you this bored? Don’t carry water for GOP **** right now. You have to be better than that, man.

Huh?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 18, 2020, 12:44:21 pm
A group of Republican operatives has launched a new super PAC to help turn out disaffected GOP voters for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, Matt Borges, a founder of the group, confirmed to CNN.

The group, called "Right Side PAC," will focus on targeting voters in battleground states like Arizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, Borges, a former chair of the Ohio Republican Party and an alum of the George W. Bush administration, said. The group will focus on data, targeting and turnout, and does not have plans to run television or radio ads.

Borges said the group will work to turn out "that group of Republicans who feels that Donald Trump is an existential threat to the country and this party."
"We're going to make people feel comfortable with the correction option -- pulling the lever for Joe Biden this year," he said.

Conservatives of *actual* principle continue to abandon the party of Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 18, 2020, 12:48:26 pm
Let’s hope so when it matters. GOP voter suppression machine will kick into overdrive
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 18, 2020, 01:21:16 pm
I'm a fan of the Lincoln Project
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 18, 2020, 05:42:20 pm
The search for the bottom of the barrel continues: Trump ads using a Nazi symbol.  So offensive even Facebook took them down.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/06/18/trump-campaign-runs-ads-with-marking-once-used-by-nazis-designate-political-prisoners/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 18, 2020, 07:18:30 pm
Top State Department official resigns in protest of Trump’s response to racial tensions in the country

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/top-state-department-official-resigns-in-protest-of-trumps-response-to-racial-tensions-in-the-country/2020/06/18/e142e342-b181-11ea-a567-6172530208bd_story.html

Anyone agree that Trump will say she was fired?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 18, 2020, 07:31:58 pm
"I did something good: I made Juneteenth very famous," Trump said in reference to the rally date in an interview published Thursday. "It's actually an important event, an important time. But nobody had ever heard of it."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/18/politics/donald-trump-juneteenth-credit/index.html


And here's the Fox News link for Robb.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-juneteenth-famous-interview
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 19, 2020, 12:02:40 am
Robb, I'll invite you to post legitimate sources "debunking" this.

Given Fox's recent legal arguments that their anchors have no responsibility to validate their claims and that viewers do not expect factual news, Fox is not a legitimate source, per their own admission. They officially have as much credibility as a tabloid.

Further, I would ask you to quote established, centrist sources, like USA Today, AP, WSJ (not the op-ed section; the actual paper), The Economist, etc.

No need to reference NYT, Atlantic, Vox, etc. But if the best you can do is a Federalist source, you have epistemological challenges that supersede any discussion you'd like to have about this incident.
There were three groups protesting in  Charlotte. White Supremacists, Antifa, and actual peaceful protesters on both sides of the issue. When Trump said there were good people on both sides he was referring to the non white Supremacists and non Antifa people. He clarified that after, said he condemned white Supremacists. Because you believe everything he says and does is dishonest and evil you won't believe him. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 19, 2020, 12:04:10 am
I'm a fan of the Lincoln Project
And I am in favor of the blexit movement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 19, 2020, 12:10:58 am
Let’s hope so when it matters. GOP voter suppression machine will kick into overdrive
In the history of this country the party who was guilty of suppressing black voters and even threatening their lives is the Democrat party. 

Requiring people to present IDs to vote is hardly suppressing. If so then we are also suppressing flights on airplanes, depositing and cashing checks and picking up prescription drugs. One citizen one vote is not racist or suppressing, it is demanding that the election is won by actual voters who are eligible to vote.  I don't know how this became a partisan issue. Doesn't everyone want this?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 19, 2020, 12:18:27 am
"I did something good: I made Juneteenth very famous," Trump said in reference to the rally date in an interview published Thursday. "It's actually an important event, an important time. But nobody had ever heard of it."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/18/politics/donald-trump-juneteenth-credit/index.html


And here's the Fox News link for Robb.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-juneteenth-famous-interview

And your point is?  Trump is a narcissist?  He makes everything about himself?  In other words he is like almost everyone who has been or runs for the highest office? Granted he is the most overt of any I can remember and certainly less eloquent, but again I say so what?   In a country that is watching Democrat cities burn,  looters steal, territory ceded to lawlessness in the middle of a major city, and a movement to defund the police,  I am not too concerned with Trumps ego, unless it forces him to intercede in these big cities. The left is desperately hoping he will so they can say he is a dictator and set the military on "peaceful" protesters. If he takes the bait he deserves the consequences. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 19, 2020, 12:31:56 am
And your point is?  Trump is a narcissist?  He makes everything about himself?  In other words he is like almost everyone who has been or runs for the highest office? Granted he is the most overt of any i can remember and certainly less eloquent, but again I say so what?   In a country that is watching Democrat cities burn,  looters steal, territory ceded to lawlessness in the middle of a major city, and a movement to defund the police,  i an not too concerned with Trumls ego, unless it forces him to intercede in these big cities. The left is desperately hoping he will so they can say he is a dictator and set the military on "peaceful" protesters. If he takes the bait he deserves the consequences. 




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPn0KFlbqX8
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 19, 2020, 12:39:33 am
I do hope that one of these cities is able to defund and dismantle their police departments. Let's see what that looks like for a few days.  I'm sure it will go well. Talk about the biggest overreaction in history.  Sure you can point to a small number of instances of police brutality against both black and white people, but blaming all cops for the actions of a few idiots is like punishing Bluejay for a few doctors caught murdering their elderly patients or attacking Curt because a few teachers have molested their students. Prosecute the crime, prosecute the criminal who committed it,  but judging an entire profession, one that is vastly underpaid for the job they are asked to do,  one that is the first line of defense between criminals and law abiding citizens, is not only stupid,  it is beyond dangerous.  I can't believe that even the far lefties here support such lunacy. Instead of villifying these heros, we should thank them.  There are very few jobs in this country where fathers and mothers go to work each day not knowing if they will return, and many don't.  These men and women see people on their worst day,  everyday.  If reforms are needed then fine,  let's debate that.  But defunding them? Or cutting back their numbers or pay? Do you know what the stats say about inner city neighborhoods vs the number of cops patrolling? They say the greater concentration of cops the safer the neighborhood. And you want less? An unarmed black person in America is more likely to be struck by lightning than killed by police. Does that mean God is racist? It's too bad the media is stoking the outrage with glee instead of reporting the facts. They are complicit in this,  but don't seem to care. So sit back and watch and stay silent,  but if you dial 911 and nobody answers you will perhaps then appreciate just how much we need the men and women in blue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 19, 2020, 06:33:31 am
There were three groups protesting in  Charlotte. White Supremacists, Antifa, and actual peaceful protesters on both sides of the issue. When Trump said there were good people on both sides he was referring to the non white Supremacists and non Antifa people. He clarified that after, said he condemned white Supremacists. Because you believe everything he says and does is dishonest and evil you won't believe him.

You can actually read what he said. Over and over, including the famous “very fine people” part, he was defending the people who came to protest the removal of the statue. That was the “Unite the Right” rally, that was a group of white supremacists neo-Nazis.  I know you think those are very fine people with a completely justified cause but you are in the minority on that one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 19, 2020, 08:14:07 am
Reporter: "The neo-Nazis started this. They showed up in Charlottesville to protest --"

Trump: "Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves -- and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name."

In Context: Donald Trump’s ‘very fine people on both sides’ remarks (transcript)

NATIONAL

President Donald Trump speaks to the media in the lobby of Trump Tower on Aug. 15, 2017 in New York. (AP)

By Angie Drobnic HolanApril 26, 2019

On Aug. 15, 2017, President Donald Trump held a press conference to discuss an executive order he had signed on infrastructure permitting. Reporters shortly began asking questions about Trump’s initial response to violent protests in Charlottesville, Va. It was at this press conference that Trump said that "you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides."

On April 25, 2019, former Vice President Joe Biden declared his 2020 candidacy for the Democratic nomination and the presidency by recalling the events in Charlottesville and Trump’s comments. "With those words, the president of the United States assigned a moral equivalence between those spreading hate and those with the courage to stand against it," Biden said.

The next day, Trump responded, saying "If you look at what I said, you will see that that question was answered perfectly. And I was talking about people that went because they felt very strongly about the monument to Robert E. Lee, a great general. Whether you like it or not, he was one of the great generals." Trump also said he would defeat Biden "very easily."

We wanted to look at Trump’s comments in their original context. Here is a transcript of the questions Trump answered that addressed the Charlottesville controversy in the days after it happened. (His specific remarks about "very fine people, on both sides" come in the final third of the transcript.)

• • •

Reporter: "Let me ask you, Mr. President, why did you wait so long to blast neo-Nazis?"

Trump: "I didn’t wait long. I didn’t wait long."

Reporter: "Forty-eight hours."

Trump: "I wanted to make sure, unlike most politicians, that what I said was correct -- not make a quick statement. The statement I made on Saturday, the first statement, was a fine statement. But you don’t make statements that direct unless you know the facts. It takes a little while to get the facts. You still don’t know the facts. And it’s a very, very important process to me, and it’s a very important statement.

"So I don’t want to go quickly and just make a statement for the sake of making a political statement. I want to know the facts. If you go back to --

Reporter: "So you had to (inaudible) white supremacists?"

Trump: "I brought it. I brought it. I brought it."

Reporter: "Was it terrorism, in your opinion, what happened?"

Trump: "As I said on -- remember, Saturday -- we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. It has no place in America. And then it went on from there. Now, here’s the thing --"

Reporter: (Inaudible)

Trump: "Excuse me. Excuse me. Take it nice and easy. Here’s the thing: When I make a statement, I like to be correct. I want the facts. This event just happened. In fact, a lot of the event didn’t even happen yet, as we were speaking. This event just happened.

"Before I make a statement, I need the facts. So I don’t want to rush into a statement. So making the statement when I made it was excellent. In fact, the young woman, who I hear was a fantastic young woman, and it was on NBC -- her mother wrote me and said through, I guess, Twitter, social media, the nicest things. And I very much appreciated that. I hear she was a fine -- really, actually, an incredible young woman. But her mother, on Twitter, thanked me for what I said.

"And honestly, if the press were not fake, and if it was honest, the press would have said what I said was very nice.  But unlike you, and unlike -- excuse me, unlike you and unlike the media, before I make a statement, I like to know the facts."

(crosstalk)

Reporter: "The CEO of Walmart said you missed a critical opportunity to help bring the country together. Did you?"

Trump: "Not at all. I think the country -- look, you take a look. I’ve created over a million jobs since I’m President. The country is booming. The stock market is setting records. We have the highest employment numbers we’ve ever had in the history of our country. We’re doing record business. We have the highest levels of enthusiasm. So the head of Walmart, who I know -- who’s a very nice guy -- was making a political statement. I mean -- I’d do it the same way. And you know why? Because I want to make sure, when I make a statement, that the statement is correct. And there was no way -- there was no way of making a correct statement that early. I had to see the facts, unlike a lot of reporters. Unlike a lot of reporters --

Reporter: "Nazis were there."

Reporter: "David Duke was there."

Trump: "I didn’t know David Duke was there. I wanted to see the facts. And the facts, as they started coming out, were very well stated. In fact, everybody said, ‘His statement was beautiful. If he would have made it sooner, that would have been good.’ I couldn’t have made it sooner because I didn’t know all of the facts. Frankly, people still don’t know all of the facts.

"It was very important -- excuse me, excuse me -- it was very important to me to get the facts out and correctly. Because if I would have made a fast statement -- and the first statement was made without knowing much, other than what we were seeing. The second statement was made after, with knowledge, with great knowledge. There are still things -- excuse me -- there are still things that people don’t know. I want to make a statement with knowledge. I wanted to know the facts."

Reporter: "Two questions. Was this terrorism? And can you tell us how you’re feeling about your chief strategist, Stephen Bannon?"

Trump: "Well, I think the driver of the car is a disgrace to himself, his family, and this country. And that is -- you can call it terrorism. You can call it murder. You can call it whatever you want. I would just call it as the fastest one to come up with a good verdict. That’s what I’d call it. Because there is a question:  Is it murder? Is it terrorism? And then you get into legal semantics. The driver of the car is a murderer. And what he did was a horrible, horrible, inexcusable thing.

(crosstalk)

Reporter: "Can you tell us broadly what your -- do you still have confidence in Steve?"

Trump: "Well, we’ll see.  Look, look -- I like Mr. Bannon. He’s a friend of mine. But Mr. Bannon came on very late. You know that. I went through 17 senators, governors, and I won all the primaries. Mr. Bannon came on very much later than that. And I like him, he’s a good man. He is not a racist, I can tell you that. He’s a good person. He actually gets very unfair press in that regard. But we’ll see what happens with Mr. Bannon. But he’s a good person, and I think the press treats him, frankly, very unfairly."

(crosstalk)

Reporter: "Sen. (John) McCain said that the alt-right is behind these attacks, and he linked that same group to those who perpetrated the attack in Charlottesville."

Trump: "Well, I don’t know. I can’t tell you. I’m sure Senator McCain must know what he’s talking about. But when you say the alt-right, define alt-right to me. You define it. Go ahead."

Reporter: "Well, I’m saying, as Senator --"

Trump: "No, define it for me. Come on, let’s go. Define it for me."

Reporter: "Senator McCain defined them as the same group --"

Trump: "Okay, what about the alt-left that came charging at -- excuse me, what about the alt-left that came charging at the, as you say, the alt-right? Do they have any semblance of guilt?

"Let me ask you this: What about the fact that they came charging with clubs in their hands, swinging clubs? Do they have any problem? I think they do. As far as I’m concerned, that was a horrible, horrible day. Wait a minute. I’m not finished. I’m not finished, fake news. That was a horrible day --

" I will tell you something. I watched those very closely -- much more closely than you people watched it. And you have -- you had a group on one side that was bad, and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent. And nobody wants to say that, but I’ll say it right now. You had a group -- you had a group on the other side that came charging in, without a permit, and they were very, very violent."

Reporter: "Do you think that what you call the alt-left is the same as neo-Nazis?"

Trump: "Those people -- all of those people – excuse me, I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. But not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue of Robert E. Lee."

Reporter: "Should that statue be taken down?"

Trump: "Excuse me. If you take a look at some of the groups, and you see -- and you’d know it if you were honest reporters, which in many cases you’re not -- but many of those people were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.

"So this week it’s Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?

"But they were there to protest -- excuse me, if you take a look, the night before they were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. Infrastructure question. Go ahead."

Reporter: "Should the statues of Robert E. Lee stay up?"

Trump: "I would say that’s up to a local town, community, or the federal government, depending on where it is located."

Reporter: "How concerned are you about race relations in America? And do you think things have gotten worse or better since you took office?"

Trump: "I think they’ve gotten better or the same. Look, they’ve been frayed for a long time. And you can ask President Obama about that, because he’d make speeches about it. But I believe that the fact that I brought in -- it will be soon -- millions of jobs -- you see where companies are moving back into our country -- I think that’s going to have a tremendous, positive impact on race relations.

"We have companies coming back into our country. We have two car companies that just announced. We have Foxconn in Wisconsin just announced. We have many companies, I say, pouring back into the country. I think that’s going to have a huge, positive impact on race relations.  You know why? It’s jobs. What people want now, they want jobs. They want great jobs with good pay, and when they have that, you watch how race relations will be.

"And I’ll tell you, we’re spending a lot of money on the inner cities.  We’re fixing the inner cities. We’re doing far more than anybody has done with respect to the inner cities.  It’s a priority for me, and it’s very important."

Reporter: "Mr. President, are you putting what you’re calling the alt-left and white supremacists on the same moral plane?"

Trump: "I’m not putting anybody on a moral plane. What I’m saying is this: You had a group on one side and you had a group on the other, and they came at each other with clubs -- and it was vicious and it was horrible. And it was a horrible thing to watch.

"But there is another side. There was a group on this side. You can call them the left -- you just called them the left -- that came violently attacking the other group. So you can say what you want, but that’s the way it is.

Reporter: (Inaudible) "… both sides, sir. You said there was hatred, there was violence on both sides. Are the --"

Trump: "Yes, I think there’s blame on both sides. If you look at both sides -- I think there’s blame on both sides. And I have no doubt about it, and you don’t have any doubt about it either. And if you reported it accurately, you would say."

Reporter: "The neo-Nazis started this. They showed up in Charlottesville to protest --"

Trump: "Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves -- and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name."

Reporter: "George Washington and Robert E. Lee are not the same."

Trump: "George Washington was a slave owner. Was George Washington a slave owner? So will George Washington now lose his status? Are we going to take down -- excuse me, are we going to take down statues to George Washington? How about Thomas Jefferson? What do you think of Thomas Jefferson? You like him?"

Reporter: "I do love Thomas Jefferson."

Trump: "Okay, good. Are we going to take down the statue? Because he was a major slave owner. Now, are we going to take down his statue?

"So you know what, it’s fine. You’re changing history. You’re changing culture. And you had people -- and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists -- because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.

"Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people. But you also had troublemakers, and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets, and with the baseball bats. You had a lot of bad people in the other group."

Reporter: "Sir, I just didn’t understand what you were saying. You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly? I just don’t understand what you were saying."

Trump: "No, no. There were people in that rally -- and I looked the night before -- if you look, there were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I’m sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day it looked like they had some rough, bad people -- neo-Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call them.

"But you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest, and very legally protest -- because, I don’t know if you know, they had a permit. The other group didn’t have a permit. So I only tell you this: There are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country -- a horrible moment.  But there are two sides to the country.
This is taken from the Politifact article here https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/7eb258a6-1887-441b-b1b2-d480848cffec

Hardly a right wing news source.  They determined that full context is essential in understanding the President's comments. He condemned the white nationalist Neo Nazis and the Antifa people as well. He spoke up for the right of the non violent people to protest, and contrary to the group think around here,  not everyone who doesn't want history erased is racist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 19, 2020, 09:16:30 am
If the hood fits...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 19, 2020, 12:10:32 pm
In the history of this country the party who was guilty of suppressing black voters and even threatening their lives is the Democrat party. 

Robb, you're basically an Infowars bot at this point if you seriously think this is a truthful, rational argument. This is nothing but hateful and ignorant.

Requiring people to present IDs to vote is hardly suppressing. If so then we are also suppressing flights on airplanes, depositing and cashing checks and picking up prescription drugs. One citizen one vote is not racist or suppressing, it is demanding that the election is won by actual voters who are eligible to vote.  I don't know how this became a partisan issue. Doesn't everyone want this?

In the recent GA elections where voter suppression was once again witnessed, the issue had *nothing* to do with voter IDs. Please stop the nonsense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 19, 2020, 12:14:32 pm
And your point is?  Trump is a narcissist?  He makes everything about himself?  In other words he is like almost everyone who has been or runs for the highest office? Granted he is the most overt of any I can remember and certainly less eloquent, but again I say so what?   In a country that is watching Democrat cities burn,  looters steal, territory ceded to lawlessness in the middle of a major city, and a movement to defund the police,  I am not too concerned with Trumps ego, unless it forces him to intercede in these big cities. The left is desperately hoping he will so they can say he is a dictator and set the military on "peaceful" protesters. If he takes the bait he deserves the consequences. 

Ahh, yes, our **** Grabber In Chief is indeed "like almost everyone who... runs for the highest office." Again, this is Infowars bot territory, and an extraordinary leap for someone so supposedly concerned about the morality and decency of our culture.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 19, 2020, 12:29:29 pm
Texas and Florida are claiming their COVID rates are climbing because they finally have enough testing to reveal their levels.  That makes sense, but is it true, CBJ?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 19, 2020, 01:36:49 pm
Robb, you do know what the AP is, right? They posted the transcript because it's news, as did every other outlet. Here's the transcript from Vox:

https://www.vox.com/2017/8/15/16154028/trump-press-conference-transcript-charlottesville

The mental gymnastics you have to go through to suggest the AP posting the transcript is somehow a validation of Trump's statement... I'd be impressed if I weren't so concerned for you.

And of course the transcript is damning for Trump. The Unite the Right rally was organized by known neo nazis and white supremacists. The "facts" were all known well in advance. It doesn't take 48 hrs to figure out how to say, "hey nazis, don't run over people with cars, thx."

The same Trump who reflexively rage tweets 24/7 and who is a volcanic eruption of misinformation is suddenly concerned with making a careful statement? Yes, if there are any words to describe our **** Grabber In Chief, those words are forbearance and veracity.

Robb, for the sake of your mental health, you need to find additional sources of news that don't immediately conform to your confirmation bias. I'm serious. Your homogenized intake of information is carving ruts so deep into your brain and thought processes that you are increasingly incapable of critical thinking.

This doesn't mean you have to be a liberal or Democrat to be capable of critical thinking. I regularly read/listen to excellent conservative and centrist minds like Jennifer Rubin, Tom Nichols, Bill Kristol, George Will, Neal Katayal, Heath Mayo, Matthew Dowd, Rick Wilson, David Jolly, Nicolle Wallace, David French, etc.

I'm not saying you need to convert to liberalism. I'm saying you need to come back to sanity, and that begins with changing your diet of information.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 19, 2020, 01:49:26 pm
"Not everyone who doesn't want history erased is racist"

Well let's make sure to also erect monuments to the great **** and serial rapists of our history, so as not to forget them and accidentally all become sexual predators.

Also, apparently books are not a thing anymore? Cause last time I checked there were quite a number of them written about the Civil War, slavery, etc. Didn't know those had been erased, too.

And I guess we should all be preparing for WWIII with Germany. Given that they removed a long time ago all Nazi monuments and symbols, I'm sure we're about to see them start gassing Jews left and right again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 19, 2020, 01:58:33 pm
Also, apparently books are not a thing anymore? Cause last time I checked there were quite a number of them written about the Civil War, slavery, etc. Didn't know those had been erased, too.

That's what I have always wondered...how is it erasing history when a government decides to remove a statue? Who learns their history from a statue on a courthouse lawn or government building lobby?

I'd argue that if we took down every confederate statue and moved a few of them into museums in the proper context, people would be far more likely to learn from those statues.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 19, 2020, 06:00:04 pm
Taking down statues isn’t a solution in itself. But it’s hard to have a real conversation about real solutions if we’re not willing to do the bear minimum of taking down confederate statues. They do honor traitorous generals who fought a war with our country in order to preserve slavery, after all.

I grew up in suburban Birmingham, AL. I went to a virtually all white high school. Our mascot was the same as the Ole Miss Rebel, and people waved confederate flags at every football game. I frequently heard the Civil War called the “war of northern aggression” and was taught the war was about states rights. Because of my background, I never seriously considered that the confederate flag could be considered a racist symbol until a new student from Arizona explained it to me when I was 17. This was the mid-90s, so not that long ago. If these symbols are still celebrated and treated as normal, it’s very easy to just not understand the history that makes the conversations necessary—teenage me is an example of that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Pekin on June 19, 2020, 10:12:53 pm
The reason Democrats want the statues gone is because it hides their past.  George Soros is paying for all of the rioting and the peaceful protests as well.  It is what he does and has done in other nations as well.

Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.

The Democrats fought to keep slavery going.  The Democrats wrote the Jim Crow laws.  The Democrats turned firehouses and attack dogs on black people peacefully protesting for their civil rights.

George Floyd was killed by a corrupt police officer who had been reported numerous times for abuse.  The police Chief is a Democrat, the Mayor is a Democrat and the Governor is a Democrat.  It has been this way for ages.

Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger who was a racist Eugenicist who spoke at KKK meetings.  There is a reason that Planned Parenthood is more often them not placed in urban downtrodden areas.  They are there to kill black babies.

Democrat politicians are and have always been the true racists in this nation.  From the time they fought to keep them from having equal rights, to convincing them to kill their own babies, to the soft racism of low expectations today.

Nothing I have said is not true.

 







Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on June 20, 2020, 11:26:36 am
Ahh, yes, our **** Grabber In Chief is indeed "like almost everyone who... runs for the highest office." Again, this is Infowars bot territory, and an extraordinary leap for someone so supposedly concerned about the morality and decency of our culture.

Oh the irony.. Speaking of "bot territory" (aren't you clever). Do you post anything that isn't regurgitated liberal catch phrases.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: chifaninva on June 20, 2020, 11:46:19 am
If liberals were truly interested in helping black people they would go straight to the inner city. Change the existing culture, drugs, murder. Lots of talent goes to waste. The ugly truth is, liberals don't give a sh!t about black people as a whole. Liberals don't care about statues, it's all about furthering an agenda..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 20, 2020, 02:14:36 pm
Robb, you're basically an Infowars bot at this point if you seriously think this is a truthful, rational argument. This is nothing but hateful and ignorant.

In the recent GA elections where voter suppression was once again witnessed, the issue had *nothing* to do with voter IDs. Please stop the nonsense.
Actually the problem here is your inability to back up your arguments with anything but emotion and anger. Step outside the bubble and do some study. The Democrat party founded the kkk. The Republican party was founded to abolish slavery. The bogus switch theory is just that,  bogus. It was Republicans in the 60's who helped and voted for the Civil rights acts. It was LBJ that enacted the great society which essentially kicked fathers from the homes of the poor and incentivized single women marrying the government instead. Check out his quotes when it was passed. He knew what he had done and did it for black votes.  No matter that removing fathers from the homes of the poor statistically hurts everyone in terms of upward mobility. 

In Georgia the voters roles were purged of dead people, illegals and others who had moved from the state. I think suppressing dead people's right to vote is a good thing.  In a party that laughs off a belief in God and this the accompanying morals what would keep them from falsifying votes to win an election? We already know they have no problem doing it in primaries. Just ask Bernie Sanders. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 20, 2020, 02:16:40 pm
That's what I have always wondered...how is it erasing history when a government decides to remove a statue? Who learns their history from a statue on a courthouse lawn or government building lobby?

I'd argue that if we took down every confederate statue and moved a few of them into museums in the proper context, people would be far more likely to learn from those statues.
I am on board with that Brjones. I think that would be a good solution.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 20, 2020, 02:45:31 pm
A woman in an "I can't breathe" shirt is arrested by Tulsa police for trespassing. Video was caught on MSNBC:

https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1274379971281203202

She was minding her own business and had a ticket to the event. The Tulsa Police Department is saying that she was inside a secure area that has been set up for the rally and she was removed at the Trump administration's discretion (it was within their rights to remove anyone in that area). So technically, it doesn't appear to be a violation of her first amendment rights.

Still, it's a really bad look for Trump. He makes himself look so weak, thin-skinned, and afraid sometimes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 20, 2020, 05:58:07 pm
Actually the problem here is your inability to back up your arguments with anything but emotion and anger. Step outside the bubble and do some study. The Democrat party founded the kkk. The Republican party was founded to abolish slavery. The bogus switch theory is just that,  bogus. It was Republicans in the 60's who helped and voted for the Civil rights acts. It was LBJ that enacted the great society which essentially kicked fathers from the homes of the poor and incentivized single women marrying the government instead. Check out his quotes when it was passed. He knew what he had done and did it for black votes.  No matter that removing fathers from the homes of the poor statistically hurts everyone in terms of upward mobility. 

Now explain the last 50 years.

It's telling that the most recent Republican action you cited here happened pre-Nixon administration.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Pekin on June 20, 2020, 07:06:43 pm
https://cms.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/06/great-society-has-failed-lt-colonel-allen-west
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 20, 2020, 10:21:19 pm
Another humiliation tonight for the United States of America care of Donald Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BillSharp on June 20, 2020, 11:59:24 pm
A woman in an "I can't breathe" shirt is arrested by Tulsa police for trespassing. Video was caught on MSNBC:

https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1274379971281203202

She was minding her own business and had a ticket to the event. The Tulsa Police Department is saying that she was inside a secure area that has been set up for the rally and she was removed at the Trump administration's discretion (it was within their rights to remove anyone in that area). So technically, it doesn't appear to be a violation of her first amendment rights.

Still, it's a really bad look for Trump. He makes himself look so weak, thin-skinned, and afraid sometimes.

only to those who believe in the new right to resist the police.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BillSharp on June 21, 2020, 12:03:14 am
anyone who believes in the "voter suppression" cost the Georgia governors race canard is retarded, is someone so deluded that they will swallow any propaganda put out by the Party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 21, 2020, 02:23:39 am
Looks like the troglodytes from the other board have found this one since it moved here. Should be fertile soil for endless comedy gold.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Pekin on June 21, 2020, 02:56:22 am
Looks like the troglodytes from the other board have found this one since it moved here. Should be fertile soil for endless comedy gold.

When you finish your almond milk, soy latte and properly dispose of it in a recyclable container make sure to kneel in front of a black man and kiss his feet you gamma NPC POS!  If you want to throw insults we can throw them right back.  To bad for you we can also bring facts which liberals are always in short supply of.

All you have are the emotions of a thirteen year old girl on her period.

Now go run to your room and slam the door, twice in case your parents didn't hear it the first time...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 21, 2020, 04:33:54 am
Keep it coming.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 21, 2020, 08:47:50 am
Now explain the last 50 years.

It's telling that the most recent Republican action you cited here happened pre-Nixon administration.
Okay,  look at the criminal reform bill passed by Trump. The opportunity zones implemented by Trump in inner cities.  Both had more effect than anything Obama did in his 8 years. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 21, 2020, 09:01:17 am
The surge of new cases is irrelevant. It only provides the media with fodder to try to make Trump look bad.  The real news is hospitalizations and deaths continue to decrease since their peak mid April. [attachimg=1]

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 21, 2020, 09:03:32 am
[attachimg=1]The reason for the increase in cases is increased testing. 

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 21, 2020, 09:22:35 am
Okay,  look at the criminal reform bill passed by Trump. The opportunity zones implemented by Trump in inner cities.  Both had more effect than anything Obama did in his 8 years.

I strongly suspect you know little if anything about the way opportunity zones are actually working.  It’s been very successful for the owners of land or property inside the 10-15% allowed carve outs (designated OZ’s that fall outside of the mandated income/demographic criteria) but not so much for the rest. I’m sure that’s exactly what trump intended and as long as he has rubes like you to carry his water for him and shout that the program is working, it obscures what is actually happening. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 21, 2020, 09:58:30 am
Okay,  look at the criminal reform bill passed by Trump. The opportunity zones implemented by Trump in inner cities.  Both had more effect than anything Obama did in his 8 years. 

The opportunity zones program has already been covered--it's unclear if anyone is really being helped beyond real estate developers who are able to take advantage of carve outs in the plan.

The First Step Act has done some good. But that's hardly a Trump/Republican-only accomplishment. In fact, 12 Republican senators voted against it; all Democrats voted for it. Trump happened to sign it in to law, but it was clearly bipartisan legislation that was pushed more by congress than the president. This is just an instance of both parties agreeing to some common sense first steps on criminal justice reform, not Republican outreach to people of color.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 21, 2020, 10:17:21 am
The surge of new cases is irrelevant. It only provides the media with fodder to try to make Trump look bad.  The real news is hospitalizations and deaths continue to decrease since their peak mid April. (Attachment Link)

Hospitalizations and deaths trail case diagnosis by 1-2 weeks. The biggest surge in cases has come in the last 5-10 days. We need another week to 10 days to see how this surge is impacting hospitizations and deaths. It might turn out that the death rate continues to fall for any number of reasons unrelated to the raw case count.

In any case, we're still averaging over 600 deaths a day nationwide. That's still pretty awful--the situation still looks bad even if you don't consider the surge in cases.

(Attachment Link) The reason for the increase in cases is increased testing. 

The increase in testing is part of the reason. But the positive test rate is also increasing, especially in places like Florida, Arizona, and Texas where the surge is the worst.

https://time.com/5854572/covid-19-testing-florida-texas-arizona/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 21, 2020, 01:57:58 pm
We are getting better at treating COVID, so there is less use of ICU and ventilators. That said hospitalizations usually lag about a week and deaths lag around 3 weeks.

The increasing higher percentage of tests being positive in Florida, Texas and Arizona is really concerning and goes counter to the whole we are just testing more. Those states are going to have to shut down again are risk overwhelming the healthcare system. 

The 3 governors messed up the reopening and their states are going to pay a heavy economic and human death toll because of it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 21, 2020, 04:00:10 pm
We are getting better at treating COVID, so there is less use of ICU and ventilators. That said hospitalizations usually lag about a week and deaths lag around 3 weeks.

I've read some speculation that we also might be seeing fewer deaths because the people getting sick now are younger. Most of the people who are high risk are generally still sheltering in place, so the infections are mainly hitting those who are not as likely to die or need hospitalization. I don't know if that's backed up with data, though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest61 on June 21, 2020, 05:20:59 pm
So the Libtards around these parts whined and cried and got their way because they actually got some posters to come in here and stand up to them.

LMFAO

Just about what I'd expect from them.

Bears board members please dont leave us.

Look what I have to deal with.

They need to be kept on their place.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 21, 2020, 05:47:33 pm
I've read some speculation that we also might be seeing fewer deaths because the people getting sick now are younger. Most of the people who are high risk are generally still sheltering in place, so the infections are mainly hitting those who are not as likely to die or need hospitalization. I don't know if that's backed up with data, though.
I've read some speculation that we also might be seeing fewer deaths because the people getting sick now are younger. Most of the people who are high risk are generally still sheltering in place, so the infections are mainly hitting those who are not as likely to die or need hospitalization. I don't know if that's backed up with data, though.

Seems to be a lot of wishful thinking imho.  Roughly 15% of the population is over 65 and 30% of the population is going to be diabetic, HTN, etc...  That is a lot of people to avoid exposure. If you look at nursing home a large chuck of the employees will be younger due to low pay. It is going to be hard to keep them at home if all their friends are going out.

There is more willingness to have permissive hypoxia in patients with COVID-19, ie people with really low oxygen saturation’s that’s aren’t having issues aren’t getting intubated.  We know more how to treat it, even though we don’t have a cure. We still don’t know what the long term impact on young people will be from getting it, because not ever mild disease acts the same.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 21, 2020, 08:43:33 pm
So the Libtards around these parts whined and cried and got their way because they actually got some posters to come in here and stand up to them.

I'd love to see a few more honest conservatives posting around here. Not interested in conspiracy theorists, though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 22, 2020, 01:15:35 am
I'd love to see a few more honest conservatives posting around here. Not interested in conspiracy theorists, though.

Seeing that statement, I can't help but think of Oldfan.  Perry was a conservative who used logic and facts when presenting his thoughts unlike many of today's one-sided posts which are nothing but bombast and hyperbole.

Has it really been almost 11 years?


Here's a suggestion:  Rename the Politics topic to something in his honor.  I'm open to any name that might encourage more of us to consider emulating his style.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 22, 2020, 06:01:09 am
Actually the problem here is your inability to back up your arguments with anything but emotion and anger. Step outside the bubble and do some study. The Democrat party founded the kkk. The Republican party was founded to abolish slavery. The bogus switch theory is just that,  bogus. It was Republicans in the 60's who helped and voted for the Civil rights acts. It was LBJ that enacted the great society which essentially kicked fathers from the homes of the poor and incentivized single women marrying the government instead. Check out his quotes when it was passed. He knew what he had done and did it for black votes.  No matter that removing fathers from the homes of the poor statistically hurts everyone in terms of upward mobility. 

In Georgia the voters roles were purged of dead people, illegals and others who had moved from the state. I think suppressing dead people's right to vote is a good thing.  In a party that laughs off a belief in God and this the accompanying morals what would keep them from falsifying votes to win an election? We already know they have no problem doing it in primaries. Just ask Bernie Sanders.

Lmao.

I’m going to relentlessly dunk on you this week you **** cultist homophobic clown. Get your popcorn ready
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 22, 2020, 06:06:05 am
And once again...

Shoutout to those of you seeking reasonable dialogue from the opposing side who do nothing else but continue to vomit on you while you shine their shoes. You **** aren’t helping at all.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 22, 2020, 06:19:59 am
“hEy RoBB eXpLaIn tHIs”

Shitting out hollow paragraphs doesn’t make you less complicit than out and out racists like Robb when you **** admittedly voted for Reagan and the Bushes.

Again...trump is the outcome of all that.

McConnell and Barr and DeVos are worse than Trump.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 22, 2020, 06:28:05 am
Imagine being a homophobic racist cultist in Utah and thinking you need an AR-15. Lmao.

But then imagine you think you can reasonably discuss race relations with that type of arcane shitheel.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 22, 2020, 06:41:48 am
https://twitter.com/eugene_scott/status/1275029025854033921?s=21

^^^^

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 22, 2020, 06:53:39 am
“Pekin” is a wild moniker btw. Just casually out here hiding in plain sight lol.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ccamuseum.org/2018/04/28/1981-the-pekin-chinks-high-school-team-becomes-the-pekin-dragons/amp/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pekin,_Illinois
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 22, 2020, 07:04:30 am
“Pekin” is a wild moniker btw. Just casually out here hiding in plain sight lol.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ccamuseum.org/2018/04/28/1981-the-pekin-chinks-high-school-team-becomes-the-pekin-dragons/amp/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pekin,_Illinois

Figures

Quote
Although Illinois was a "free" state, pro-slavery sentiment was predominant throughout southern and central Illinois, which had been largely settled by Southerners, some of whom were slaveholders before the state was admitted to the union. Cities with pro-slavery sentiment included Peoria and Pekin (see Charles L. Dancey's "Pekin, KKK, blacks: It goes back to Copperheads, Union League," Peoria Journal Star, 13 April 1989). According to the 1949 Pekin "Centenary," p. 15,

"Pekin was a pro-slave city for years. Some of the original settlers had been slave-owners themselves, and the overwhelming sentiment in Pekin was Democratic. Stephen A. Douglas, not Abraham Lincoln, was the local hero, although Lincoln was well-liked, and had some German following."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 22, 2020, 09:10:29 am
Based on Trump’s rant on Twitter today about a rigged election, he knows that he’s in deep trouble.  That disaster of a rally on Saturday has gutted him.  He’s going to ramp up the voter fraud rhetoric for awhile but I wonder how much longer he’ll be able to handle this coming humiliation before he quits? He’s nothing if not a cowardly loser who has always cheated to get ahead. What happens when that won’t work?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on June 22, 2020, 09:52:16 am
Not sure why anyone would want to be POTUS these days...

There is no dignity in it - he thought he could change things - it is impossible
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 22, 2020, 09:56:58 am
Not sure why anyone would want to be POTUS these days...

There is no dignity in it - he thought he could change things - it is impossible

He wasn’t interested in changing anything. He wasn’t even interested in the job. It was a grift from the jump and he underestimated how much his racism would resonate with voters. Now the job is appealing because it protects him from coming legal troubles. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 22, 2020, 10:13:20 am
Dignity?  That was the first thing he deserted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Sportster on June 22, 2020, 11:24:28 am
So, any of you liberals actually believe Biden, a guy that has been in politics before the dirt was formed beneath our feet, is going to do anything other than run his mouth if he gets in? Biden was a terrible choice! I wanted Cruz, Rubio, Carson and last, Trump but he isn't a politician and that's why folks voted him in. Biden? The guy's senile! He has very serious trouble forming meaningful understandable sentences! If I had my way....and God I wish I did....I'd be voting for a second term for Cruz/Rubio/Carson and the left can still have Bidey....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on June 22, 2020, 12:11:08 pm
Biden seemed like a solid choice back in 88 - but plagiarism blew him out?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 24, 2020, 05:33:41 pm
U.S. sets a daily record for Coronavirus cases, positive test rate all the way up to 7.7%

Turns out that during a pandemic, gross malfeasance and incompetence by the national government has a major impact. Who knew?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 24, 2020, 06:54:49 pm

Not a good pattern.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EbUJ9i9WkAIV4-W?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 24, 2020, 06:56:45 pm
Not a good pattern.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EbUJ9i9WkAIV4-W?format=jpg&name=small)

Historic failure of leadership.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 24, 2020, 06:59:44 pm
Historic failure of leadership.

No, it's all the fault of the governors.  They're the ones who let things get out of control.  It wasn't Washington.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 24, 2020, 07:25:08 pm
Wait for his reaction to Europe refusing to admit Americans.  I mean, if I was Europe, I would refuse to admit Americans.  Politicizing mask wearing and basic public health?  WTF?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 24, 2020, 08:16:11 pm
I know one American that I'd like to send to Europe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 24, 2020, 08:32:49 pm
What Trump has accomplished here is truly remarkable.  He's actually managed to make Boris Johnson and his pandemic response look competent in comparison.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 25, 2020, 01:59:31 pm
Georgia got a lot of attention for issues with our primary--the new voting machines didn't work and many polling places were closed. So there were long waits and it was hard to vote in places, especially in Fulton County (Atlanta) and Dekalb County (just east of Atlanta).  But Georgia got one thing right: in May, they sent out absentee ballot applications to every registered voter. About 1.1 million people ended up voting that way, which was more than half the total votes cast. This included 600,000 Democratic ballots and 524,000 Republican ballots.

So we should've known this was coming...Republicans are (predictably) trying to pass a law that prohibits the Secretary of State from sending out absentee ballot applications again.

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/bill-would-ban-repeat-georgia-absentee-ballot-request-mailings/hpXad0RidSRMOHXdVpLq2N/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 25, 2020, 03:07:04 pm
Quote
I know one American that I'd like to send to Europe.

You can't make me, even if I do appreciate their societal approach more all the time.  Oh, wait.  You meant DaveP, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 25, 2020, 03:25:07 pm
No, no, not Davep.  He's Dutch, not American. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 25, 2020, 11:28:29 pm
 Wild how Florida, Arizona and Texas are getting mf’ed the hardest four months later. Purely coincidental I’m sure.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 26, 2020, 12:21:12 am
Georgia got a lot of attention for issues with our primary--the new voting machines didn't work and many polling places were closed. So there were long waits and it was hard to vote in places, especially in Fulton County (Atlanta) and Dekalb County (just east of Atlanta).  But Georgia got one thing right: in May, they sent out absentee ballot applications to every registered voter. About 1.1 million people ended up voting that way, which was more than half the total votes cast. This included 600,000 Democratic ballots and 524,000 Republican ballots.

So we should've known this was coming...Republicans are (predictably) trying to pass a law that prohibits the Secretary of State from sending out absentee ballot applications again.

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/bill-would-ban-repeat-georgia-absentee-ballot-request-mailings/hpXad0RidSRMOHXdVpLq2N/

This goes beyond just voter suppression. This will likely kill people, too. Seriously.

First it was let grandma die for the economy.

Now it’s let grandma die so R’s can stay in power.

I wish this was sensationalist, but it’s not. May be extreme and provocative. But it’s also true, barring completion of an effective vaccine and mass distribution before November.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 26, 2020, 10:51:29 am
Well, Texas and Florida have re-closed bars, and Texas has reduced restaurant capacity to 50%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 26, 2020, 11:12:10 am
They are clearly over testing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 26, 2020, 07:27:31 pm
MANDATE WEARING FUCKlNG MASKS
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 26, 2020, 07:57:40 pm
Watching some of these city hall meetings and we are truly **** as a nation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 26, 2020, 08:02:34 pm
MANDATE WEARING FUCKlNG MASKS
we have to have special masks for THAT too?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 26, 2020, 08:04:30 pm
Watching some of these city hall meetings and we are truly **** as a nation.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=979874739097682
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 26, 2020, 09:22:16 pm
https://twitter.com/charlie_savage/status/1276603566283726848?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 26, 2020, 09:29:42 pm
Sounds like fake news.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 27, 2020, 12:49:27 am
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_05e46e40-4698-409d-9ec9-cafaec155e35.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=300)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 27, 2020, 08:49:15 am
One day we’ll find out what the Russians have over Trump. The degree to which he favors their interests over our own is shocking and the cult just lets it keep rolling.

Quote
Russia Secretly Offered Afghan Militants Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops, Intelligence Says


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/russia-afghanistan-bounties.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 27, 2020, 10:36:42 am
One day we’ll find out what the Russians have over Trump. The degree to which he favors their interests over our own is shocking and the cult just lets it keep rolling.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/russia-afghanistan-bounties.html

Hint:  It's tied to why he won't let the public see his tax returns.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Sportster on June 27, 2020, 09:33:33 pm
Still won't give up the Russian hoax circle jerk, ehh.... ::)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 28, 2020, 05:44:42 pm
Trump is acting so wacky, I wouldn't be shocked if he suddenly said he wasn't to run because there would be nothing but fraud.  He'd paint himself as a martyr to his followers. 

He signed an executive order the other day protecting any and all monuments.  I can tell you one monument that won't come down, because it will never be erected: Donald Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 28, 2020, 07:24:11 pm
There's a growing sentiment (led by James Carville) that Drumpf will resign because his ego can't accept the idea of a humiliating defeat.  To me it seems like wishful thinking, because being president is the only thing keeping him out of prison.  He's not giving that up willingly and without a fight, including after the election is over.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 28, 2020, 07:29:47 pm
He’s not going to resign because he won’t believe the polls. It is all fake news.

Pence finally broke down and wore a mask today in Texas. I do wonder if they would have handled COVID better and pivoted to people wearing masks earlier, coming up with an actual reopening plan if they wouldn’t actually be ahead in the polls or at least have a punchers chance vs making Texas a battle ground state.

Edit: That would require competence that is impossible for Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 28, 2020, 07:34:39 pm
They were behind in the polls before this all started, and his approval rating has never gotten above 42% or so. It’d be closer but he’d still be behind.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 28, 2020, 07:55:22 pm
Trump retweeting videos of old dumb racists shouting white power.  Bold move
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 28, 2020, 08:01:27 pm
Some days, it's still just unbelievable how far people will go to dismiss Trump's obvious bigotry. There are people who don't think it was a problem that he tweeted a video this morning where one of his supporters yells "white power" at protesters.

The most generous you can reasonably be to Trump on that tweet is admitting that he's so stupid that he didn't even watch or listen to the video. He just saw a still that had a picture of a golf cart covered in his posters and he tweeted it without knowing the content.

Those are your only two choices for why he tweeted that video: he's a bigot, or he's monumentally stupid.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 28, 2020, 08:14:21 pm
They were behind in the polls before this all started, and his approval rating has never gotten above 42% or so. It’d be closer but he’d still be behind.

Maybe, but it would also allow some people to gloss over the racism if he was actually good at his job. Biden would also have to be out more and not just going look at how bad this guy is.

Those are your only two choices for why he tweeted that video: he's a bigot, or he's monumentally stupid.

C) He is both a biogot and monumentally stupid.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 28, 2020, 10:55:32 pm
C) He is both a biogot and monumentally stupid.

Obviously true. I'm just not sure which was a bigger factor in his decision to send that tweet.

Is he a bigot who is really stupid? Or a really stupid person who also happens to be a bigot?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 28, 2020, 11:04:58 pm
Look at the comments by those who have left the White House staff, Trump is losing his grip on reality. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Sportster on June 28, 2020, 11:22:41 pm
Oh that's rich! lol. Enjoy senile Bidey..... ::)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on June 29, 2020, 12:08:37 am
Over the nutty imbecile that's in there right now?  Absolutely.  Literally anyone would do a better job.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 29, 2020, 03:30:13 pm
Just got back from the grocery store.  Not only was I the only one in a mask, a number of couples had kids without masks too.   It's one thing  to risk yourself, but your kids?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 29, 2020, 06:32:56 pm
Arizona joins Texas and Florida in making their first moves towards a re-shut down. They're closing bars, nightclubs, gyms, and theaters. They're also delaying the first day of school, and events with more than 50 people are banned (churches and political rallies are exempt).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on June 29, 2020, 08:02:35 pm
CurtOne


trump has made the wearing or not of a face mask a sign of political support for him rather than an informed choice based on the science of best practices during a pandemic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 29, 2020, 08:18:29 pm
Arizona joins Texas and Florida in making their first moves towards a re-shut down. They're closing bars, nightclubs, gyms, and theaters. They're also delaying the first day of school, and events with more than 50 people are banned (churches and political rallies are exempt).

Those states with their meatball governors never really shut down in the first place.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 29, 2020, 08:24:52 pm
Arizona joins Texas and Florida in making their first moves towards a re-shut down. They're closing bars, nightclubs, gyms, and theaters. They're also delaying the first day of school, and events with more than 50 people are banned (churches and political rallies are exempt).

Triumvirate of shitheel red states. Karen’s and Chads didn’t want to wear masks because their freedom. Let em suffer
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 29, 2020, 08:38:17 pm
This article is bananas.  Trump is the worst president in so many different ways.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/29/politics/trump-phone-calls-national-security-concerns/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 29, 2020, 09:07:05 pm
Interesting stat in this study. https://freopp.org/the-covid-19-nursing-home-crisis-by-the-numbers-3a47433c3f70

45% of all Covid deaths have been by people in LTC facilities.  Primarily in NE states with Democratic governors who made it their policy to send Covid positive patients in to recover. Almost half the deaths. Don't #seniorlivesmatter too?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 29, 2020, 09:20:12 pm
https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/1277788165802164229?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 29, 2020, 09:35:00 pm
Interesting stat in this study. https://freopp.org/the-covid-19-nursing-home-crisis-by-the-numbers-3a47433c3f70

45% of all Covid deaths have been by people in LTC facilities.  Primarily in NE states with Democratic governors who made it their policy to send Covid positive patients in to recover. Almost half the deaths. Don't #seniorlivesmatter too?

While I think the New York policy of sending COVID patients to nursing homes was ill advised nursing homes have been a mess since the start of this.  I can only speak to Western Iowa, but I was involved in more than a few discussions with nursing homes as a medical director and rounding on nursing patients.

One nursing home that my boss is a medical director of deals with traumatic brain injury patients that are often ventilator dependent. My boss was out of town when the first cases started to show up in Iowa. It took about an hour phone call to get them to agree to not let families into the facility. That facility has had zero COVID cases. They didn’t lock down another facility in central Iowa and they had an outbreak there. The facility that I’m medical director at hasn’t let anyone in including myself since the start and they have had no cases.

Rounding in facilities has changed a great deal. At first they where recommending masks. Now masks and eye protection is required. They have developed COVID lock down units and they don’t let resisdents mix in common areas. It is a damn depressing place to go into.

At start getting patients into nursing homes as skilled nursing patients was almost impossible and it led to a people sitting in the hospital for no reason, because nursing homes didn’t want to become New York. It has gotten better and being able to do COVID testing in hours vs a week helps.

It was a mess at the beginning, but we have gotten a lot better. 

And just because 2020 hasn’t been fun enough the just found a swine flu in China that has the ability to jump into humans. That doesn’t mean it will, but I mean 2020 has been the year where everything happens so it will.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on June 29, 2020, 09:43:07 pm
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1277793990713110529
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 29, 2020, 10:14:06 pm
Deaths and hospitalizations continue to go down as the virus moves to younger people.  Cases are up but that could be a good thing if it leads to herd immunity and is primarily among the younger people who are not seriously impacted by the virus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 29, 2020, 10:35:44 pm
CurtOne


trump has made the wearing or not of a face mask a sign of political support for him rather than an informed choice based on the science of best practices during a pandemic.
Yes, I know.  Is this really otto?  I could read it, so I'm confused.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 29, 2020, 11:17:38 pm
Quote
Cases in Arizona jumped by 5.5%, above the state’s average of a 4.4% daily increase over the past week.

The current record rates of newly reported cases at 40,000 or more in recent days likely reflected a far bigger outbreak, Gottlieb said.

Some encouraging signs
By the CDC’s own reckoning, the real number of infections was 5 to 10 times that being reported, Gottlieb said, and that meant the real rate of new infections was likely to be a “quarter-million” each day.

Frieden said that while there were potentially encouraging signs in the growing share of younger people—who are less likely to suffer severe complications—among new reported cases, that shouldn’t be a reason to grow complacent.

“What starts in the young doesn’t stay in the young,” he said, since younger people, often asymptomatic, can spread the coronavirus to more-vulnerable individuals including family members and co-workers.

It was false to dismiss the recent surge in daily cases as a function of a ramping up in testing, Frieden said. A lower death rate was also potentially misleading, he said, with reported deaths likely to lag a surge in cases by about a month.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 30, 2020, 01:23:18 am
Anyone read Ken Follett's "World Without End?  It's the second of the excellent "Pillars of the Earth" series.  It's the one the deals with the Black Death., and is based on real events.

A progressive young nun who runs the hospital at the Kingsbridge Priory wants to have everyone wear masks and frequently wash their hands with vinegar. The conservative Prior declares that this is witchcraft with no biblical basis, and must be avoided...

After the old prioress dies (of the plague, naturally) there's an election between the young progressive nun and the conservative proxy for the prior. Mask-wearing becomes a political statement, with the conservatives declaring that anyone who stands with God won't wear one.

This is 1348.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on June 30, 2020, 06:31:16 pm
So far in 2020 we've had earthquakes, pandemic, rioting, looting, mobs and threats of violence. Sure sounds to me like something I read somewhere.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 30, 2020, 08:43:38 pm
Deaths and hospitalizations continue to go down as the virus moves to younger people.  Cases are up but that could be a good thing if it leads to herd immunity and is primarily among the younger people who are not seriously impacted by the virus.

California, Arizona and Texas have seen surges in hospitalizations and ICU admissions. Florida is no longer reporting hospitalizations or ICU admissions.  Deaths lag the longest. If any of those states have to use surge ICU capacity the fatality rate will increase, because the care isn’t as good.

Goldman Sachs put out a statement that wearing masks could prevent a 5% loss in GDP, just in case medical people saying to do it isn’t enough.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 30, 2020, 11:37:30 pm
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
I will Veto the Defense Authorization Bill if the Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren (of all people!) Amendment, which will lead to the renaming (plus other bad things!) of Fort Bragg, Fort Robert E. Lee, and many other Military Bases from which we won Two World Wars, is in the Bill!


Warren's amendment has bipartisan support. He's a bigot. Somehow, he still thinks defending the confederacy and appealing to racists is his path to being re-elected. He's so stupid.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 01, 2020, 02:04:14 am
The pivot is coming, don't worry.  That's what we were promised.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 01, 2020, 08:14:15 am
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
I will Veto the Defense Authorization Bill if the Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren (of all people!) Amendment, which will lead to the renaming (plus other bad things!) of Fort Bragg, Fort Robert E. Lee, and many other Military Bases from which we won Two World Wars, is in the Bill!


Warren's amendment has bipartisan support. He's a bigot. Somehow, he still thinks defending the confederacy and appealing to racists is his path to being re-elected. He's so stupid.

This is who he is.  He’s in panic mode and doubling down on the themes and topics that are core to his beliefs. The question is how many of his 2016 voters are aligned with this.  Unfortunately, probably a lot. You look at this little community here and zero of the trump supporters are questioning him at all. In fact, they, too, are doubling down on him. There is no more tax cut or “booming” economy to point to. It’s all about racial politics and white supremacy and people like Robb DaveP, and the Bears guys are all in.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 01, 2020, 08:34:37 am
A lot, but not enough to get him elected in anything remotely resembling a fair election.  That's why 55% consistently tell pollsters there's no chance they'll vote for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 01, 2020, 08:43:41 am
A lot, but not enough to get him elected in anything remotely resembling a fair election.  That's why 55% consistently tell pollsters there's no chance they'll vote for him.

I don’t think he’ll win but I’m not all that reassured about the 50 million who are going to vote for this. These lunatics are a problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on July 01, 2020, 09:04:05 am
https://twitter.com/maggienyt/status/1278327038882054145?s=21

Racism doesn’t exist
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 01, 2020, 10:42:03 am
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/01/politics/george-w-bush-43-alumni-super-pac-joe-biden/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 01, 2020, 01:03:34 pm
I don’t think he’ll win but I’m not all that reassured about the 50 million who are going to vote for this. These lunatics are a problem.

I think this is going to be the closest election to Reagan vs Mondale. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on July 01, 2020, 02:36:20 pm
Getting Mondaled really isn't enough of a comeuppance for that guy.  Contracting and dying from CV-19, maybe.  Or strangled in his office by William Barr when he snaps over whatever dirt he has on him.  Or maybe a treasonous attempt to take control disputing election results.

I mean, I'll take it, of course.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 01, 2020, 04:31:59 pm
I think this is going to be the closest election to Reagan vs Mondale. 

Not with massive voter suppression and foreign interference it won't.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 01, 2020, 04:33:06 pm
I fear its going to be alarmingly close.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 01, 2020, 04:44:42 pm
https://youtu.be/r8yOv4PwttM
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 01, 2020, 05:11:17 pm
https://youtu.be/r8yOv4PwttM

WAPO fake news. Got anything from OAN or Qanon?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 01, 2020, 05:41:23 pm
He said it again today, lol.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 01, 2020, 05:53:05 pm
So if this is true, it indicates that Trump regrets signing the First Step Act. I'm shocked because I've been assured by the right that his signing that bill into law is evidence Trump has done more for people of color and criminal justice reform than Obama ever did.

(They claim this despite the fact that it was truly a bipartisan bill that had no Democratic opposition and only slight Republican opposition, and it's been well-documented that Trump had to be convinced by Kushner to sign it)

https://www.axios.com/trump-kushner-second-thoughts-408d5a33-725d-442a-88e4-d6ab6742c139.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 01, 2020, 06:53:07 pm
The new Trump 2020 logo is - literally - the Nazi emblem with the wording changed.  Every time I think I've lost the capacity to be shocked, he shocks me again.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eb4Jk5GU0AAB12I?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 01, 2020, 07:20:15 pm
I thought that must be a hoax, but it appears to be real. I don't think it's an official logo, but the T-shirt is on sale on the front page of his campaign's official store:

https://shop.donaldjtrump.com/

Even if the resemblance is completely accidental, it's not an excuse. Given the widespread perceptions that he is a bigot, the campaign should be double and triple checking every official release of any kind to make sure there is no reasonable chance that it will be misconstrued. It strains credibility to think that anyone wouldn't recognize that as similar to the emblem of the Nazi party from 1933 to 1945.

(And to be clear, I'm not arguing that it's accidental...I'm just pre-empting that excuse. After all, they already had an ad removed from Facebook (Facebook!) for using a clear Nazi symbol in the last couple of weeks. This isn't the first time something like this happened.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 01, 2020, 07:24:49 pm
must have taken it down... what did the shirt look like?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 01, 2020, 07:27:44 pm
It's on there when I click it. It's called the "America First Tee" if you scroll down. It's the same America First logo picture in Deeg's post. Here's the direct link:

https://shop.donaldjtrump.com/products/america-first-tee
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 01, 2020, 07:40:40 pm
I will say that the picture in Deeg's post (that I'm assuming came from Twitter) has the image of the eagle reversed horizontally. The official emblem appears to have the eagle looking the other way. I think that's a unnecessary alteration by whoever made the original picture that Trumpers will almost certainly latch on to. They'll argue that by using a reversed logo, Trump is actually showing he's the opposite of a Nazi.

I'm sure the campaign's real purpose is to troll people. Now that it's getting outrage, Hannity and Carlson can go on their shows and rile up Trump's base again about the "snowflakes on the left." But everyone outside his core 30% is sick of the juvenile trolling.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 01, 2020, 07:42:21 pm
There's no way that's accidental, are you kidding?  They're just trading in the dog whistle for a megaphone.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 01, 2020, 08:30:37 pm
I will say that the picture in Deeg's post (that I'm assuming came from Twitter) has the image of the eagle reversed horizontally. The official emblem appears to have the eagle looking the other way. I think that's a unnecessary alteration by whoever made the original picture that Trumpers will almost certainly latch on to. They'll argue that by using a reversed logo, Trump is actually showing he's the opposite of a Nazi.

I'm sure the campaign's real purpose is to troll people. Now that it's getting outrage, Hannity and Carlson can go on their shows and rile up Trump's base again about the "snowflakes on the left." But everyone outside his core 30% is sick of the juvenile trolling.

The Lincoln Project on Twitter has 3 variants of the Nazi logo. 2 with the Eagle facing right and 1 to the left. The left facing one was for the Reichsadler. The right where for the Parteiadler.  It looks like their source is Wikipedia, so mileage might vary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 01, 2020, 08:31:29 pm
Is that really the most important point here?  :D
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 01, 2020, 10:39:31 pm
I bought 3 of them.  For br, Jack, and goblue!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on July 02, 2020, 10:16:53 am
https://twitter.com/sleepydjango/status/1278473876461113344?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 02, 2020, 10:20:04 am
https://twitter.com/sleepydjango/status/1278473876461113344?s=21

It’s all just a big coincidence.  We were told that racism is no longer an issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 02, 2020, 10:22:02 am
He's doing his best to tell the world who he is, yet lots of people just dont care to listen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on July 02, 2020, 02:16:33 pm
Its not that they care to listen, its that they agree with his sentiment on race and white privilege. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on July 02, 2020, 02:18:23 pm
Exactly
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 02, 2020, 02:31:52 pm
Former presidential candidate (and 74 year old cancer survivor) Herman Cain attended Trump's rally in Tulsa without a mask two weeks ago. He's now in the hospital with COVID.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on July 02, 2020, 03:18:35 pm
Look for Herman Cain to get thrown under the bus by trump and FOX news for being weak against the virus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 02, 2020, 04:42:45 pm
9-9-9!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 02, 2020, 05:30:46 pm
Shucky ducky.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on July 02, 2020, 08:40:24 pm
https://twitter.com/covidperspectiv/status/1278857967970865154?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 03, 2020, 06:58:53 pm
Racism is no longer a problem.

Quote
Black high school baseball player says fans yelled 'You should have been George Floyd' and 'Get back to the fields'

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/03/us/iowa-baseball-teen-taunted-trnd/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 03, 2020, 07:02:10 pm
Racism is no longer a problem.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/03/us/iowa-baseball-teen-taunted-trnd/index.html

At least the umpire got it right.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on July 04, 2020, 10:31:00 am
Bluejay - is there any validity to this?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hydroxychloroquine-helped-save-coronavirus-study?fbclid=IwAR32XgT9sg2QLuSmnS7ZPfvefZs5l3TwdoCSU2YLElgV75cVHR9UHCDPd1Y
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 05, 2020, 09:36:21 am
Bluejay - is there any validity to this?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hydroxychloroquine-helped-save-coronavirus-study?fbclid=IwAR32XgT9sg2QLuSmnS7ZPfvefZs5l3TwdoCSU2YLElgV75cVHR9UHCDPd1Y


It would s an observational study which is a pretty low level of scientific study.

There are multiple problems with it as well. They excluded roughly 10% of study population. The hydroxychloroquine group was also much more likely to have received steroids, which has a study showing it helps in survival for sick patients.  The also excluded anyone with heart disease. Those people shouldn’t get hydroxychloroquine, but is also a risk factor for rising from COVID-19.

Almost every large study that would prove if it is effective is being shut down. This study wouldn’t be enough for me to consider using it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 05, 2020, 09:38:22 am
How about drinking bleach?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 05, 2020, 09:58:05 am
How about drinking bleach?
Why bother?  It's going away.

Just look at what the 110° temperatures are doing in Arizona.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 05, 2020, 10:57:14 am
That study was published in a low impact journal.  Probably a good reason for that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 05, 2020, 11:02:29 am
These people are nuts.  The president and the people who advise him are into this ****.

Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) Tweeted:
At the end of the oath you’ll hear General Flynn and the group say “where we go one we go all.”

That is the QAnon motto. You’ll often see them use the hashtag #WWG1WGA in their tweets for that reason.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 05, 2020, 07:19:40 pm
Quote
Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson
Those of us who care about our country must accept the possibility that too many Americans are selfish or stupid for us to ever control COVID-19. That means we're headed to the "uncontrolled" scenario experts warned of—2.5 million dead. Prepare yourself mentally for that outcome.


Play ball!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 05, 2020, 08:38:20 pm

Play ball!

Not that I want to dismiss the suggestion that many Americans are behaving stupidly about Covid-19, who the heck is Seth Abramson as a source for something like that?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 05, 2020, 09:47:41 pm
Not that I want to dismiss the suggestion that many Americans are behaving stupidly about Covid-19, who the heck is Seth Abramson as a source for something like that?

An attorney/Newsweek columnist/Author about Qanon.

To get to 2.5 million deaths now it would mean the really large states don’t lock again, wear masks, social distance, etc...  The smaller states would have to just stick their heads in the sand and say it won’t happen. If the deaths start creeping up again people will have to start taking it more seriously again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 05, 2020, 10:03:41 pm
The problem is that without hard border controls at state lines, the stupidity of some states impacts all states.  That's why a national policy would have been so crucial.

I don't think there's any "if" about it, it's "when".  I wish that weren't the case but given what we know about this pandemic it's inevitable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 05, 2020, 10:36:48 pm
Some people are just plain stubborn stupid.  Some are oblivious stupid.  Most have just gotten sloppy.  Like that article from Mrs. Freeman in another topic.  People who worked so hard and were so careful have gotten sloppy in either their own behavior or getting caught off guard by the behavior of others.  In my case, we have a caregiver come a couple times a week to do a little cleaning and to do exercises with my invalid wife.  For six weeks we didn't have her come.  In June she went and got tested and was negative so she started coming again sporadically.  The other day after she got here and was working with my wife that she and her husband had traveled to a city to meet another couple in a restaurant that was surprisingly crowded.  At this point, I said WHOA and we cut the visit short.   Many people who test negative then forget that the guy they pass in the hall on the way out of the testing area could sneeze on them and bingo.

My sister had to have a blood test the other day at the local hospital.  She said the waiting room was packed, she was the only one wearing a mask, and one guy was coughing his head off.  As I've mentioned I've been the only one wearing a mask in the local grocery and there are a dozen adults with their kids!  How do you risk your kids?

Older people like myself are saying, we can only hope for a vaccine because they Trumpers and morons and Teenagers are going to kill us otherwise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 05, 2020, 11:08:19 pm
What's interesting is that the demographics for fatal cases skew younger in the U.S. than anywhere in Europe.  As far as I know there haven't been any major studies attempting to explain why (widespread lack of adequate health insurance is the most obvious reason, on paper), but if more people were aware of that maybe younger Americans wouldn't behave with reckless stupidity in such huge numbers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 05, 2020, 11:09:48 pm
I know of 3 nursing homes/retirement villages here in Illinois with 20+ fatalities each.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 06, 2020, 08:11:40 am
What's interesting is that the demographics for fatal cases skew younger in the U.S. than anywhere in Europe.  As far as I know there haven't been any major studies attempting to explain why (widespread lack of adequate health insurance is the most obvious reason, on paper), but if more people were aware of that maybe younger Americans wouldn't behave with reckless stupidity in such huge numbers.

We are fatter and have more chronic health problems that start at a younger ages than other countries.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 06, 2020, 09:26:35 am
On this subject:
https://t.co/s1om5LfPQW
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 06, 2020, 11:09:41 am
This is an interesting update From Sweden. https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/

A couple of things they found in the data.

Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general population of school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride to work. The risk was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no symptoms were not taken into account.

The median age of the deceased in most countries (including Italy) is over 80 years (e.g. 86 years in Sweden) and only about 4% of the deceased had no serious preconditions. The age and risk profile of deaths thus essentially corresponds to normal mortality.

In many countries, up to two thirds of all extra deaths occurred in nursing homes, which do not benefit from a general lockdown. Moreover, in many cases it is not clear whether these people really died from Covid19 or from weeks of extreme stress and isolation.
Up to 30% of all additional deaths may have been caused not by Covid19, but by the effects of the lockdown, panic and fear. For example, the treatment of heart attacks and strokes decreased by up to 60% because many patients no longer dared to go to hospital.

Even in so-called “Covid19 deaths” it is often not clear whether they died from or with coronavirus (i.e. from underlying diseases) or if they were counted as “presumed cases” and not tested at all. However, official figures usually do not reflect this distinction.
Many media reports of young and healthy people dying from Covid19 turned out to be false: many of these young people either did not die from Covid19, they had already been seriously ill (e.g. from undiagnosed leukaemia), or they were in fact 109 instead of 9 years old. The claimed increase in Kawasaki disease in children also turned out to be false.

Countries without curfews and contact bans, such as Japan, South Korea, Belarus or Sweden, have not experienced a more negative course of events than other countries. Sweden was even praised by the WHO and now benefits from higher immunity compared to lockdown countries.
The fear of a shortage of ventilators was unjustified. According to lung specialists, the invasive ventilation (intubation) of Covid19 patients, which is partly done out of fear of spreading the virus, is in fact often counterproductive and damaging to the lungs.

Numerous internationally renowned experts in the fields of virology, immunology and epidemiology consider the measures taken to be counterproductive and recommend rapid natural immunisation of the general population and protection of risk groups.

All of these findings are referenced at the link. It is hard for people to know what to believe when there are reputable sources on both sides saying the exact opposite. Would be nice if this weren't political. I played golf with my doctor Friday and he spent most of the round talking about the faults with what the media is reporting and what is being done to treat it. I am sure there is something of a confirmation bias going on with people on the right and left. In the middle are those being hurt by misinformation from both ends. This is where a truly unbiased media would be nice to have, even crucial. But because half the country, at least, doesn't trust them to research and report the facts without a slant, people are ignoring what they are telling us, and chaos ensues.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Voiceontheair on July 06, 2020, 01:19:45 pm
This is an interesting update From Sweden. https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/

A couple of things they found in the data.

Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general population of school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride to work. The risk was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no symptoms were not taken into account.

The median age of the deceased in most countries (including Italy) is over 80 years (e.g. 86 years in Sweden) and only about 4% of the deceased had no serious preconditions. The age and risk profile of deaths thus essentially corresponds to normal mortality.

In many countries, up to two thirds of all extra deaths occurred in nursing homes, which do not benefit from a general lockdown. Moreover, in many cases it is not clear whether these people really died from Covid19 or from weeks of extreme stress and isolation.
Up to 30% of all additional deaths may have been caused not by Covid19, but by the effects of the lockdown, panic and fear. For example, the treatment of heart attacks and strokes decreased by up to 60% because many patients no longer dared to go to hospital.

Even in so-called “Covid19 deaths” it is often not clear whether they died from or with coronavirus (i.e. from underlying diseases) or if they were counted as “presumed cases” and not tested at all. However, official figures usually do not reflect this distinction.
Many media reports of young and healthy people dying from Covid19 turned out to be false: many of these young people either did not die from Covid19, they had already been seriously ill (e.g. from undiagnosed leukaemia), or they were in fact 109 instead of 9 years old. The claimed increase in Kawasaki disease in children also turned out to be false.

Countries without curfews and contact bans, such as Japan, South Korea, Belarus or Sweden, have not experienced a more negative course of events than other countries. Sweden was even praised by the WHO and now benefits from higher immunity compared to lockdown countries.
The fear of a shortage of ventilators was unjustified. According to lung specialists, the invasive ventilation (intubation) of Covid19 patients, which is partly done out of fear of spreading the virus, is in fact often counterproductive and damaging to the lungs.

Numerous internationally renowned experts in the fields of virology, immunology and epidemiology consider the measures taken to be counterproductive and recommend rapid natural immunisation of the general population and protection of risk groups.

All of these findings are referenced at the link. It is hard for people to know what to believe when there are reputable sources on both sides saying the exact opposite. Would be nice if this weren't political. I played golf with my doctor Friday and he spent most of the round talking about the faults with what the media is reporting and what is being done to treat it. I am sure there is something of a confirmation bias going on with people on the right and left. In the middle are those being hurt by misinformation from both ends. This is where a truly unbiased media would be nice to have, even crucial. But because half the country, at least, doesn't trust them to research and report the facts without a slant, people are ignoring what they are telling us, and chaos ensues.

Despite your expressed desire to find an unbiased news source, you did exactly the opposite when you cited the "Swiss Policy Research" cite. It has a reputation for being unreliable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Propaganda_Research
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 06, 2020, 01:20:47 pm
This is an interesting update From Sweden. https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/

A couple of things they found in the data.

Even in global “hotspots”, the risk of death for the general population of school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride to work. The risk was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no symptoms were not taken into account.

The median age of the deceased in most countries (including Italy) is over 80 years (e.g. 86 years in Sweden) and only about 4% of the deceased had no serious preconditions. The age and risk profile of deaths thus essentially corresponds to normal mortality.

In many countries, up to two thirds of all extra deaths occurred in nursing homes, which do not benefit from a general lockdown. Moreover, in many cases it is not clear whether these people really died from Covid19 or from weeks of extreme stress and isolation.
Up to 30% of all additional deaths may have been caused not by Covid19, but by the effects of the lockdown, panic and fear. For example, the treatment of heart attacks and strokes decreased by up to 60% because many patients no longer dared to go to hospital.

Even in so-called “Covid19 deaths” it is often not clear whether they died from or with coronavirus (i.e. from underlying diseases) or if they were counted as “presumed cases” and not tested at all. However, official figures usually do not reflect this distinction.
Many media reports of young and healthy people dying from Covid19 turned out to be false: many of these young people either did not die from Covid19, they had already been seriously ill (e.g. from undiagnosed leukaemia), or they were in fact 109 instead of 9 years old. The claimed increase in Kawasaki disease in children also turned out to be false.

Countries without curfews and contact bans, such as Japan, South Korea, Belarus or Sweden, have not experienced a more negative course of events than other countries. Sweden was even praised by the WHO and now benefits from higher immunity compared to lockdown countries.
The fear of a shortage of ventilators was unjustified. According to lung specialists, the invasive ventilation (intubation) of Covid19 patients, which is partly done out of fear of spreading the virus, is in fact often counterproductive and damaging to the lungs.

Numerous internationally renowned experts in the fields of virology, immunology and epidemiology consider the measures taken to be counterproductive and recommend rapid natural immunisation of the general population and protection of risk groups.

All of these findings are referenced at the link. It is hard for people to know what to believe when there are reputable sources on both sides saying the exact opposite. Would be nice if this weren't political. I played golf with my doctor Friday and he spent most of the round talking about the faults with what the media is reporting and what is being done to treat it. I am sure there is something of a confirmation bias going on with people on the right and left. In the middle are those being hurt by misinformation from both ends. This is where a truly unbiased media would be nice to have, even crucial. But because half the country, at least, doesn't trust them to research and report the facts without a slant, people are ignoring what they are telling us, and chaos ensues.

-Swedens's death per 100,000 people has increased to roughly twice what the US has experienced despite being healthier and younger than the US.
-Sweden isn't anywhere close to herd immunity and there isn't any data avaiable that getting infected with result in immunity that could last past a few months.
-There isn't data on what the long term effects are people that don't die from the disease on how it will affect them.  Just because younger people don't die it doesn't mean this is harmless
-The article the sited about kids is from April.  There is more recent studies that COVID is the cause of this in kids.
-It says it is written by a doctor, but the doctor doesn't actually put his name to it.  The Swiss Policy Research that put this out definitely has a slant if you dig through their website.
-This is a virus that we haven't seen before.  The answers to many of these questions are determined and the people that are ignoring what is being said are either young and stupid or Trumpers.  You can let the data lead you, but your going to have to be willing to change your mind and admit that you are wrong.  Answers are going to change, because it is constantly changing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 06, 2020, 01:54:41 pm
Also a personal pet peeve.

People that want to compare the fatality rates between the flu and COVID are demanding 2 separate standards for each virus.  The flu deaths given by the CDC are estimated and not confirmed cases.  If you go with just confirmed cases the total is much, much, much smaller.  For COVID the demand confirmed cases only and then if they have a co-morbidity they want to pawn it off on the co-morbidity.  It is pretty easy to tell the difference somebody that dies from leukemia vs COVID.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 06, 2020, 02:33:58 pm
Also a personal pet peeve.

People that want to compare the fatality rates between the flu and COVID are demanding 2 separate standards for each virus.  The flu deaths given by the CDC are estimated and not confirmed cases.  If you go with just confirmed cases the total is much, much, much smaller.  For COVID the demand confirmed cases only and then if they have a co-morbidity they want to pawn it off on the co-morbidity.  It is pretty easy to tell the difference somebody that dies from leukemia vs COVID.

You should explain that to Pekin.  He seems open minded and reasonable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 06, 2020, 07:12:40 pm
You should explain that to Pekin.  He seems open minded and reasonable.

He’d love my dad’s family.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 06, 2020, 07:24:56 pm
He’d love my dad’s family.

Do you hear stuff like this from your dad’s family?

Who cares how many cases there are if the hospitalizations and deaths don't go up.  Corona is literally the common cold.  So if they are doing antibody tests and it comes back positive you could just have anti bodies from being exposed to the common cold.

Plus every test is coming back positive right now for some strange reason.  I have seen multiple posts from people who scheduled tests but never went then got a positive result back.  Posts from nurses who send in tests kits that have never been used coming back positive.

If you test positive they ask you to come back every few days to get tested again.  Each time you test positive they count it as a new case.

A guy my wife works with recently moved to Arizona and is going to work remotely.  He and his entire family got it.  A few days of feeling crappy then they were fine.

The numbers are being manipulated to try and shut the economy down again to keep President Trump from being re-elected.  Yes they are that corrupt.

The left, the MSM and the deep state (I repeat myself) along with foreign actors worked together to lock us down to take away our freedoms and destroy our economy.  All so the Democrats could regain power.

Covid 19 was never more deadly then a bad flu season.  They just pumped up the numbers to scare the public into going along with their bullshit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 06, 2020, 08:34:14 pm
Do you hear stuff like this from your dad’s family?


Seems tame for uncle who I called a **** moron on Facebook before I blocked him. I also asked my dad if we where actually biologically related to them. This didn’t prompt anger from dad, just a shrug that he didn’t want to live in small town Iowa early on in life.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 07, 2020, 12:35:28 am
Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) — Forty lobbyists with ties to President Donald Trump helped clients secure more than $10 billion in federal coronavirus aid, among them five former administration officials whose work potentially violates Trump’s own ethics policy, according to a report.

https://apnews.com/2edf8670a491a702ecfb7312f507f83a
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on July 07, 2020, 12:44:44 am
Quote
Forty lobbyists with ties to President Donald Trump helped clients secure more than $10 billion in federal coronavirus aid, among them five former administration officials whose work potentially violates Trump’s own ethics policy

I'm sure they need it to fight the Deep State Conspiracy
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 07, 2020, 02:31:55 pm
One of the two big dicks has gotten it:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/07/americas/brazil-bolsonaro-positive-coronavirus-intl/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 07, 2020, 02:37:00 pm
Wonder what has changed his mind?  Couldn't be pandering to his support, right?

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/07/07/trump-confederate-flag-museum-2015-comment-newday-vpx.cnn
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 07, 2020, 02:42:29 pm
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/florida-teen-dies-after-conspiracy-theorist-mom-takes-her-to-church-covid-party-and-tries-to-treat-her-with-trump-approved-drug-report/

Some people are too dumb to be allowed to have children.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on July 07, 2020, 03:52:40 pm
Did somebody tout Sweden...


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/business/sweden-economy-coronavirus.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 08, 2020, 06:55:17 pm
Bad COVID report today:

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1281009997254742021

You can excuse the high death total yesterday because the count was catching up after the holiday weekend. But over 800 deaths today with 62,000 new cases...that's bad.

It's just one day and maybe some of the holiday weekend backlog was also cleared today. But this week and next are key for learning if we're going to be able to maintain the lower death rate despite the surge in cases over the last month...and today is not a good sign.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 08, 2020, 07:01:37 pm
Bad COVID report today:

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1281009997254742021

You can excuse the high death total yesterday because the count was catching up after the holiday weekend. But over 800 deaths today with 62,000 new cases...that's bad.

It's just one day and maybe some of the holiday weekend backlog was also cleared today. But this week and next are key for learning if we're going to be able to maintain the lower death rate despite the surge in cases over the last month...and today is not a good sign.

The backlog would have cleared Monday.  The fact the the positive % is going up is really bad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 08, 2020, 07:05:38 pm
The phrase "crisis standard of care" is now being heard some.  It sounds like a fancy way of saying triage.

A doctor on TV this morning may have been a little overly dramatic when he said you might hear "We can't help you.  Go home to die."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 08, 2020, 07:27:09 pm
https://www.propublica.org/article/a-spike-in-people-dying-at-home-suggests-coronavirus-deaths-in-houston-may-be-higher-than-reported/amp?__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 08, 2020, 07:27:30 pm
The backlog would have cleared Monday.  The fact the the positive % is going up is really bad.

Yeah...I was mainly trying to grab on to any possible excuse so I don't put too much emphasis on one day, which is the worst report we've had in several weeks. (Also, as information for anyone not looking at these numbers daily: the report lags a day, so that means yesterday's report included the backlog from Monday)

Also a bad sign...if you look at the data by state, there has been an upward trend in deaths in the big hot spots (Arizona, Texas, and Florida) for a couple of weeks. So it's pretty clear in those places that the death rate hasn't kept falling despite the surge in cases.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 08, 2020, 07:28:45 pm
Someone has to make Brazil look good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 08, 2020, 07:32:02 pm
The phrase "crisis standard of care" is now being heard some.  It sounds like a fancy way of saying triage.

A doctor on TV this morning may have been a little overly dramatic when he said you might hear "We can't help you.  Go home to die."

Since March I have had to do a SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment ment) score plus a comorbidity score on all ICU admissions. This is what the hospital that I admit to is going to use to determine who gets a ventilator and who doesn’t in case of scarcity.  Something from Arizona was leaked that was very similar and it has the same purpose. I’d assume everybody is doing it or should be.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 08, 2020, 08:21:48 pm
Most COVID deaths today in California since the pandemic started.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 10, 2020, 10:12:07 am
You can't make this stuff up

Quote
"Dr. Fauci is a nice man, but he's made a lot of mistakes," Trump said

Quote
Fauci last saw Trump in person at the White House on June 2, according to a report published Friday by The Financial Times after interviewing Fauci. He also said that he hasn't briefed Trump for at least two months.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-says-fauci-made-lot-mistakes-n1233402
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 10, 2020, 07:43:17 pm
The guy who is constantly pretending to be the "law and order" president just commuted the sentence of his friend. And of course he does it on a Friday night because that's when he always makes his most blatantly corrupt moves.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/10/politics/trump-stone-prison-clemency/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 10, 2020, 08:25:15 pm
This comment from Stone says it all. Trump was scared of what he might say.  I wonder what dirt Stone had on him.

@howardfineman: Just had a long talk with #RogerStone. He says he doesn’t want a pardon (which implies guilt) but a commutation, and says he thinks #Trump will give it to him. “He knows I was under enormous pressure to turn on him. It would have eased my situation considerably. But I didn’t.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 10, 2020, 09:38:28 pm
This comment from Stone says it all. Trump was scared of what he might say.  I wonder what dirt Stone had on him.

@howardfineman: Just had a long talk with #RogerStone. He says he doesn’t want a pardon (which implies guilt) but a commutation, and says he thinks #Trump will give it to him. “He knows I was under enormous pressure to turn on him. It would have eased my situation considerably. But I didn’t.”

Yeah...Stone was convicted of five counts of lying to Congress, one count of witness tampering and one count of obstruction of a proceeding. So basically, he's saying he's being set free for breaking the law in the way Trump wanted him to break the law.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on July 11, 2020, 06:50:51 am
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1281616586273468416?s=21

Curious how the career educators feel about this one.

This is wild.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 11, 2020, 09:15:42 am
Mitt Romney  @MittRomney
Unprecedented, historic corruption:  an American president commutes the sentence of a person convicted by a jury of lying to shield that very president.
6:06 AM · Jul 11, 2020
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 11, 2020, 09:23:38 am
Robert Mueller will go down in history as one of the biggest pieces of feces ever.  He had mountains of evidence for obstruction of justice, documented it, and then did nothing about it. I know there is the DOJ “we can’t indict a president” but letting this guy run wild is way more damaging than taking the extraordinary step of indictment.  Now Trump is free to obstruct as much as he wants and our country crumbles. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 11, 2020, 09:29:34 am
Yeah...Stone was convicted of five counts of lying to Congress, one count of witness tampering and one count of obstruction of a proceeding. So basically, he's saying he's being set free for breaking the law in the way Trump wanted him to break the law.

I just can’t believe we live in a world where this guy openly admits he has dirt on the President and nobody seems curious what that might be or concerned that he just told us the president is dirty.  Everybody already knows it’s true but now we are making this type of thing normal. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 11, 2020, 09:48:28 am
Still unanswered is the question "can a president pardon himself?". 

It's a safe bet that he will have no choice but to try.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 11, 2020, 09:49:39 am
When the Dems win this Nov and take the Senate and WH along with the House, they really should aggressively investigate and prosecute all these people in the current admin who are ruining this country including (especially) Trump.  The problem is that, while justified, it will just kick off an endless cycle of prosecuting political opponents regardless of the justification which is not good and another step down the path towards authoritarian rule.   There is no good answer to this - do we let this admin get away with all these crimes and normalize this behavior (or pretend like this is a one-off type thing) or do we start a new tradition of jailing the outgoing admin? Either way, we are in a bad spot and avoiding it will require threading the world’s smallest needle and hope that the next several admins are honest and not in it for the power and their own interests.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 11, 2020, 09:50:59 am
Still unanswered is the question "can a president pardon himself?". 

It's a safe bet that he will have no choice but to try.

He’s not going to be president if/when the crimes are finally prosecuted.  Also, a lot of his issues are at the state level and those can’t be pardoned at the federal level.  He should be totally **** once he’s out of office.  We’ll see if that actually happens.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 11, 2020, 10:26:42 am
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1281616586273468416?s=21

Curious how the career educators feel about this one.

This is wild.
!   It's Trump.   Nuff said.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 11, 2020, 03:39:56 pm
Imagine being so corrupt that Barr wants some distance.

@GeoffRBennett: Attorney General Barr discussed clemency for Roger Stone with Trump and recommended against it, an administration official tells NBC News. The official said the Justice Department had nothing to do with Trump’s decision to commute Stone’s sentence.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 11, 2020, 07:08:26 pm
Barr doesn't want any distance, and he didn't actually recommend against commutation - this is just free PR.  It's like Romney and Collins voting for witnesses when they knew their votes wouldn't matter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 11, 2020, 10:05:07 pm
Five days in a row, COVID deaths have been up over the same day last week (also, today's deaths were up over the non-holiday weekend two weeks ago).  It's pretty clear that daily deaths are no longer declining.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 11, 2020, 10:32:22 pm
It is almost like it goes increase cases then increased hospitalizations then deaths.

People still acting like death is the only bad outcome of this virus is annoying as well.

My father-in-law moved to Fort Meyers last year and his second wife had an allergic reaction. She was kept overnight, but they didn’t have a regular hospital bed for her so she spent the night in the ER converted supply room.  Which is completely normal and everything is fine in Florida.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 11, 2020, 10:38:49 pm
The problem with the people (especially the racists in GA and FL) who voted in these governors in FL, GA and TX is that they’re not the only ones suffering the consequences - everyone else is too.  It’s almost like they’re anti-vaxxers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 12, 2020, 03:42:30 am
I am not against masks or wearing them if they help.  California mandated them a month ago yet their case counts keep going up on the same trajectory ever since. Shouldn't masks be making some positive effect on those numbers?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 12, 2020, 07:58:55 am
That doesn’t mean people are wearing them, because people are stupid. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbs8.com/amp/article/news/health/coronavirus/san-diegans-have-wide-array-of-opinions-on-controversial-mask-ordinance/509-b0ff2784-97fd-4f2f-8556-fd465b9b96a7

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/story/2020-07-09/many-in-orange-county-resist-masks-even-as-coronavirus-cases-soar%3f_amp=true

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-07-11/courts-masks-coronavirus-public-defenders%3f_amp=true

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbs8.com/amp/article/news/health/coronavirus/san-diegans-have-wide-array-of-opinions-on-controversial-mask-ordinance/509-b0ff2784-97fd-4f2f-8556-fd465b9b96a7

Japan has done very little other than asking for social distancing and wearing of masks. Their infections rates and deaths have been tiny compared to the US.


Edit:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/anti-maskers-posting-selfies-wearing-191200948.html

Just ran across this article.  To steal a phrase from Nike, “Just do it.”  Don’t be a ****wad.




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 12, 2020, 10:15:30 am
I am not against masks or wearing them if they help.  California mandated them a month ago yet their case counts keep going up on the same trajectory ever since. Shouldn't masks be making some positive effect on those numbers?

Robb, it’s stuff like this that shows how much you are starved for factual news. Your brain is literally starving for reliable information.

Almost every other country in the world quickly implemented mask wearing and social distancing guidelines, and their populations adhered to those guidelines.

The clear and obvious science told us these simple measures would limit the spread of COVID, for the same reason that covering your mouth when you sneeze or cough is important.

Surprise, surprise, those countries that adopted these guidelines have flattened and reduced the curve, while every day the US gets worse.

It’s really, truly challenging to think of a scenario that is more clear cut than this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 12, 2020, 10:26:49 am
tico, the biggest problem is that those countries have cultures that obeys laws and recommendations and have leaders and governments that they trust to some degree.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 12, 2020, 11:39:04 am
tico, the biggest problem is that those countries have cultures that obeys laws and recommendations and have leaders and governments that they trust to some degree.

Yeah, Italy is really known as a rule following culture and trustworthy stable government.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 12, 2020, 11:53:56 am
If bright people like Robb still aren't convinced about the necessity for wearing masks, there really isn't much hope.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 12, 2020, 11:58:02 am
Yeah, Italy is really known as a rule following culture and trustworthy stable government.
!  Italy?  Who said Italy? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 12, 2020, 12:33:52 pm
!  Italy?  Who said Italy?

Italy is an example we should have followed. The point is that even cultures that were not predisposed to taking this kind of thing seriously did and are doing well. It just makes the reaction here look even more disgraceful.

On a related note, how is this take aging?

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcvToOQUYAAzieQ.png?format=png)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 12, 2020, 01:05:17 pm
Tico, how about addressing the contents of my post without  the vitriol? Are you capable of such a thing?  I said myself I WEAR A MASK!!! I simply asked the question.  Why isn't it working better?

Are questions not allowed now? Thank you Bluejay for responding with a rational response. I guess I thought a state like California so peopled by folks who are less skeptical of government than conservative states would comply and we'd see more of a dent in the case spikes. That isn't a political statement by the way.  If it would knock this thing out and actually work I am all for even more drastic measures for a short period of time.  But it seems that the experts can barely agree on anything.  You can find a virologist or doctor to fit your argument no matter what it is.  Which is a big problem. Fauci seems very smart but he said masks wouldn't help,  now he says they do.  I hope they do.  But he never explained his switch.  What was it? 

So again,  mask use was mandated nearly a month ago in CA. It hasn't done a thing to slow the spread. What next?  Back to shelter in place mandated country wide? For how long?  I know my conservative friends. They won't do it.  I would do it.  But most I know here wouldn't or feel they can't.  I own a small business and those in our local chamber have said even another week of shutdowns will end them let alone longer.

The police will have to enforce a stay at home order with heavy fines to make it work. Spare me who is to blame stuff. I already know your answer.  My questions are not political. What is to be done if masks don't slow this? Because what we are doing now isn't working. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 12, 2020, 01:07:08 pm
Because people in California aren’t following it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 12, 2020, 01:08:32 pm
If CA doesn't follow it what are the chances of Texas doing so?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 12, 2020, 01:15:39 pm
Jack, I guess my image of Italy was a country that totally crapped out early.

Just got back from a benefit chicken dinner.  90% of the people there were unmasked.  Lots of kids under 12.  I wore my mask but I was doing take-out and when I struggled to open the plastic bag to put my food in, I did what I normally do, went to wet my fingers, reaching under the mask.  I think I stopped before getting to my mouth, but either way I am now a candidate for this year's Darwin Award.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 12, 2020, 01:20:11 pm
Italy is an example we should have followed. The point is that even cultures that were not predisposed to taking this kind of thing seriously did and are doing well. It just makes the reaction here look even more disgraceful.

On a related note, how is this take aging?

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcvToOQUYAAzieQ.png?format=png)
Considering this spike in deaths was 95 yesterday for a total of 4100k in FL while New Jersey was at 729 for a total of over 15k and New York coming in at 32k I think DeSantis can still say he did things better.  Until a vaccine is done spikes and hotspots are going to happen.  Cuomo and Murphy and other governors who mandated sending Corona patients to nursing homes have blood on their hands and a lot to answer for.  Other states like FL protected those populations and their fatalities are way below. Nearly half of all deaths are from LTC patients.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 12, 2020, 01:36:00 pm
Considering this spike in deaths was 95 yesterday for a total of 4100k in FL while New Jersey was at 729 for a total of over 15k and New York coming in at 32k I think DeSantis can still say he did things better.  Until a vaccine is done spikes and hotspots are going to happen.  Cuomo and Murphy and other governors who mandated sending Corona patients to nursing homes have blood on their hands and a lot to answer for.  Other states like FL protected those populations and their fatalities are way below. Nearly half of all deaths are from LTC patients.

We should check in on this in about 20 days. I look forward to whatever idiotic excuse you come up then when this current spike in infections turns into deaths.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 12, 2020, 02:04:19 pm
Did he still do a good job when no one feels comfortable taking trips to Florida and their economy tanks?

Florida is just in the beginning of their mess and they have a long time before it is going to be over.  It just takes one employee being positive for a nursing home to have issues.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 12, 2020, 02:09:48 pm
Florida ICU beds are at 81% capacity already. Currently 269811 total cases of Covid in Florida, out of t hose 232K are still active.

We now have a contingency plan... to drive our happy asses OUT of state if somehow we need critical care.

Link for data - https://bi.ahca.myflorida.com/t/ABICC/views/Public/ICUBedsHospital?%3AshowAppBanner=false&%3Adisplay_count=n&%3AshowVizHome=n&%3Aorigin=viz_share_link&%3AisGuestRedirectFromVizportal=y&%3Aembed=y
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 12, 2020, 02:59:11 pm
You guys, remember the old saying: "never try to teach a pig to sing." I don't think I need to be specific about the application of that to the current discussion here.

I am president of my condo board for a building with 104 units and we are planning to pass a formal rule that will enable us to fine residents for not wearing face coverings, since pleas for concern for other residents' health and safety have been inadequate.  One of the owners is threatening to sue because she says the science is against wearing masks and it would be illegal for us to implement such a rule. Her sources are a right wing publication a right wing state legislator who has sued our governor over his face covering edict and the legisloator's lawyer. And a Good Morning America segment from February.  I pointed out that the CDC has changed its position since February as the science on the virus has advanced, and I have provided her with cites from the Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins, University of Chicago and Northwestern University. 

Did that do any good whatsoever?  Guess.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 12, 2020, 03:03:23 pm
Trump wearing a mask today will do more good than any factual evidence with folks like that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 12, 2020, 03:11:29 pm
You guys, remember the old saying: "never try to teach a pig to sing." I don't think I need to be specific about the application of that to the current discussion here.

I am president of my condo board for a building with 104 units and we are planning to pass a formal rule that will enable us to fine residents for not wearing face coverings, since pleas for concern for other residents' health and safety have been inadequate.  One of the owners is threatening to sue because she says the science is against wearing masks and it would be illegal for us to implement such a rule. Her sources are a right wing publication a right wing state legislator who has sued our governor over his face covering edict and the legisloator's lawyer. And a Good Morning America segment from February.  I pointed out that the CDC has changed its position since February as the science on the virus has advanced, and I have provided her with cites from the Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins, University of Chicago and Northwestern University. 

Did that do any good whatsoever?  Guess.
When I was VP of our association board, we had a woman who called us communists because her dog was not allowed into the pool area.  Our defense in situations like that was the form every resident signed when they moved in where they agreed to abide by any and all rules.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 12, 2020, 03:45:54 pm
Always knew Bennett was a commie.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 12, 2020, 09:20:28 pm
When I was VP of our association board, we had a woman who called us communists because her dog was not allowed into the pool area.  Our defense in situations like that was the form every resident signed when they moved in where they agreed to abide by any and all rules.

Everyone who purchases a condo in our building has to do that. The result is when someone violates a rule, they are subject to fines. In this case the fine will be up to $500.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 12, 2020, 09:41:39 pm
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.13553.pdf

If you want more science on masks. I’m glad I wouldn’t have to deal with Ron’s neighbor. At this point I’d probably call her a bunch on names and tell her to sign a DNR so we wouldn’t have to waste medical resources on her.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 12, 2020, 10:31:02 pm
There's an idea, Doc.  "You can come into my establishment without a mask, if you sign a DNR."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 12, 2020, 10:33:10 pm
Thanks for that,  Blue. An interesting read. It's interesting that the mask culture already in place in South Korea and Japan and other Asian countries as well as China were greatly responsible for their success with the virus. Why didn't the CDC and Fauci know this and recommend it back in March? They were saying the opposite. Very frustrating
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 12, 2020, 10:39:36 pm
Robb, back at that time, WHO and CDC were convinced the virus spread through human touch.  Remember about all the no shaking hands stuff?  My doctor says, if the virus attacks the lungs, it's airborne.  Not rocket science.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 12, 2020, 10:40:14 pm
Thanks for that,  Blue. An interesting read. It's interesting that the mask culture already in place in South Korea and Japan and other Asian countries as well as China were greatly responsible for their success with the virus. Why didn't the CDC and Fauci know this and recommend it back in March? They were saying the opposite. Very frustrating

Basic Q-Anon talking points there.

Because the country was facing a mask shortage due to the executive branch's inaction, Fauci was saying that priority should go to medical professionals.  By early April the CDC was recommending all Americans wear masks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 12, 2020, 11:06:02 pm
The mask shortage was part of it. We still don’t have enough surgical masks and N95’s. The other part was we didn’t understand how effective cloth masks could be. Science/Medicine changes daily, recommendations change when new information comes in. Not changing your mind when presented with new evidence is more damning than changing your mind.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 12, 2020, 11:10:50 pm
There's an idea, Doc.  "You can come into my establishment without a mask, if you sign a DNR."

I prefer watching them trend on Twitter and get fired.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 13, 2020, 11:08:34 am
Kudos to Mormon leaders:  https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/13/us/mormon-church-wear-mask-coronavirus-trnd/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 13, 2020, 11:13:31 am
A few more around here will listen thanks to that but many still won't. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 13, 2020, 11:14:35 am
Leaders need to set the right example regardless.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 13, 2020, 01:02:34 pm
Tico, how about addressing the contents of my post without  the vitriol? Are you capable of such a thing?  I said myself I WEAR A MASK!!! I simply asked the question.  Why isn't it working better?

Robb, there was no vitriol in my post. Sorry you felt otherwise.

Are questions not allowed now? Thank you Bluejay for responding with a rational response. I guess I thought a state like California so peopled by folks who are less skeptical of government than conservative states would comply and we'd see more of a dent in the case spikes. That isn't a political statement by the way.  If it would knock this thing out and actually work I am all for even more drastic measures for a short period of time. 

Of course questions are allowed. But if your questions are born of conspiracy-theories-posing-as-journalism expect to be called out on it. This is not an issue of not being able to ask a question. This is an issue of you not doing your homework. If you were consuming anything other than far right wing news sources, you'd know *EXACTLY* why California cases are spiking. It has *NEVER* been a secret. CBJ isn't sharing some doctor's-only-insider-memo on what's happening in California. The fact that you have to ask the question at all is evidence of the very thing I've been saying over and over and over and over: YOU. NEED. DIVERSITY. IN. YOUR. NEWS. INTAKE.

So again, mask use was mandated nearly a month ago in CA. It hasn't done a thing to slow the spread. What next?  Back to shelter in place mandated country wide? For how long?  I know my conservative friends. They won't do it.  I would do it.  But most I know here wouldn't or feel they can't.  I own a small business and those in our local chamber have said even another week of shutdowns will end them let alone longer.

What next? Massive penalties for any individual not wearing a mask in a public space. Continued bans on gatherings of any size in indoor spaces. (Looking at you, Trump rallies.) Extend increased unemployment benefit. Return to delivering cash directly to American families, and not ladling out hundreds of billions to corporations based on Trump/Mnuchin's whims with no congressional oversight.

The police will have to enforce a stay at home order with heavy fines to make it work. Spare me who is to blame stuff. I already know your answer.  My questions are not political. What is to be done if masks don't slow this? Because what we are doing now isn't working. 

What is to be done if masks don't slow this?! Masks ***DO*** slow this!!! Stop suggesting otherwise! What isn't working is the Trump administration's months-long attempt to sweep COVID under the rug. That's not "blame stuff." That's "responsibility," something I thought conservatives were a fan of.

Tell your conservative friends they've been given bad info by Trump and Fox News, that this isn't the flu, that it's not going to just disappear, and that we're not going to beat this until people conjure up the basest amount of human decency and put on a damn mask.

And when they respond with some nonsense about their rights, encourage them to also exercise their right to be naked in public and see how far that gets them. Anyone who complies with "no shirt, no shoes, no service" can wear a mask.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 13, 2020, 01:17:35 pm
I agree with Trump that all this is Facci's fault that people listened to Trump instead of him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 13, 2020, 01:38:04 pm
Now Trump is going after the CDC.

So WHO, CDC, Dr. Fauci, Medical professionals in the US and around the world are in a grand conspiracy to keep President Trump for getting reelected.  I can see how his doctors would be surprised he passed a mini-mental status exam.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 13, 2020, 02:07:23 pm
The global medical community is all a part of the Deep State. They secretly rewrote the Hippocratic oath into an anti-Trump screed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 13, 2020, 02:37:20 pm
Its not just the deepstate, its the vast left wing globalists that control the governments. if you are wondering what it looks like imagine SPECTRE only more gays.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 14, 2020, 01:33:54 am
Former GOP policy maker Evan McMullan on the White House’s attacks on Fauci:

“When the clods in White House attack Fauci, they're telling Americans that their lives are unimportant and unworthy of saving.”

I’ll say that again: former ***GOP*** policy maker.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 14, 2020, 10:18:48 am
Republicans attack each other quite often. They were not a unified movement before Trump and are certainly not after. The NeverTrump crowd is vocal if not large. Ann Coulter, Bill Krystol, Byron York, Mitt Romney, Jeff Flake and the Bushes are just a few. Those who worship Trump are only more convinced by these defections, not deterred. I don't know why your article or that statement would be shocking. Mitt Romney excoriated the President over his pardon of Roger Stone.

Either the Democrats are better at falling in line or I just haven't watched their side close enough. It does seem like they fall in line behind the party with very few defections comparatively. I am sure most here will attribute that to the rightness of all the Democrat positions. I attribute it to the media. If a Democrat steps out of line the media will go after them like they are a traitor. If a Republican does so they become a Maverick (see John McCain) or brave, (see Mitt Romney, who was about the worst thing that could happen to the country according to the same media just four years before.)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 14, 2020, 10:32:27 am
Democrats have a large diverse set of special interest groups that they have to balance and if Trump wasn't around they would have a more difficult time keeping everyone in line. 

Republicans seem to enjoy trying to driving people out of the party and it will eventually catch up with them. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 14, 2020, 10:36:22 am
Robb, there was no vitriol in my post. Sorry you felt otherwise.

Of course questions are allowed. But if your questions are born of conspiracy-theories-posing-as-journalism expect to be called out on it. This is not an issue of not being able to ask a question. This is an issue of you not doing your homework. If you were consuming anything other than far right wing news sources, you'd know *EXACTLY* why California cases are spiking. It has *NEVER* been a secret. CBJ isn't sharing some doctor's-only-insider-memo on what's happening in California. The fact that you have to ask the question at all is evidence of the very thing I've been saying over and over and over and over: YOU. NEED. DIVERSITY. IN. YOUR. NEWS. INTAKE.

What next? Massive penalties for any individual not wearing a mask in a public space. Continued bans on gatherings of any size in indoor spaces. (Looking at you, Trump rallies.) Extend increased unemployment benefit. Return to delivering cash directly to American families, and not ladling out hundreds of billions to corporations based on Trump/Mnuchin's whims with no congressional oversight.

What is to be done if masks don't slow this?! Masks ***DO*** slow this!!! Stop suggesting otherwise! What isn't working is the Trump administration's months-long attempt to sweep COVID under the rug. That's not "blame stuff." That's "responsibility," something I thought conservatives were a fan of.

Tell your conservative friends they've been given bad info by Trump and Fox News, that this isn't the flu, that it's not going to just disappear, and that we're not going to beat this until people conjure up the basest amount of human decency and put on a damn mask.

And when they respond with some nonsense about their rights, encourage them to also exercise their right to be naked in public and see how far that gets them. Anyone who complies with "no shirt, no shoes, no service" can wear a mask.

Tico,

When you begin your post with this: "Robb, it’s stuff like this that shows how much you are starved for factual news. Your brain is literally starving for reliable information." then you might see it as a factual statement, I see it as vitriol. How do you know where I get my news from?  I watch a variety of news sources, right and left and mostly try to find my facts form neutral parties. I don't believe something just because Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity says it despite whatever you believe. I also don't discount it just because they say it unlike pretty much every person here. I watch CBS broadcast news, I read the WaPost and NY Post. I actually think USAToday is as close to middle as print media can be today, although they are still a left leaning org. I also read articles I see on Twitter, where many who I follow are in the writing community and are hardly right wing. So please do not tell me to expand my consumption of news, I don't have time for it. 

With that as a backdrop I am somewhat perplexed at the response I have received about wearing masks. I stated that I wear one. In fact there are some cool Cubs themed masks out there and I have a few and wear them proudly. So if I myself am not opposed then why would I question their use? I don't. I simply question whether mandates to wear them are enough, hence pointing out CA and their numbers. You say a nationwide mask mandate is what we need. I merely pointed out that according to empirical data in CA and other states, a mandate has not slowed the increase in cases one wit.  So I say again, what next?

This question I direct to Blue. If a nationwide shutdown, not a pseudo shutdown, a real stay at home shutdown with groceries and meds delivered to our door, no flights, no outside activities, every one other than grocery, pharmacy and health care quarantined to their homes enforced strictly by police were to occur, how long would be necessary to kill this thing in America? 2 weeks? 3? 4? More? I don't think the country would do it. I am just wondering. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 14, 2020, 11:20:51 am
A strict shutdown is impossible, but it would need to be 2 weeks longer than the last infection.  But that would mean zero outside movement.  No Hospitals, food deliveries, meds, etc..  If people are going to work the risk of infection still exisits.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 14, 2020, 11:39:16 am
This is likely endemic to the US now... its not going away unless they shut the entire country down for an extended period of time... 8-10 weeks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 14, 2020, 12:59:12 pm
Either the Democrats are better at falling in line or I just haven't watched their side close enough.

It actually has more to do with the fact that the current leader of the Dem party isn't a racist, sociopathic narcissist. It's easier to find common ground when the centerpoint isn't someone like Trump.

It does seem like they fall in line behind the party with very few defections comparatively. I am sure most here will attribute that to the rightness of all the Democrat positions. I attribute it to the media.

Wrong on both accounts. There's quite a lot of internal debate within the Dem party as to more traditional neoliberal values vs all-out progressive values. Neither issue has anything to do with the media.

If a Democrat steps out of line the media will go after them like they are a traitor.


This just isn't a thing at all. The Dem primary fielded candidates as diverse as an overt Democratic Socialist and a guy who was a vocal supporter of the war on drugs, tough criminal justice system, the war in Iraq, etc. You're talking from your ingrown conservative news bubble again.

or brave, (see Mitt Romney, who was about the worst thing that could happen to the country according to the same media just four years before.)

I voted for Romney.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 14, 2020, 01:00:34 pm
This is likely endemic to the WORLD now... its not going away unless they shut the entire country down for an extended period of time... 8-10 weeks.

Fixed it.

Even if the US did shut down completely it would just take 1 traveler that has been outside the US to restart the infection.  Mitigation is the only way going forward until a vaccine is ready and is effective.  If you think the mask debate is fun, wait until we have to start actually injecting people with something. 

We can social distance, wear masks and hand wash and get closer to normal or ignore it and then end up with rolling shut downs of over run areas. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 14, 2020, 03:42:13 pm
I agree Blue. I know many who have vowed not to be vaccinated. One of those nearly died from the swine flu vaccination back in the late 70's. Hopefully these rushed vaccinations are safe and enough people take them to finish this thing off or at least relegate it to those who won't get vaccinated.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 14, 2020, 04:02:13 pm
It actually has more to do with the fact that the current leader of the Dem party isn't a racist, sociopathic narcissist. It's easier to find common ground when the centerpoint isn't someone like Trump.

Good grief Tico, how about taking your own advice and stepping outside the liberal news bubble? Joe Biden has a history of racist views and statements. Being democrat doesn't = not a racist. Biden fought for segregation, bragged Delaware is a slave state, said he didn't want his children growing up in a racial jungle, passed the 1994 criminal reform bill that more directly affected black males than any other segment of population, said some pretty racist things about Obama during his run in 2008 and proclaimed just a few weeks ago that if you don't vote Democrat you "ain't black." Why hasn't he been grilled on this by the news media?

Wrong on both accounts. There's quite a lot of internal debate within the Dem party as to more traditional neoliberal values vs all-out progressive values. Neither issue has anything to do with the media.

I didn't say there wasn't discussion. I said if you buck the party the media joins in and goes after you. I can give many examples but you have Google too. Use it.

This just isn't a thing at all. The Dem primary fielded candidates as diverse as an overt Democratic Socialist and a guy who was a vocal supporter of the war on drugs, tough criminal justice system, the war in Iraq, etc. You're talking from your ingrown conservative news bubble again.

I voted for Romney.

So did I.  I wish he would have won, then the damage of the last four years would not have been done. See, I can criticize a party I usually associate with. Trump has enacted the policies I have wanted for the most part, and they have worked. But he can't shut down his ego. He hasn't a humble bone in his body. He certainly had lowered the standard on the decorum of the office and having a leader we can look up to. His squabbles with celebrities and reporters and self aggrandizement will far overshadow whatever policies he got right. I expect he will lose this fall, perhaps in a historic way. If so, he deserves it. But due to his unpopularity the left has been able to bear their teeth, show their true colors and if given power will turn this country into something you don't recognize. If you would like to see what the left does with absolute power take a gander at my beloved home state. Illinois is collapsing under debt it cannot pay, raising taxes on a nearly annual basis and watching as business and jobs and citizens flee to better run states around them. 10 years ago my entire family lived there, nearly all of my friends too. In this decade all but 2 have moved away, many of those liberal. It is criminal what has been done. That is what I see happening if we employ the agenda of the left. Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 14, 2020, 04:35:25 pm
I agree Blue. I know many who have vowed not to be vaccinated. One of those nearly died from the swine flu vaccination back in the late 70's. Hopefully these rushed vaccinations are safe and enough people take them to finish this thing off or at least relegate it to those who won't get vaccinated.

The rush on the vaccines has me both hopeful and concerned. I would feel much more comfortable if Trump had no power to try and force through a vaccine that might might not be safe or effective.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 14, 2020, 07:02:52 pm
Hopefully a lot of Trumprrs will decline.  Thin the herd.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 14, 2020, 07:35:22 pm
Cotton looking good
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 14, 2020, 08:17:35 pm
Hopefully a lot of Trumprrs will decline.  Thin the herd.
I hope you are joking.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 14, 2020, 08:25:33 pm
I hope you are joking.

It would be better if they all killed themselves in a different way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 14, 2020, 09:43:42 pm
I mean Rush Limbaugh was extolling the virtues of the Donner Party on his show today. A group that had no skills and took an unproven path instead of the Oregon Trail.  They ignored warnings and got stuck in a snow storm. Almost half of them died and some of the survivors resorted to cannibalism to survive. I can’t think of a better description of the Republican Party currently.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 15, 2020, 12:03:38 am
Late term baby killing, no airplanes or fossil fuels, rioters, looters, burning businesses to the ground, 76 genders or whatever it is up to,  gun confiscators yet wanting to defund the police. See,  I can do it too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 15, 2020, 12:04:35 am
I forgot to add nominating a guy most likely in the early stages of dementia.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 15, 2020, 12:23:02 am
Self-parody now?  You're moving up in the world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 15, 2020, 12:43:41 am
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_3abcc469-ab31-4808-8553-a336da83f160.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=300)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 15, 2020, 06:17:44 am
Robb what portion of yesterday's rose garden event showed Trump to be a coherent person?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 15, 2020, 06:22:09 am
I hope you are joking.
Facetious maybe, but, from what I've observed lately, we have to fix the gene pool somehow.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 15, 2020, 06:23:19 am
I forgot to add nominating a guy most likely in the early stages of dementia.
Doesn't this apply to both parties?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 15, 2020, 08:28:24 am
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/us/politics/trump-cdc-coronavirus.html

I predict Covid numbers will now drop drastically.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 15, 2020, 08:30:34 am
I didn't know this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/brazil-confederate-flag-civil-war-americana-santa-barbara/2020/07/11/1e8a7c84-bec4-11ea-b4f6-cb39cd8940fb_story.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 15, 2020, 09:04:08 am
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/us/politics/trump-cdc-coronavirus.html

I predict Covid numbers will now drop drastically.

It is hospital data that was getting reported to one out dated government system now getting reported to another out dated government system that the Trump administration will be paying a company a large amount of money to maintain.  It won't effect the numbers getting reported to the states and the total number of cases.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 16, 2020, 11:47:31 am
I don't remember who said it, but the other day somebody said outside of a a few families like the McCain, Romney and Bush's had come out against Trump.   Check out this website: your fingers will tire scrolling all the posters.

https://rvat.org/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on July 16, 2020, 04:15:12 pm
Quote
Kayleigh McEnany, the White House press secretary, said Thursday that Mr. Trump still wants to see schools reopen.

“When he says open, he means open and full, kids being able to attend each and every day at their school,” she said. “The science should not stand in the way of this.”

There is no comeuppance too harsh for these imbeciles.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 16, 2020, 04:57:54 pm
"The science should not stand in the way of this."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 16, 2020, 04:58:28 pm
Trump touts his strong Republican support, Gallup released their monthly party affiliation poll.

Jan 2020- 47% Rupublican/lean Republican
July 2020- 39%
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 16, 2020, 05:23:07 pm
977 COVID deaths today. It’s been almost 2 months since the last 1000 death day, but it unfortunately seems like we’ll cross that line any day now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 16, 2020, 06:07:04 pm
Abby D. Phillip @abbydphillip
Trump now explicitly warning that fair housing regulations designed to combat housing segregation will "obliterate" the suburbs: "Your home will go down in value and crime rates will rapidly rise," Trump said today.


I'd like to see the full context...because as she describes it, there's no way that statement can be interpreted as anything but extremely racist. Even Trump isn't that blatant with his racism, is he?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 16, 2020, 06:44:24 pm
Abby D. Phillip @abbydphillip
Trump now explicitly warning that fair housing regulations designed to combat housing segregation will "obliterate" the suburbs: "Your home will go down in value and crime rates will rapidly rise," Trump said today.


I'd like to see the full context...because as she describes it, there's no way that statement can be interpreted as anything but extremely racist. Even Trump isn't that blatant with his racism, is he?

Rhetorical question?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 16, 2020, 07:19:39 pm
Yes he is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 17, 2020, 08:43:06 am
New nominee in the Washington Redskins new name contest: The Rapists.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 17, 2020, 05:03:16 pm
Meanwhile in Portland, federal secret police are abducting protestors over and against the wishes of local lawmakers and law enforcement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 17, 2020, 08:06:36 pm
But it can’t happen here. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 17, 2020, 09:31:41 pm
Meanwhile in Portland, federal secret police are abducting protestors over and against the wishes of local lawmakers and law enforcement.

It's amazing how completely Trump has taken over that party. Right now, it looks like he's going to lose in a landslide, and probably take the Republican Senate down with him. But they are still too scared to call him out even on something like this. Seems like at least a few of them would be willing to throw him under the bus by now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 18, 2020, 12:19:46 am
Here's hoping for a complete and speedy recovery for Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 18, 2020, 01:08:01 am
I think Trump is behind right now but if you think it will be a blowout or that Trump can't win you didn't pay attention to what happened last time.  The polls were about the same or worse. The debates will be more important than ever.  If Joe can show he still has his mind he will probably win.  If he gets confused and has a bad moment or two that fits the narrative he could lose by quite a bit.  Whoever wins I think it will be a violent time in our country unfortunately.  Hopefully I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 18, 2020, 04:02:58 am
The polls were nowhere remotely close to the same.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 18, 2020, 08:44:10 am
Biden isn’t Hillary Clinton.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 18, 2020, 08:49:32 am
I think Trump is behind right now but if you think it will be a blowout or that Trump can't win you didn't pay attention to what happened last time.  The polls were about the same or worse. The debates will be more important than ever.  If Joe can show he still has his mind he will probably win.  If he gets confused and has a bad moment or two that fits the narrative he could lose by quite a bit.  Whoever wins I think it will be a violent time in our country unfortunately.  Hopefully I'm wrong.

Robb is going to vote for four more years of this. What a **** scumbag. Robb and ilk are literally the worst people in the world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 18, 2020, 09:01:49 am
And, if there is violence, its coming from one direction.  Take, for example, the head of the NYPD union and this insane Q stuff that he apparently is in on. When Trump loses, it’s these dangerous idiots who are going to cause trouble. Make no mistake, your side is the dangerous one and it goes all the way to the top.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/17/us/head-nypd-union-qanon-mug/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 18, 2020, 09:32:38 am
Robb's command of facts is, shall we say, ... limited.  At about this time four years ago Clinton had a national lead of about 4-5 points.  Biden has a lead of 9 (sometimes a bit more), and the trend line is consistently in Biden's favor.  In Battleground states that Clinton lost (PA, MI, WI & FL), costing her the election, Biden has a lead in the double digits or upper single digits - which Clinton did not have. Plus he leads or is running even in a bunch of other states (OH, AZ, NC, GA and even TX).

Not to say anyone should count on anything. Those who want to preserve/rebuild our democracy need to do all we can to make sure that Trump is defeated and defeated very badly in November.  His enablers in the Senate as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 18, 2020, 09:33:12 am
Cletus, you are always good for a laugh.  Not to be taken seriously,  but a laugh regardless.  It isn't conservatives in the streets throwing crap at police,  rioting and murdering. What better place to see what liberals have in store for America than the cities and states under their absolute control for decades? Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, San Francisco, LA. They've all had free reign of governing for many years,  in fact an entire generation.  No racist Republicans around to push them down.  And what is the result?  Poverty, drugs and violence.  Even the police in most of these cities are heavily populated with minorities. So what about the liberal agenda should people in these cities be excited about?  You can blame the boogeyman Republicans all you want but it is the Democrats tucking you in that are in control and to blame.  Why do you want that for the rest of the country?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 18, 2020, 09:34:49 am
Has anyone ever seen Robb and Tucker Carlson in the same room?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 18, 2020, 09:57:47 am
Has anyone ever seen Robb and Tucker Carlson in the same room?

The only good thing about these times is that the truly terrible people have had no issue about revealing themselves. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 18, 2020, 09:58:53 am
Has anyone ever seen Robb and Tucker Carlson in the same room?

How can you tell with the hoods?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 18, 2020, 10:44:07 am
It has taken me some time to get used to wearing a mask.  I now wear a mask continuously when I leave my house.  I consider it to be a demonstration that I'm a good teammate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 18, 2020, 07:18:03 pm
Walmart and CVS now requiring masks for entry.  Some dumbasses still wear them with the nose exposed.  I suppose that's their form of protest.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 18, 2020, 07:19:02 pm
Regardless of your political leanings, Plato's Republic is still a go to.   This article is from 2016.  Truer today than then:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/04/america-tyranny-donald-trump.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 18, 2020, 07:25:46 pm
Walmart and CVS now requiring masks for entry.  Some dumbasses still wear them with the nose exposed.  I suppose that's their form of protest.

Seems like the private sector is doing what the public side should have done months ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 18, 2020, 07:34:34 pm
Walmart and CVS now requiring masks for entry.  Some dumbasses still wear them with the nose exposed.  I suppose that's their form of protest.
Lowe's and Home Depot too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 18, 2020, 09:11:49 pm
If you look at the numbers and compare against the models from way back when this started, the U.S. is basically on the “unchecked” on-ramp now and there’s probably no way to turn back.  But if all the government is going to do is cut funding for the CDC and testing and find new ways to try and hide the numbers, the private sector really has no choice but to do whatever they can do.  Even BoJo’s U.K. is about to enact a mask law.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 19, 2020, 08:45:56 am
Has anyone ever seen Robb and Tucker Carlson in the same room?
Nice deflection.  Now please tell me how the Republicans are to blame for the major city collapses Democrats have controlled the last 30 years. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 19, 2020, 08:53:08 am
If you look at the numbers and compare against the models from way back when this started, the U.S. is basically on the “unchecked” on-ramp now and there’s probably no way to turn back.  But if all the government is going to do is cut funding for the CDC and testing and find new ways to try and hide the numbers, the private sector really has no choice but to do whatever they can do.  Even BoJo’s U.K. is about to enact a mask law.
Cases have been going up for 6 weeks or so.  Deaths have barely moved.  I don't think we are anywhere near your worst case scenario. There were always going to be spikes once you reopened the country.  Those areas have had to pull back some which is appropriate.  Wear a mask,  stay at home,  but quit living your life in fear. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 19, 2020, 09:33:54 am
Robb is voting for more of this.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EdSwDs4XsAICvz5.jpg?format=jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 19, 2020, 09:58:52 am
92?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 19, 2020, 10:23:23 am
The leader of the party of Lincoln is going to great lengths to defend the honor of the Confederacy.  There is really no doubt what values are most core to the Republican Party.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EdSu7c8XkAAYjbL.jpg?format=jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 19, 2020, 11:44:50 am
This is the test that trump this is very hard and is so proud he aced.  Robb wants this guy to be president until 2024.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EdS4I0jXkAEkZl8.jpg?format=jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 19, 2020, 09:36:27 pm
We aren’t on the path to 2 million deaths, but we aren’t on the best case scenario path either.

Florida is projected to have 10,000 deaths from COVID by Sept 1. They are currently at 4,981.

Too much fear is a bad thing, but they are far too many people that have no fear. I’ll take too much fear over that every time over no fear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 20, 2020, 01:48:05 am
I'm more worried about policy than all the noise you are so consumed with,  Cletus. Democrat policy is socialism, raise taxes on me and other small business owners,  eliminate fossil fuels altogether which would destroy our economy,  place radical left wing judges on the Supreme Court to legislate from the bench, go back to the horrible trade deals of both parties past, defund the police,  continue to promote killing millions of babies per year because they are inconvenient and passing laws to limit my right to defend my family with firearms. So yes,  I will be willing to vote for a pig like Trump to try to avert such disasters for the country I love.

And if you think Trump is senile compared to Biden then you lose all credibility.  I have hundreds of clients who are seniors. Many who are on Aerosept for early dementia. They have the same issues with memory Biden has, the same blank stare. I could have stomached Biden of 10 years ago who would have stood up to the extreme wing of his party.  This Biden will probably not be able to serve out a 1st term.  With Bernie Sanders and AOC crafting your policies there is no moderation. I will never support such extremes. Trump, for all his warts, has governed as a centrist. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 20, 2020, 01:53:58 am
You couldn't write this shlt.  It's comedy gold.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 20, 2020, 01:59:16 am
For all the cries of racism against Trump, all I have to say is,  If he is a racist,  he sucks at it.  Unlike Obama, Trump signed and worked to get passed sentencing reform, commuted the sentence of Alice Marie Johnson, signed inner city empowerment zones which gives businesses incentives to open and build in the inner cities predominantly in African American neighborhoods and signed a bill restoring funding permanently for black colleges. Until Covid oversaw an economy that saw the lowest black unemployment rate in history.  Again,  if he is a racist he isn't very good at it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 20, 2020, 02:01:06 am
You couldn't write this shlt.  It's comedy gold.
Translation, I agree with the radical left agenda that has never worked in or out of our country, but I can't defend it so orange man is bad therefore let's destroy our country. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 20, 2020, 09:18:12 am
And if you think Trump is senile compared to Biden then you lose all credibility.  I have hundreds of clients who are seniors. Many who are on Aerosept for early dementia.

Making a diagnosis of dementia based off of TV appearances is nearly impossible for trained medical professionals so for the untrained it is impossible.  You need to do a MMSE or the cognitive test that Trump underwent to make a diagnosis.  If Biden was taking Aricpet he would have no issues with completing 1 term as long as he had mild dementia. 

Trump's response to COVID is has been about as bad as it could possibly be so far.  His lack of leadership should be disqualify from being fit for president.  None of the other stuff you mentioned is actually at risk of happening as long as Republicans can retain 41 votes in the Senate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 20, 2020, 04:04:02 pm
Hey Chicago, the Fascis... I mean Feds are coming to your home town to put on the same unmarked-police-unmarked-vehicle-disappearing-protestors act they've been running in Portland!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 20, 2020, 04:25:42 pm
For all the cries of racism against Trump, all I have to say is,  If he is a racist,  he sucks at it.  Unlike Obama, Trump signed and worked to get passed sentencing reform, commuted the sentence of Alice Marie Johnson, signed inner city empowerment zones which gives businesses incentives to open and build in the inner cities predominantly in African American neighborhoods and signed a bill restoring funding permanently for black colleges. Until Covid oversaw an economy that saw the lowest black unemployment rate in history.  Again,  if he is a racist he isn't very good at it. 

Robb, are you aware of how the overwhelming majority of black Americans describe their own experiences of Trump, his administration, and his fanbase?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 20, 2020, 04:31:36 pm
Translation, I agree with the radical left agenda that has never worked in or out of our country, but I can't defend it so orange man is bad therefore let's destroy our country. 

As I said about a former poster here, the one good thing about this era is that it's emboldened the cockroaches to scurry about by light of day, because they feel like their venal belief system is now acceptable. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 20, 2020, 05:41:11 pm
Hey Chicago, the Fascis... I mean Feds are coming to your home town to put on the same unmarked-police-unmarked-vehicle-disappearing-protestors act they've been running in Portland!

We haven’t really had much protest activity in awhile so I wonder what the SS is going to do when they get to town?  They will cause mayhem, or try, but I have to wonder where.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 20, 2020, 06:11:12 pm
I guess there was some sort of skirmish in Grant Park the other day.  Not sure it justifies the SS and I’m sure that they would have made it much much worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 20, 2020, 06:22:31 pm
I guess there was some sort of skirmish in Grant Park the other day.  Not sure it justifies the SS and I’m sure that they would have made it much much worse.

There was, but it was instigated by a specific group of provocateurs (anarchists or whatever) who hijacked a peaceful demonstration. They were gathered together, all dressed in black with black umbrellas. They came equipped with batches of bottled water, and apparently other objects, with which they pummeled cops who were encircling the statue of Columbus. Predictably, some of the cops over-reacted with violence of their own.  I don't know if those **** realize that they are playing into the Trumpsters' hands or not.  But this a small group ( a couple dozen maybe) and not representative of legitimate demonstrators.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 20, 2020, 07:09:51 pm
Trump now says wearing a mask is patriotic:  https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/20/politics/donald-trump-mask-tweet/index.html.  This is an act of courage on his part in that it probably seals his election loss in the Fall.  No way his extreme base will find this acceptable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 20, 2020, 07:15:29 pm
I read it as I'm down double digits and it's time for a Hail Mary
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 20, 2020, 09:16:57 pm
I guess I'll post this here instead of in the Around Baseball topic. Respect to Kapler.

Bob Nightengale @BNightengale
Gabe Kapler becomes the first #MLB manager to kneel during the national anthem. #SFGiants
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 20, 2020, 09:57:25 pm
Trump now says wearing a mask is patriotic:  https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/20/politics/donald-trump-mask-tweet/index.html.  This is an act of courage on his part in that it probably seals his election loss in the Fall.  No way his extreme base will find this acceptable.

I disagree - it's smart politically.  His hardc0re racist, conspiracy-obsessed base is as close to locked-in as imaginable - but they aren't enough to win.  In order to have any chance Drumpf has to at least try to win back a few suburban conservatives who recoil at his authoritarianism and the fact that he doesn't practice his racism tastefully and discreetly like they do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 20, 2020, 10:47:56 pm
Trump can't afford any loss of enthusiasm on the part of his supporters. He's always been a cartoon figure without core beliefs, and his supporters are getting a good look at the Emperor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 20, 2020, 11:22:46 pm
Trump can't afford any loss of enthusiasm on the part of his supporters. He's always been a cartoon figure without core beliefs, and his supporters are getting a good look at the Emperor.

Well, that's the conundrum he finds himself in.  His core supporters simply aren't enough, and because Biden has a penls he doesn't alienate swing white voters like Hillary did.

If I were advising him, I think Drumpf has no choice but to trust that his Jonestown 40% are with him no matter what he does, and he needs to try to broaden his support.  He can keep doubling down on a bad hand, but sooner or later the cards are what they are.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on July 22, 2020, 05:08:20 am
Shoutout to Robb for keeping his hood off the entire time. You are obviously a dumb racist homophobic piece of ****. But you take your lumps.

Those of you who pimped Romney and Reagan and Bush are just as complicit.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on July 22, 2020, 05:12:19 am
Much love to cletus, delmar, Ron, Robert l and deeg. Real ones.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 22, 2020, 10:41:58 am
Shoutout to Robb for keeping his hood off the entire time. You are obviously a dumb racist homophobic piece of ****. But you take your lumps.

Those of you who pimped Romney and Reagan and Bush are just as complicit.



goblue - Sorry but I just cannot let that go unchallenged.  I was staunchly against Romney, Reagan and Bush (that's actually a gross understatement). But there were philosophical reasons for decent people to support each of them. Certainly the Republican Party smoothed the way Trump and his acolytes, and many Republicans in Congress and state government were particularly complicit. But not everyone who supported those candidates were knowing parties to that process.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 22, 2020, 12:09:22 pm
And that kind of name calling is counterproductive, driving more people to support Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 22, 2020, 05:43:10 pm
I appreciate the responses to Goblue on my behalf. This topic is so toxic at times I don't even like to click on it.  Especially the day after major surgery and I feel like crap.  But it is good to see some decency once in a while. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 22, 2020, 05:54:13 pm
Get well soon, Robb.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 22, 2020, 06:06:55 pm
Thanks
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 22, 2020, 06:21:21 pm
And that kind of name calling is counterproductive, driving more people to support Trump.
Trump's saddest contribution to this country is the lack of civility.  The outright polarization so that even families and good friends get divided.   We are so polarized that neither side will listen to the other and a lot of good ideas are being flushed because the wrong party suggested it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on July 22, 2020, 06:49:16 pm
Get well soon, Robb.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 22, 2020, 06:50:16 pm
I appreciate the responses to Goblue on my behalf. This topic is so toxic at times I don't even like to click on it.  Especially the day after major surgery and I feel like crap.  But it is good to see some decency once in a while.

You don’t deserve any decency.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on July 22, 2020, 11:59:35 pm
Quote
Trump's saddest contribution to this country is the lack of civility.

I started to agree with this, but there are so many sad contributions it's hard to pick the saddest one.  The election of Donald Trump is the worst thing that's happened to the U.S. in my lifetime--sure, civil discourse, but the erosion of the rule of law, the erosion of the value of truth, the erosion of the value of science, the erosion of the value of education, the erosion in the value of this country.  To say nothing of tens and what will be hundreds of thousands dead because of his inept leadership.  Voting him out, investigating his actions, and prosecuting is the first step in making America great again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 23, 2020, 08:23:28 am
Why aren’t the 2nd Amendment gun nuts rushing to Portland to fight the tyrannical government invasion?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 23, 2020, 12:24:26 pm
Conservatives (for literally as long as I've been alive): STATES RIGHTS, STATES RIGHTS, STATES RIGHTS!!! SMALLER FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! STATES RIGHTS, STATES RIGHTS, STATES RIGHTS!!!

Trump: I'm going to expand our gestapo operation to cities and states all over the country. More unmarked officers throwing people into unmarked vans in clear and undeniable violation of their rights. We're sending a violent, militarized secret police force with no jurisdiction into your backyard, against the wishes of your local authorities.

Conservatives: ALL HAIL THE DEAR LEADER!!!

Trump: person man woman camera tv

Conservatives: STABLE GENIUS!!!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 23, 2020, 12:57:37 pm
tico, was the intent of the writers of the Constitution to insure States Rights or to diminish them?  Just asking.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on July 23, 2020, 01:41:52 pm
Or maybe the saddest thing is how easy it was for this sociopathic charlatan to take over the Republican party.  The increasing acceptability and celebration of willful ignorance is appalling. 

A message to the Base:  Trump and Fox News prefer that you are stupid.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 23, 2020, 02:18:50 pm
tico, was the intent of the writers of the Constitution to insure States Rights or to diminish them?  Just asking.

I mean, I don't know, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, Federalist Papers, 10th amendment :)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 23, 2020, 04:00:49 pm
tico, was the intent of the writers of the Constitution to insure States Rights or to diminish them?  Just asking.

Both? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 23, 2020, 07:05:43 pm
"States rights" is as much a "core conservative value" as deficit reduction.  It's something they wield as a blunt instrument when it politically suits them, and ignore when it doesn't.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on July 24, 2020, 01:59:46 am
goblue - Sorry but I just cannot let that go unchallenged.  I was staunchly against Romney, Reagan and Bush (that's actually a gross understatement). But there were philosophical reasons for decent people to support each of them. Certainly the Republican Party smoothed the way Trump and his acolytes, and many Republicans in Congress and state government were particularly complicit. But not everyone who supported those candidates were knowing parties to that process.

What were the philosophical reasons?

And is it worth this strife?


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 24, 2020, 10:41:30 am
What were the philosophical reasons?

And is it worth this strife?

Legitimate conservatives have a different vision of the role of government, particularly the extent of regulation of business. Those views do not equate to support of autocracy, racism, xenophobia, misogyny, etc. Some conservatives obviously are guilty of some or all of those things, but not all are.  The never-Trumpers in The Lincoln Project are examples.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 24, 2020, 02:59:41 pm
Did anyone expect to see something like this ... ever?

Krista Ruch
@KristaCBS2
Cubs wearing Black Lives Matter shirts during pregame. They want to help end racism and “not sticking to sports”


https://twitter.com/KristaCBS2/status/1286745456215830528?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 24, 2020, 03:02:25 pm
I have the Braves pre-game on, and they were all wearing the same shirt during warm-ups. Nice to see, but it seems like it might be a league-wide mandate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 24, 2020, 03:07:43 pm
I have the Braves pre-game on, and they were all wearing the same shirt during warm-ups. Nice to see, but it seems like it might be a league-wide mandate.

I cannot imagine it's a mandate.  Teams have found different ways of doing something like that.  Cubs also have issued a statement with player signatures.

https://www.facebook.com/stories/2112895648753157/UzpfSVNDOjEwMTU4MzY2ODE1NTcwNjU5/?source=story_tray
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 24, 2020, 03:13:38 pm
Maybe "mandate" is too strong a word, but I think there was at least a suggestion by MLB (or maybe union leadership?) about how players should act. All three games so far have done the same pre-game thing where all the players on both teams hold onto a black cloth and kneel before the national anthem, so there is definitely some level of coordination with MLB's response. And that's not a bad thing--as divided as MLB and the union are right now, it's nice to see them work together on something that actually matters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 25, 2020, 08:26:13 am
Ladies and gentlemen, your Cubs corporate partner:

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/24/media/sinclair-fauci-conspiracy-bolling/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 25, 2020, 09:27:05 am
Ladies and gentlemen, your Cubs corporate partner:

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/24/media/sinclair-fauci-conspiracy-bolling/index.html

Local news has influence and these people are going to go to absurd depths to try to keep trump in office. This country is broken, badly.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 25, 2020, 10:19:49 am
Here’s the latest from the Bears board. This time, saying that a prominent Jewish man should go to Auschwitz.  Remember, these guys are Trump’s base and not some fringe lunatics.

This guy is a prime candidate for Auschwitz

https://americanlibertydaily.com/soros-backed-da-signals-willingness-to-arrest-feds-compares-them-to-nazis/?utm_source=Email_marketing&utm_campaign=Content_7.25.20&cmp=1&utm_medium=HTMLEmail
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 25, 2020, 11:15:42 am
Trump would never say that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 25, 2020, 11:46:41 am
Trump would never say that.

I wouldn’t be so sure about that.  The limiting factor is that he probably doesn’t know anything about Auschwitz and the history there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 25, 2020, 12:03:03 pm
Ladies and gentlemen, your Cubs corporate partner:

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/24/media/sinclair-fauci-conspiracy-bolling/index.html

Sinclair owns 21 regional sports networks and has multiple affiliates as well. The amount of sports you can watch that doesn’t benefit Sinclair is going to be limited to ESPN and Comcast.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 25, 2020, 12:10:40 pm
What about the traditional major networks and the Golf Channel?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 25, 2020, 03:25:40 pm
Sinclair the affiliates I was talking about are other regional sports networks such as YES and Marquee and former fox sports regional networks and the Tennis channel

Sinclair owns multiple major network affiliates, so I would be unable to watch anything on FOX for instance.

You also can’t use Fox Sports Go for streaming because Sinclair owns that. So yeah you could watch Golf, MLB, NHL, NBA Networks. The offending part of their business is the local news programs so I just avoid that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 25, 2020, 03:30:56 pm
Or just don't watch the program in question. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 25, 2020, 03:35:03 pm
Hollywood espouses almost universally the opposite of the values I espouse and does so in an in- your-face manner.  I still go to movies and watch shows they produce. I just have to use my own filter.  If I boycotted all shows and movies that didn't meet my values I would have about 2 networks and select Disney cartoons left.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 26, 2020, 12:00:48 am
Sinclair has been shamed into not airing the Fauci-slandering conspiracy rant.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 26, 2020, 08:13:42 am
The Reagan foundation has told the Trump campaign to stop using images of President Reagan in their fundraising materials.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 26, 2020, 08:31:06 am
Is this okay with my friends on the left? It's from the The National Museum of African American History & Culture

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ec90PqvXgAc2z16?format=png&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 26, 2020, 03:53:00 pm
Trump has built a bigger wall around the White House than his much hyped (and unnecessary) wall on the boarder. What a **** disgrace this guy is.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ed3-qjlXsAAfzoh.jpg?format=jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 27, 2020, 09:03:03 am
[attachimg=1]


According to this from the CDC the overall death rate for 2020 is actually the same or better than the any year since 2014. I guess we can at least give credit to Covid for curing all other diseases.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 27, 2020, 11:26:42 am
A few things:

- That table is literally impossible to read, and I can't find anything similar online, so please share the actual link rather than an incredibly fuzzy screen shot so as to verify the data and its source.

- 2020 is barely half over. How does one compare partial-year mortality rates to full year mortality rates, especially given the seasonality of mortality rates? I'm no expert statistician, but this would seem to be an apples to oranges comparison on the face of it, unless there is more significant modeling work being done in the background to account for sample variance.

- Once it's possible to evaluate the data, something must then be said about the fact that the healthy parts of the country have been on lockdown for 3-4 months. We've enormously reduced the behaviors that lead to disease transmission with so many people staying home, washing hands, wearing masks, etc. It's akin to removing the bullet heads from 9 out of every 10 rounds in a clip. If the national mortality rate is not significantly lower as a result, it shows just how much of a killer COVID is. Of course, there is plenty of data that shows just how deadly COVID is (which you never seem to quote), and the stories of overwhelmed hospitals and the accounts of front line healthcare practitioners bear this out already, but some of the country seems to need extra convincing.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 27, 2020, 11:27:48 am
According to this from the CDC the overall death rate for 2020 is actually the same or better than the any year since 2014. I guess we can at least give credit to Covid for curing all other diseases.

This isn't CDC data.  This is from United Nation projections and you can see the table in the link below.  The page also INCLUDES THIS SPECIFIC WARNING.

"NOTE: All 2020 and later data are UN projections and DO NOT include any impacts of the COVID-19 virus."

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/death-rate


Here is the link to the CDC.  Since March 28 we have been above the excess death line in the US.  The most recent week in their data was 10% above the expected death total.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

From March to May their were about 120,000 excess deaths in the US.  A lot of this was from COVID, but it is about 30% more than the reported COVID deaths.  Some of this is going to be people avoiding medical care and hospitals as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 27, 2020, 11:28:57 am
*sigh*

of course
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 27, 2020, 05:03:34 pm
The excess deaths are also due to increased suicides drug od's and murders.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 27, 2020, 05:11:38 pm
The excess deaths are also due to increased suicides drug od's and murders.

Man, you really know the talking points.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 27, 2020, 05:24:18 pm
Robb, remember what Twain said: there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.  I saw a chart today that showed the U.S. as world leader in % of people surviving COVID.  Sounds good doesn't it...until you think it through. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 27, 2020, 05:52:49 pm
I saw it was the UN after Bluejay responded and tried to get an actual number from the CDC. The link he gave doesn't give me the hard number that I could find either.  I would love to see it and have correct numbers if there is such a thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 27, 2020, 08:52:56 pm
139,910 through May 16, which is the last week of CDC’s data so far.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 28, 2020, 10:55:48 am
Breitbart/Trump’s new favorite doctor not only believes in Plaquenil, but that dream sex with demons will causes endometriosis and STI (STD’s for Curt).   She also has charity set up for legal expenses because her medical license might be in jeopardy. I can’t imagine why.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 29, 2020, 08:49:02 am
Trump’s refusal to stand up to Russia and Putin will go down in history as one of the most despicable (or even treasonous) acts ever committed by a US President.

@jimsciutto: This is deeply disturbing. Beyond admitting he never raised Russian bounties intel to Putin in at least 8 conversations, asked about Russia arming the Taliban, Trump says “Well, we supplied weapons when they were fighting Russia, too”. A Russian talking pt https://www.axios.com/trump-russia-bounties-taliban-putin-call-4a0f6110-ab58-41c0-96fc-57b507462af1.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 29, 2020, 04:07:09 pm
No more dog whistle from Trump, he’s just coming right out and saying it now.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1288509572223651840?s=20
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 29, 2020, 04:10:11 pm
No more dog whistle from Trump, he’s just coming right out and saying it now.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1288509572223651840?s=20

He was afraid he was being too subtle for his following.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 29, 2020, 04:22:25 pm
He was afraid he was being too subtle for his following.

His base is dumb enough to have missed the signals.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 29, 2020, 04:35:26 pm
There's at least a 50% chance he's going to "accidentally" drop the n-word before the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 29, 2020, 09:01:59 pm
Holy crap, this video is jarring especially since I was told on this very board that racism is no longer an issue.

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1288625381784748032?s=20
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 29, 2020, 09:45:46 pm
Jack, just a quick tip - when abject racists tell you that, you can discard it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 30, 2020, 07:31:56 am
Come on down here to Florida. Tampa is a great place but you go one county North to Pasco county or Polk county and that video is exactly what you'll experience.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 30, 2020, 07:35:38 am
Come on down here to Florida Tampa is a great place but you go one county North to Pasco county or Polk county and that video is exactly where you'll experience.

I suspect that, or some of that, is pretty much everywhere coast to coast. Where I live, I can’t imagine that. But, go a couple hours south to where Pekin lives and I can totally imagine it.  That’s not to say there aren’t plenty of people who live in this city who have those feelings but the odds they’d act on that urge is very low.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 30, 2020, 08:04:16 am
This morning, Trump called for the election to be delayed.   Here we go....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on July 30, 2020, 09:47:55 am
He knows the Democrats will cheat with mail in ballot.  So does anyone else with a brain.  Vote in person with voter ID.  Problem solved no more voter fraud just like that.  But of course the Democrats are against that.  Gee I wonder why?

So Soros gives tons of money to get radical liberal Democrat DA's elected.  He gives tons of money to get radical liberal mayors and governors elected.  He gives tons of money to BLM and ANTIFA.

Then BLM protests, ANTIFA turns them into riots.  The Democrat mayors and Democrat governors have the police stand down while their cities burn.  These same DA's prosecute people who defend themselves and release the rioters when they get caught.  So in other words this entire mess was funded and created by George Soros and the Democrat party.  And Cletus thinks they are above using mail in ballots to cheat when there are already reports of people receiving multiple ballots, receiving them for dead pets, etc.  Cletus you used to try and appear you had some sense.  You have gone off the same deep end the Democrats have.  I can't wait until President Trump is re-elected.  The liberal tears will fill an ocean!

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/da-soros-justice
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 30, 2020, 10:59:10 am
Herman Cain has died of COVID after being in the hospital for a month. It's likely that he was exposed at Trump's Tulsa rally where he didn't wear a mask.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 30, 2020, 11:01:53 am
Shucky ducky.

Was he patient zero, or did he catch it there?

You know he was shaking tons of hands.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 30, 2020, 03:43:21 pm
Are you really glad that a man has died because you think it might make Trump look bad?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 30, 2020, 03:57:06 pm
Who said they were glad he died?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on July 30, 2020, 07:03:16 pm
Robb reads what he believes you're thinking.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 30, 2020, 07:55:54 pm
Robb reads what he believes you're thinking.
I think he was responding to shucky ducky.  Everyone needs to chill.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 30, 2020, 07:58:09 pm
Are you really glad that a man has died because you think it might make Trump look bad?

No i'm not glad a man died to make trump look bad. I'm not surprised that a man who refused to listen to medical experts and was in a high risk group ended up being a victim of his own science denial.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on July 30, 2020, 08:44:27 pm
Quote
I think he was responding to shucky ducky.  Everyone needs to chill.

Clearly he was, but he made a pretty significant leap, and it's something he's done before numerous times.  Put imagined words into others' mouths.  His 'why can't we get along' shtick is almost as ironic as Jiggs once posting something along the lines of Twain's "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you're a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on July 30, 2020, 08:48:35 pm
When someone posts Shucky ducky about a man dying then it isn't much of a leap to say he was happy about it.  Give me a break. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 30, 2020, 08:57:49 pm
A feel bad for Herman Cain and his family. It is an absolute horrible way to die. He likely spent much of the last month alone and his only human contact was people So gowned up you couldn’t recognize them.

That said my empathy for people that refuse to wear masks is low. My mother had to have a part of her colon removed so I drove back to Des Moines to be with my paralyzed father and help him out. I wore a mask in my parents house any time I was on the same floor as they were. There was 1 guy in the surgery waiting room that refused to keep his mask one and I was just amazed at him.  Hopefully he won’t get is elderly mother sick.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 30, 2020, 09:01:09 pm
When someone posts Shucky ducky about a man dying then it isn't much of a leap to say he was happy about it.  Give me a break.

Shucky ducky was his catch phrase...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on July 30, 2020, 09:15:31 pm
Quote
because you think it might make Trump look bad?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on July 31, 2020, 12:46:54 am
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_3ffd5b6c-78ec-425f-89fd-082a3c04a5d6.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=300)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 31, 2020, 07:44:02 am
In election news Trump is pulling money out of Michigan already.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 31, 2020, 08:49:07 am
Texas and GA are suddenly in play... he has to shore up places he shouldnt have to campaign in. He's pouring cash into FL
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 01, 2020, 01:33:20 pm
'Nobody likes me,' Trump complains, as even his allies fade

LOL  Sorry, that just makes me laugh.  I don't think it's beyond belief that he will resign soon to avoid a crushing defeat in November.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 01, 2020, 01:39:58 pm
'Nobody likes me,' Trump complains, as even his allies fade

LOL  Sorry, that just makes me laugh.  I don't think it's beyond belief that he will resign soon to avoid a crushing defeat in November.

He’s not resigning unless he gets some sort of prosecution immunity from New York.  Looks like he’s only kicking the can down the road for a few more months but the chance of four more years of immunity is worth the risk of the humiliating defeat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 01, 2020, 01:57:11 pm
What if he struck a deal with Pence for a pardon?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 01, 2020, 02:00:13 pm
Federal pardons do not apply to state crimes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 01, 2020, 03:20:57 pm
As good as things look right now for a clear (hopefully overwhelming) defeat for Trump, no one should be too confident even at this relatively late date. There are still three months left and Trump and Barr (as well as some governors and state legislatures) have demonstrated that there is virtually nothing they would not do to suppress voting.  And with the pandemic likely to be full swing and the mail issues that are being created or exacerbated by Trump, it could hold down the vote against Trump. And then of course there is the potential for Russian interference, perhaps even in the actual voting or vote tabulation.

Those of us who realize that our very democracy is at stake must do everything we can to make sure that Trump is so soundly defeated that no level of voter suppression or other mischief can prevent him from being defeated. Years ago I was very, very active in electoral politics but vowed to myself that I had retired from that and would let others carry the ball going forward. But I cannot do that this election. I am going to do as much phone banking into Wisconsin, as well as Iowa and/or Michigan as I can, as well as donating money. Personally, I wont' be satisfied with a mere loss, I want Trump (and his minions) to be humiliated in November.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 01, 2020, 03:36:49 pm
I’ve never donated to a politician, but I’m awfully close to giving money to Biden. I can’t stand what the Republican Party has become and I hope the experience an overwhelming defeat that sends them back to the drawing board about what the party should be for.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 01, 2020, 03:46:33 pm
I’ve never donated to a politician, but I’m awfully close to giving money to Biden. I can’t stand what the Republican Party has become and I hope the experience an overwhelming defeat that sends them back to the drawing board about what the party should be for.

This didn’t happen overnight so Im skeptical that change will happen quickly. But I hope the defeat is so overwhelming that a reckoning comes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 01, 2020, 04:37:09 pm
I’ve never donated to a politician, but I’m awfully close to giving money to Biden. I can’t stand what the Republican Party has become and I hope the experience an overwhelming defeat that sends them back to the drawing board about what the party should be for.
This didn’t happen overnight so Im skeptical that change will happen quickly. But I hope the defeat is so overwhelming that a reckoning comes.
I was not a fan of George H.W. Bush and certainly not of Reagan. But the video that I'm about to post provides a reminder of just how low the current Republican Party has sunk since those guys were representative of the party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 01, 2020, 04:37:37 pm
https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics/videos/3263665786998222
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 01, 2020, 04:40:43 pm
And I will add that whatever philosophical or policy difference we may have, I have a lot of respect for The Lincoln Project and other never-Trumpers who have dedicated themselves to removing this horrid human being from office. And even more credit to the ones who want to blow up the current Republican Party for what it has become.  Bravo!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 01, 2020, 04:54:04 pm
I was about to plug the Lincoln Project, but Ron beat me to it.  They're looking to defeat not just Trump but Trumpism, so they're not letting the gutless Republican senator weasels off the hook.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 01, 2020, 05:50:48 pm
Latest poll national poll (Emerson) has Trump training by only 4 points.  That's basically even in my book.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 01, 2020, 05:58:59 pm
I was about to plug the Lincoln Project, but Ron beat me to it.  They're looking to defeat not just Trump but Trumpism, so they're not letting the gutless Republican senator weasels off the hook.

Add representative Jim Jordan of Ohio to the list

(https://d279m997dpfwgl.cloudfront.net/wp/2020/06/GettyImages-1219101886-1000x658.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 01, 2020, 06:45:19 pm
Latest poll national poll (Emerson) has Trump training by only 4 points.  That's basically even in my book.

Never a good idea to focus on any single poll. The fivethirtyeight.com polling average has Biden ahead by 8.2 points.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 01, 2020, 07:24:43 pm
He’s not resigning unless he gets some sort of prosecution immunity from New York.  Looks like he’s only kicking the can down the road for a few more months but the chance of four more years of immunity is worth the risk of the humiliating defeat.

Don't count on humiliating defeat when he's successfully destroying the post office and Biden supporters are 4X more likely to say they're afraid to vote in person than Trump supporters.  Plus Putin interference, general voter suppression and intimidation....  This is a bare-knuckle war for America's survival.

Resign?  Hell, he won't leave even if he loses IMHO.  The only way he leaves the White House is if the military decides to drag him out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 02, 2020, 12:18:06 am
Quote
Add representative Jim Jordan of Ohio to the list

Oh, yeah.  Would love to see that guy reap some karma.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 03, 2020, 02:09:46 pm
He’s not resigning unless he gets some sort of prosecution immunity from New York.  Looks like he’s only kicking the can down the road for a few more months but the chance of four more years of immunity is worth the risk of the humiliating defeat.

SDNY inches closer to Trump.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/03/politics/trump-new-york-vance-investigation/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 04, 2020, 12:57:29 am
I couldn’t get through 10 minutes of the Trump Axios interview.  It was like watching a snuff film.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 04, 2020, 10:27:42 am
I couldn’t get through 10 minutes of the Trump Axios interview.  It was like watching a snuff film.

The advice he’s getting to go do these interviews is not top notch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 04, 2020, 11:27:24 am
The part where he's talking about COVID is getting the most attention today, but the part where they talk about John Lewis is the worst. When asked what he thought about John Lewis' legacy, Trump makes it about himself and starts talking about how Lewis didn't come to his inauguration. This exchange really stuck out to me:

Swan: Do you find him [Lewis] impressive?

Trump: (long pause) Uhhhhh....I can't say one way or the other. I find a lot of people impressive, I find many people not impressive...

Swan: Do you find his story impressive?

Trump, continuing to talk over Swan: ...He didn't come to my inauguration, he didn't come to my State of the Union speeches.


https://twitter.com/i/status/1290494089369026560
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 04, 2020, 12:35:13 pm
This may be the worst interview he’s ever done. I figured that the one where he was so proud of his performance on the dementia test was the bottom but then we have this.  It’s exciting to imagine how much worse he can get.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 04, 2020, 01:13:53 pm
He's acting a lot like Nixon in his final month.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 04, 2020, 01:29:07 pm
He's acting a lot like Nixon in his final month.

I was not alive at the time so I have no first hand knowledge of how Nixon ended things.  Was he really this unhinged and disconnected from reality?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 04, 2020, 01:35:24 pm
Yes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 04, 2020, 02:01:47 pm
You guys aren't giving Trump enough credit. Nixon his worst day couldn't match Trump on any day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on August 04, 2020, 02:21:32 pm
I imagine Nixon on Twitter would have been entertaining.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 04, 2020, 07:05:48 pm
Trump reaching out to Jews today was a heartwarming effort at bridge-building.  "Yo - Semite!"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 04, 2020, 07:06:08 pm
I was not alive at the time so I have no first hand knowledge of how Nixon ended things.  Was he really this unhinged and disconnected from reality?

No.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 05, 2020, 02:43:04 pm
I'd like to see someone splice the Axios interview with a shot of Nigel Tufnel saying "but this one goes to 11."  That's the level of intellect we're dealing with here.  The guy is just dumb as a rock with the emotional intelligence of a 4-year old.  I'm thinking he really is confused about why people don't like him and that he thinks he is doing a great job.  It would be kind of sad (in an almost makes you want to feel sorry for him kind of way) if it weren't so destructive for our society.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 05, 2020, 07:07:40 pm
That part of the Axios interview where Trump was fumbling with the COVID charts and clearly had no clue how to read them, all while effectively saying he had been told he was doing really well... all of the most horrifying reporting we’ve ever heard about his inability to comprehend anything of substance, his toddler-level attention span, the fact that he doesn’t actually read anything, that he just regurgitates whatever his sycophantic advisors or Fox “News” personalities whisper in his ear... it’s all true.

The emperor has no clothes. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 05, 2020, 07:08:33 pm
Also, *hand-waves* “it never crossed my desk” is my new excuse for life.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 05, 2020, 07:10:17 pm
Somebody overdubbed Monty Pathon’s Dead Parrot sketch and it was amazing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 05, 2020, 07:14:07 pm
As a diehard fan of Veep, the overlay of the Veep credit roll footage on the interview was especially delicious.

And horrifying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 05, 2020, 07:16:42 pm
Also, I look forward to hearing from the “values voters” supporting Trump what they think of his campaign pushing out a slew of anti-Biden ads that are egregiously deceptively photoshopped.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 06, 2020, 12:33:52 am
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_7a4cd50b-242b-4a54-aed0-dd35f9d373c1.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=300)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 06, 2020, 11:02:04 am
https://giphy.com/gifs/W29H8bAScfeQBvmasb?fbclid=IwAR3yJm_pTI_bvAN2hqShROirWT9NSDBPkSxVh-rdR9n6F2PnM-hCrKt6m0s
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 11, 2020, 10:04:02 am
Trump sending out the signals again to his base in his NBA vs NHL comments this morning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 11, 2020, 11:38:25 am
I was in serious disbelief when, over the weekend, there was a report that he had seriously approached the South Dakota governor about adding his head to Mt. Rushmore.  How can anyone  ANYONE be that delusional?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 11, 2020, 03:17:47 pm
Kamala Harris is Biden's running mate. He has sent an email out to donors making the announcement.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 11, 2020, 03:30:22 pm
Kamala Harris is Biden's running mate. He has sent an email out to donors making the announcement.

Trump will drop the n-bomb when referring to her at some point before November.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 11, 2020, 03:35:17 pm
I'm just looking forward to the VP debate. That will be great entertainment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 11, 2020, 03:43:48 pm
Kamala Harris is Biden's running mate. He has sent an email out to donors making the announcement.

Love the pick. Now just make Warren Secretary of Everything.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 11, 2020, 03:48:21 pm
Kamala Harris is Biden's running mate. He has sent an email out to donors making the announcement.

I was hoping for Susan Rice.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 11, 2020, 04:02:32 pm
I'm just looking forward to the VP debate. That will be great entertainment.

I don’t think Mother is going to like it when he has to be in a room with another woman.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 11, 2020, 04:03:29 pm
I was hoping for Susan Rice.

Me too, but there might be too much bengazi nonsense around her.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 11, 2020, 04:39:30 pm
I would have preferred Rice or just about anybody but Warren over Harris.  It won't affect me voting for Biden though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 11, 2020, 05:38:39 pm
Quote
How can anyone  ANYONE be that delusional?

Most of the accounts I've read have him serious about that.  This is what we're dealing with.  It's still stunning to me that people can't see it.  And terrifying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 11, 2020, 06:12:07 pm
Most of the accounts I've read have him serious about that.  This is what we're dealing with.  It's still stunning to me that people can't see it.  And terrifying.
  I've been trying to monitor some of that.  Bottom line, none of them will watch CNN or any news that they suspect has a liberal bias.  They assume anything about Trump is a lie if it's negative.  Suspicious if it's positive.  CNN had a report on what is being said on the conservative talk radio and Fox News and it is awful.  It's so far off the truth that it's sick.  They aren't all bigots; they just have a deep seated long standing hatred of Democrats to the point that they see Trump as their only hope of keeping the Democrats out of office, which, I guess, makes them blind to his huge deficiencies. 

A lot of us are thinking the same.  I had Rice, Harris, Whitley in that order.    The only reason I question the choice is that California is already in the Republican column.  It really doesn't help the ticket geographically.    That's the reason I liked the Michigan governor.  Flipping that state and perhaps Ohio and Wisconsin too, would have been huge.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 11, 2020, 06:50:55 pm
Interesting times that a black woman is the safe choice for VP.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 11, 2020, 11:15:05 pm
Agree...Harris was the safest choice.  Just like Biden.  Have to get that imbecile out of office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 12, 2020, 12:44:51 am
With everything else going on Tuesday, this almost slipped through the cracks

https://youtu.be/lrYmjYpcSg4
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 12, 2020, 08:21:58 am
The racism is going to ramp up to a whole new level.  On another note, we need to be able to embed tweets here if we are going to keep up with Trump’s insanity. 

@realDonaldTrump: The “suburban housewife” will be voting for me. They want safety & are thrilled that I ended the long running program where low income housing would invade their neighborhood. Biden would reinstall it, in a bigger form, with Corey Booker in charge! @foxandfriends @MariaBartiromo
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 12, 2020, 06:19:52 pm
I thought Harris was great this afternoon with her introductory speech. I think her personality will be a big strength since Biden's lack of energy is such a big talking point for the GOP. IMO, she's the right choice.

And for all of the talk about Biden really slowing down, he sounded fine. He's never been great at giving speeches, but it wasn't really any different than past speeches I've heard him make. If he's able to do the same throughout the campaign, it's going to be hard for Trump to sell the idea that Biden is the candidate whose mental state we should be worried about.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 12, 2020, 07:10:25 pm
None of this matters if:

Democrats seem to be trying to treat this as a normal election with a side of pandemic, and it's not.  It's a test of whether our democracy itself will survive.  It's a bar fight with broken bottles and the Ds are treating it like a college debate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 12, 2020, 08:39:49 pm
I knew they'd go to some kind of racist attack on Harris, but I didn't have a new version of birtherism on my radar.

https://www.newsweek.com/some-questions-kamala-harris-about-eligibility-opinion-1524483
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 12, 2020, 08:45:23 pm
See post above.  We're living in a dream world here - if there's no or effectively no election (which could be true if there's no mail-in voting) none of that shlt matters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 12, 2020, 08:45:32 pm
She was born in the US.  It's a bunch of nonsense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 12, 2020, 08:56:41 pm
Of course it's nonsense. That doesn't change the fact that it's racist (maybe technically xenophobic) to try to classify her as "not one of us."

And it's shameful that Newsweek would publish that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 13, 2020, 10:08:10 am
Newsweek hasn’t been a real journalistic outlet for a while now:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/memorializing-newsweek/552647/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 13, 2020, 10:13:30 am
And yes, Trump’s destroying the USPS to game the election is unconsciously shameful and par for the course.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 13, 2020, 11:17:40 am
He's not even trying to hide that he's sabotaging the post office specifically to block mail-in votes. He's basically bragging about it. He just does what he wants. I'm sure Susan Collins is "troubled" or "concerned" about this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-mail-voting/2020/08/13/3eb9ac62-dd70-11ea-809e-b8be57ba616e_story.html?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 13, 2020, 11:18:52 am
He's not even trying to hide that he's sabotaging the post office specifically to block mail-in votes. He's basically bragging about it. He just does what he wants. I'm sure Susan Collins is "troubled" or "concerned" about this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-mail-voting/2020/08/13/3eb9ac62-dd70-11ea-809e-b8be57ba616e_story.html?

He should be impeached today for this.  I can’t even begin to understand how his supporters can justify any of this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 13, 2020, 12:35:03 pm
Between Trump and the Postal Service and Georgia likely sending Majorie Taylor Greene to the House of Representatives, the Republicans sure seem to want me to never vote for them again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 13, 2020, 12:39:42 pm
Couldn't the postal thing backfire on Trump?  Older people are more likely than younger people to vote for him.  If I wanted to vote for him, as an older wobbly white guy along with all the old people at the nursing home three blocks away I would much rather mail it in rather than stand in long lines.  Most of the people I know in the 20-40 range that hate Trump are too busy or lazy to get a mailable ballot ready and will vote in person in November.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on August 13, 2020, 12:48:31 pm
You are assuming every voter will have integrity and do it properly?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 13, 2020, 12:56:49 pm
Does every voter using some kind of voting machine understand properly?  I wonder how many have pulled a lever for the wrong guy or party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on August 13, 2020, 01:09:39 pm
Unless the chads were hanging
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 13, 2020, 03:11:20 pm
...and Georgia likely sending Majorie Taylor Greene to the House of Representatives, the Republicans sure seem to want me to never vote for them again.

More than "sending" her, they're welcoming, even cheering her. Trump called her a future star.

R's are actively courting Q because apparently it's not enough to cater to racists, they need batshit crazy conspiracy theorists in their corner, too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 13, 2020, 05:37:18 pm
More than "sending" her, they're welcoming, even cheering her. Trump called her a future star.

R's are actively courting Q because apparently it's not enough to cater to racists, they need batshit crazy conspiracy theorists in their corner, too.

She’s a 9/11 truther as well. Apparently thinks that a plane did not fly into the Pentagon.

Trump mentioned the Harris birther thing at his press conference today.  So now that’s officially on his mind and part of the campaign.  The Trump cultists are going to eat this one up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 13, 2020, 07:11:54 pm
Couldn't the postal thing backfire on Trump?  Older people are more likely than younger people to vote for him.  If I wanted to vote for him, as an older wobbly white guy along with all the old people at the nursing home three blocks away I would much rather mail it in rather than stand in long lines.  Most of the people I know in the 20-40 range that hate Trump are too busy or lazy to get a mailable ballot ready and will vote in person in November.

According to polls Biden voters are 4-5X more likely than Trump voters to express serious reservations about in-person voting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 14, 2020, 08:36:47 am
This might be a stretch in a couple places, but not by much

https://youtu.be/UJ8OTriUThA
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 15, 2020, 09:57:21 am
Any day now, I expect the gun nuts who desperately need an arsenal to protect against government tyranny to stand up against trump’s destruction of the post office in an attempt to rig the election.  This is what the second amendment is for, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 19, 2020, 02:40:22 pm
Hey look! Genocidal maniac, self-described "proud Islamophobe," and school shooting "truther" Laura Loomer just won the R primary in Trump's home voting district!

Trump praised and supported her. i'M sO SuRprIseD!

Would love to hear from Trump supporters here what they think about Trump advocating for someone who defiles the memory of innocent children murdered in our schools.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 19, 2020, 05:31:59 pm
I guess I still don't understand the postal situation.  I would think that would backfire on Trump if it's deliberate.  If I don't get my Social Security check and I can't send my kids birthday cards and a letter informing me of a death in the family or I get late charges on bills I didn't get on time or companies didn't get my payment in time, I'm gonna get pissed...and if the hot rumor is that it's Trump's fault...  I'm voting Biden for sure.  Of course for dingy Donnie, he may not have thought it through.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 19, 2020, 05:52:51 pm
How are you voting for Biden if you never got your ballot (or you do, but it never makes it back to the state), and you’re too worried about the pandemic to vote in person?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 19, 2020, 05:55:35 pm
I put on my Nixon mask and go vote in person!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 19, 2020, 06:56:25 pm
Good on you, but that doesn't answer my question.  And I think it applies to a lot of people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 19, 2020, 07:18:00 pm
People won’t be getting medicine or social security checks long before any ballots get mailed out. It would be a disaster for Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 19, 2020, 07:21:55 pm
People won’t be getting medicine or social security checks long before any ballots get mailed out. It would be a disaster for Trump.

Ballots are already being mailed out (and "misplaced").
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 19, 2020, 07:50:04 pm
Biden just named his Vice President 8 days ago. That is an awful kick turnaround time to get the names on the ballet especially when Trump and Biden don’t officially have there nominations yet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 19, 2020, 07:58:44 pm
Why does Trump even want to be reelected.  Does he derive any joy or sense of accomplishment from being President?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 19, 2020, 08:06:40 pm
Why does Trump even want to be reelected.  Does he derive any joy or sense of accomplishment from being President?

He enjoys the rallies and he doesn’t want to be indicted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 19, 2020, 08:09:28 pm
I guess he is clueless about how he will be remembered in the perspective of history.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 19, 2020, 08:11:28 pm
I guess he is clueless about how he will be remembered in the perspective of history.

The first 5 words pretty much cover it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 19, 2020, 08:11:31 pm
Ballots are already being mailed out (and "misplaced").

The earliest that any ballots will be sent is 60 days before the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 19, 2020, 08:24:36 pm
He enjoys the rallies and he doesn’t want to be indicted.

This is the nut of it - he knows being President is the only thing keeping him out of prison.  That's why he intends to keep the job until he dies, constitution be damned.  He's already talking about how he'll be demanding a third term if he's "re-elected".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 19, 2020, 08:29:13 pm
He thinks his head belongs in Mt. Rushmore.  Once they chop it off and glue it to Washington's ear, few would see it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 19, 2020, 08:30:21 pm
Trust our Constitution.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 19, 2020, 10:03:41 pm
Trust our Constitution.

If we could do that, Trump would already have been long-removed from office and the USPS wouldn't be on the edge of dissolution.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 20, 2020, 10:07:35 am
Another one of Trump's "all the best people" is likely going to jail:

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/steve-bannon-charged/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 20, 2020, 10:14:31 am
Another one of Trump's "all the best people" is likely going to jail:

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/steve-bannon-charged/index.html

The only use of the word "pardon" in the article is in reference to Michael Flynn.  Strange.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 20, 2020, 03:22:39 pm
Trump drained the swamp so he could turn DC into a nuclear waste site.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 20, 2020, 04:33:12 pm
Swamp the drains.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 20, 2020, 10:26:08 pm
I think Republicans have to be worried after that Biden speech. Their entire campaign so far has been questioning Biden's mental state because that's the only thing they thought they had. But they don't have that anymore.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 20, 2020, 11:11:37 pm
That was a dumb angle to begin with, both because it dramatically lowers expectations for Biden and because their own candidate is a drug addict in cognitive decline.

That said, what the hell else does Trump have to run on besides overt racism?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 20, 2020, 11:33:09 pm
I think Republicans have to be worried after that Biden speech. Their entire campaign so far has been questioning Biden's mental state because that's the only thing they thought they had. But they don't have that anymore.
  I think only Trumpers have to be worried.  The real Republicans only fear 4 more years of Trump.  Just sayin'.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 21, 2020, 12:33:57 am
  I think only Trumpers have to be worried.  The real Republicans only fear 4 more years of Trump.  Just sayin'.

Considering Trump is drawing over 90% of Republican support in polls, I'd question that definition of what real Republicans are.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 21, 2020, 07:49:17 am
That was a dumb angle to begin with, both because it dramatically lowers expectations for Biden and because their own candidate is a drug addict in cognitive decline.

That said, what the hell else does Trump have to run on besides overt racism?

There is no case for Trump other than more institutional white supremacy.  That will resonate with a lot of people. Everything else is just filler til they talk about the issue that matters to them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on August 21, 2020, 02:47:46 pm
Quote
There is no case for Trump other than more institutional white supremacy.

Nobody hates Trump more than me, but to be fair there are people out there for whom traditional Republican issues such as the conservative position on taxes or getting conservative judges on the Supreme Court to outlaw abortion outweigh whatever personal distaste they may have for Trump.  I can't fathom it myself, but they exist. 

These are not the people going to rallies or wearing MAGA hats.  Those people are rubes (anyone still want to take issue with that characterization?) and they are scary as hell.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 21, 2020, 03:54:11 pm
Considering Trump is drawing over 90% of Republican support in polls, I'd question that definition of what real Republicans are.

Independents outnumber Republicans in registrations for the first time ever. Trumps is getting support in a shrinking base. I’m too lazy to switch my registration or I’d join the group of independents.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 24, 2020, 09:26:42 pm
Watching Nikki Haley, I'm reminded that the word "socialism" means nothing anymore. Calling Joe Biden a "socialist" is hilarious. It's pretty amazing that that scare tactic still works with something like 30-40% of the population.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 24, 2020, 09:38:20 pm
I've never heard Don Jr. speak before, so I had no idea how spot on Mikey Day's impression is before right now. The voice is perfect, and he even has the body language down. He blows Alec Baldwin out of the water for best SNL Trump family impression.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27IVt8hwUe8
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 24, 2020, 09:54:18 pm
So if your mother is from Puerto Rico how can you be a first generation American?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 24, 2020, 10:30:17 pm
There is no case for Trump other than more institutional white supremacy.  That will resonate with a lot of people. Everything else is just filler til they talk about the issue that matters to them.

After watching some of the content from the RNC tonight, I stand by this statement. Or, at least I’m pretty sure that the people running the RNC would agree with it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 25, 2020, 04:17:51 pm
I was told racism isn’t an issue anymore.

Quote
Black Homeowners Face Discrimination in Appraisals

Abena and Alex Horton wanted to take advantage of low home-refinance rates brought on by the coronavirus crisis. So in June, they took the first step in that process, welcoming a home appraiser into their four-bedroom, four-bath ranch-style house in Jacksonville, Fla.

The Hortons live just minutes from the Ortega River, in a predominantly white neighborhood of 1950s homes that tend to sell for $350,000 to $550,000. They had expected their home to appraise for around $450,000, but the appraiser felt differently, assigning a value of $330,000. Ms. Horton, who is Black, immediately suspected discrimination.

The couple’s bank agreed that the value was off and ordered a second appraisal. But before the new appraiser could arrive, Ms. Horton, a lawyer, began an experiment: She took all family photos off the mantle. Instead, she hung up a series of oil paintings of Mr. Horton, who is white, and his grandparents that had been in storage. Books by Zora Neale Hurston and Toni Morrison were taken off the shelves, and holiday photo cards sent by friends were edited so that only those showing white families were left on display. On the day of the appraisal, Ms. Horton took the couple’s 6-year-old son on a shopping trip to Target, and left Mr. Horton alone at home to answer the door.

The new appraiser gave their home a value of $465,000 — a more than 40 percent increase from the first appraisal.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/25/realestate/blacks-minorities-appraisals-discrimination.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 25, 2020, 06:20:10 pm
So if your mother is from Puerto Rico how can you be a first generation American?

If you're a liar happy to be used as a prop by a white supremacist administration, that's how.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 25, 2020, 09:38:10 pm
Any time I hear someone say "China virus," I disregard anything else they have to say because they're clearly a xenophobic idiot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 26, 2020, 07:41:45 am
Quote
Black Homeowners Face Discrimination in Appraisals

Abena and Alex Horton wanted to take advantage of low home-refinance rates brought on by the coronavirus crisis. So in June, they took the first step in that process, welcoming a home appraiser into their four-bedroom, four-bath ranch-style house in Jacksonville, Fla.

The Hortons live just minutes from the Ortega River, in a predominantly white neighborhood of 1950s homes that tend to sell for $350,000 to $550,000. They had expected their home to appraise for around $450,000, but the appraiser felt differently, assigning a value of $330,000. Ms. Horton, who is Black, immediately suspected discrimination.

The couple’s bank agreed that the value was off and ordered a second appraisal. But before the new appraiser could arrive, Ms. Horton, a lawyer, began an experiment: She took all family photos off the mantle. Instead, she hung up a series of oil paintings of Mr. Horton, who is white, and his grandparents that had been in storage. Books by Zora Neale Hurston and Toni Morrison were taken off the shelves, and holiday photo cards sent by friends were edited so that only those showing white families were left on display. On the day of the appraisal, Ms. Horton took the couple’s 6-year-old son on a shopping trip to Target, and left Mr. Horton alone at home to answer the door.

The new appraiser gave their home a value of $465,000 — a more than 40 percent increase from the first appraisal.

It couldn't have possibly been that the first appraiser was a total fvcking idiot and rube that sucks at his job and the second one competent at his job.  It had to be because of racism.  That is the only conclusion possible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 26, 2020, 07:52:01 am
It couldn't have possibly been that the first appraiser was a total fvcking idiot and rube that sucks at his job and the second one competent at his job.  It had to be because of racism.  That is the only conclusion possible.

Obviously you didn’t read the article. Or, maybe you did and you come away with the conclusion that Black people, all over the country and for decades, have been getting so unlucky and always getting the bad appraiser.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 26, 2020, 07:56:15 am
No.  I read what you posted as the summarized version.

I was once the victim of a bad appraisal.  Was that because of racism?  I mean both of my daughters boyfriends were there at the time.

No.  I found out that the first appraiser that came by sucked at his job.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 26, 2020, 08:18:14 am
No.  I read what you posted as the summarized version.

I was once the victim of a bad appraisal.  Was that because of racism?  I mean both of my daughters boyfriends were there at the time.

No.  I found out that the first appraiser that came by sucked at his job.

Next time, read the article.  You might learn something. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 26, 2020, 09:11:50 am
Imagine if a black militia came to Kenosha to protect the protestors.  I’m pretty sure the police wouldn’t be giving them water.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: octagon on August 26, 2020, 09:44:22 am
Imagine if a black militia came to Kenosha to protect the protestors.  I’m pretty sure the police wouldn’t be giving them water.
A multi racial militia who supported BLM showed up.  They ended up shooting three rioters, killing two.  There is plenty of tape of these guys being interviewed and stating they support the protests.  Also tape of them providing first aid to protestors.  There is very clear video of both shooting sites.  Both are pretty clearly justified.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 26, 2020, 10:25:09 am
A multi racial militia who supported BLM showed up.  They ended up shooting three rioters, killing two.  There is plenty of tape of these guys being interviewed and stating they support the protests.  Also tape of them providing first aid to protestors.  There is very clear video of both shooting sites.  Both are pretty clearly justified.

This is the opposite of what happened. I’d love to known what right wing nonsense source you got this from.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 26, 2020, 01:16:11 pm
Quote
Next time, read the article.  You might learn something.

Read it.  Still not any proof that she was a victim of racism other than her belief that she was.  She even said so herself, "“My heart kind of broke,” Ms. Horton said. “I know what the issue was. And I knew what we needed to do to fix it..."

Then there is the end of the article... 

“Is there a problem with poor and underserved communities in the United States? Yes. Is it the appraisal profession’s fault? No,” wrote Maureen Sweeney, a Chicago-based appraiser in a letter to the house subcommittee following the hearing. “It’s like blaming the canary for the bad air in the coal mine, or blaming the mirror for your bad hair day. Appraisers reflect the market; we do not create it.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on August 26, 2020, 03:11:37 pm
A multi racial militia who supported BLM showed up.  They ended up shooting three rioters, killing two.  There is plenty of tape of these guys being interviewed and stating they support the protests.  Also tape of them providing first aid to protestors.  There is very clear video of both shooting sites.  Both are pretty clearly justified.

Seriously? Supporting BLM? Check out the following:

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2020/08/26/kyle-rittenhouse-charged-kenosha-protest-shootings-militia/5634532002/?fbclid=IwAR339jv50JvgPAc4tJabRSP4BuYJ8TpFbjOlCvG6f90q9H43KU4nI6nyLS8

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: octagon on August 26, 2020, 03:44:16 pm
This is the opposite of what happened. I’d love to known what right wing nonsense source you got this from.
I watched tape compiled of livestreams of both shootings with no commentary at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: octagon on August 26, 2020, 03:50:35 pm
Seriously? Supporting BLM? Check out the following:

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2020/08/26/kyle-rittenhouse-charged-kenosha-protest-shootings-militia/5634532002/?fbclid=IwAR339jv50JvgPAc4tJabRSP4BuYJ8TpFbjOlCvG6f90q9H43KU4nI6nyLS8
Where does it say in that article whether he does or doesn't support the protests?
 I saw a video of his group being interviewed from Sunday (I think) saying they were there to prevent damage to property and to aid anyone wounded. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 26, 2020, 04:00:08 pm
Tom
@Haudricourt
·
12m
Josh Hader on Bucks boycott: "I think it's a tremendous stand. This is more about sports." Says can't say yes or no on #Brewers boycott. "I'm sure it's something we are going to discuss."

Maybe some people can change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 26, 2020, 05:06:56 pm
No NBA playoff games tonight plus

Bob Nightengale  @BNightengale  2m
Confirmed: The #Brewers have decided not to play tonight vs. the #Reds.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 26, 2020, 05:25:14 pm
Jared Diamond  @jareddiamond  22m
The Reds have agreed not to play as well. No forfeit situation. Both teams have agreed to sit out tonight’s game.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 26, 2020, 05:28:08 pm
Bob Nightengale  @BNightengale  12m
#SFGiants manager Gabe Kapler strongly supports actions by the #NBA and the #Brewers, and says his team is having conversations on whether they will play their game tonight vs. the #Dodgers
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 26, 2020, 05:29:01 pm
Add the Seattle Mariners to the list.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 26, 2020, 05:30:19 pm
Nothing like seeing sports franchises sprout a social conscience when the public mood turns against their prior inaction.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 26, 2020, 07:08:25 pm
I saw a video of his group being interviewed from Sunday (I think) saying they were there to prevent damage to property and to aid anyone wounded. 

Bringing an assault weapon to a protest and killing multiple people sure is a curious way of aiding the wounded...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: octagon on August 26, 2020, 08:02:46 pm
Bringing an assault weapon to a protest and killing multiple people sure is a curious way of aiding the wounded...
Agreed.  Just like chasing someone and throwing a Molotov cocktail at a person is a strange way to protest a police shooting. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 27, 2020, 09:39:53 am
What are you talking about?

You came on here and peddled pure lies about this kid supporting Black Lives Matter, called his murder of protesters justified, and then suggested his intention was to aid the wounded.

No. Full stop. This was a white, male 17 year old that self-identified as a member of a “militia” in support of the police. He drove across state lines looking for violence and brought the weapons he needed to enact it. He got what he came for.

Don’t spout abject nonsense about the situation and then try to both-sides the issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: octagon on August 27, 2020, 07:15:59 pm
What are you talking about?

You came on here and peddled pure lies about this kid supporting Black Lives Matter, called his murder of protesters justified, and then suggested his intention was to aid the wounded.

No. Full stop. This was a white, male 17 year old that self-identified as a member of a “militia” in support of the police. He drove across state lines looking for violence and brought the weapons he needed to enact it. He got what he came for.

Don’t spout abject nonsense about the situation and then try to both-sides the issue.
I posted the video interview on the bears forum with the interview I talked about it.  It shows exactly what I said it did.  The militia guys clearly state over and over that the support the protests.  Its possible Rittenhouse went there as you believe with the intention to kill, but there hasn't been evidence of that yet. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 27, 2020, 07:37:26 pm
octagon, you're clearly living in your own alt-right parallel universe. the kid's entire social media profile is nothing but blue lives stuff. he practically fetishized law enforcement.

nobody brings an assault rifle to a protest to "aid the wounded." what the **** kind of injury is anyone going to fix with a gun? as the black-lives side knows all too well, you bring bandages, eye wash, etc.

whatever the "militia" said they "support" we're talking about a kid that drove from IL to WI with a rifle and then murdered people, which you called justified.

no, it wasn't. it was never justified. it was murder.

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/who-is-kyle-rittenhouse-what-we-know-about-the-17-year-old-arrested-in-kenosha-shooting/2329610/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 27, 2020, 07:53:23 pm
sanity check:

who was paralyzed? an unarmed black man

why was he paralized? police shot him 7 times in the back as he was walking away from them

who was murdered? unarmed protestors

who shot them? a racist 17 year old that went out of his way to bring an assault rifle to an event that was otherwise ENTIRELY LACKING IN MURDER
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 27, 2020, 08:45:57 pm
I’m afraid that these people are hopeless. I’m terrified that they are not edge cases but are closer to the norm in this country. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: octagon on August 27, 2020, 09:29:25 pm
sanity check:

who was paralyzed? an unarmed black man

why was he paralized? police shot him 7 times in the back as he was walking away from them

who was murdered? unarmed protestors

who shot them? a racist 17 year old that went out of his way to bring an assault rifle to an event that was otherwise ENTIRELY LACKING IN MURDER
Too funny.  You are the one spreading the false narrative now.
No evidence other than your bias that he was racist.  One guy who was killed hit him with a skateboard.  Another had a Glock in his hand when shot.  The NY Times broke down the footage and Rittenhouse wasn't even the first one to shoot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 27, 2020, 10:04:23 pm
I’m afraid that these people are hopeless. I’m terrified that they are not edge cases but are closer to the norm in this country. 

40% is pretty close to being the norm.  And it's pretty clear that 40% is unmovable - they're full Jonestown at this point.  We can ignore them and maybe even defeat them in an election (if it happens at all, and isn't stolen) but they aren't going anywhere no matter what.  This is the grim reality of American's near-term future.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 27, 2020, 10:44:50 pm
I think I've posted this here before, but this really gets under my skin because it is so overtly bigoted. Trump used the term "China virus" again tonight in his acceptance speech, and that alone should be disqualifying. It's not even approaching a dog whistle--it's open bigotry. Here's what the World Health Organization had to say 5 years ago when they changed their best practices for naming diseases:

The use of names such as ‘swine flu’ and ‘Middle East Respiratory Syndrome’ has had unintended negative impacts by stigmatizing certain communities or economic sectors. This may seem like a trivial issue to some, but disease names really do matter to the people who are directly affected. We’ve seen certain disease names provoke a backlash against members of particular religious or ethnic communities, create unjustified barriers to travel, commerce and trade, and trigger needless slaughtering of food animals. This can have serious consequences for peoples’ lives and livelihoods.

He knows what he's doing. The WHO specifically said that naming diseases after people/places results in racism and/or xenophobia. The only reason he'd use that term is because he's a self-serving bigot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 27, 2020, 10:49:53 pm
A few years ago President Obama used the term "swine flu," but responded to a number of hog producers that it hurt their businesses and he never used it again, switching to H1N1.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 27, 2020, 10:56:02 pm
It’s at this point that I think the only salvation from absolute cruel untruth is lawsuits. I don’t know how else you can discourage reckless theatrical lies. There’s just too much profit in being deliberately full of ****.

You are what you eat and there is just so much junk food thoughts that until this is reigned in, we will continue to deal with this unconscionable stupidity. And I am so tired of confident, cruel ignorance.

This is exhausting.

Thankfully, Wisconsin isn’t Florida, and the life of this George Zimmerman wanna be is basically over.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 27, 2020, 11:06:13 pm
We'll see.  Some racist Walker-appointee judge will probably sentence him to community service, assuming his lawyer doesn't get an all-white jury to acquit him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 28, 2020, 08:34:50 am
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-there-are-so-few-moderate-republicans-left/?utm_source=pocket-newtab
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 28, 2020, 08:47:01 am
My hope is that the racist right won't quite gain enough sustained support to do lasting damage and that the inevitable demographic shifts in our country will banish them to the scrap heap of history where they belong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on August 28, 2020, 02:12:05 pm
I tried to watch trump's bowl full lies yesterday but had to stop after a couple of minutes. He was just too freakin orange...he looked like that cartoon character on South Park.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 28, 2020, 07:08:05 pm
Too funny.  You are the one spreading the false narrative now.
No evidence other than your bias that he was racist.  One guy who was killed hit him with a skateboard.  Another had a Glock in his hand when shot.  The NY Times broke down the footage and Rittenhouse wasn't even the first one to shoot.

If you want to suggest it's unfair to conclude the kid was racist because he wasn't running around in a KKK hood, fine. Whatever. You struggle enough with basic facts that discussing how systemic racism and white supremacy manifest in these so-called militia groups is beyond your grasp at the moment.

Speaking of struggling with facts...

Regarding the "skateboard hitting" (for which murder would obviously be an appropriate response, may our playgrounds and parks forever be piled high with the dead), the official criminal complaint notes the victim approached Rittenhouse, who was on the ground. The victim had a skateboard in his right hand and reached for Rittenhouse's gun with his other hand. No hitting is mentioned. Eyewitnesses also report that the victim threw a plastic bag at Rittenhouse in an attempt to disarm him. Clearly he should have been murdered, and got what was coming to him.

Regarding the notion that one of the victims had a glock in their hand, yes, after Rittenhouse had already murdered two unarmed protestors, someone else with a gun attempted to stop the shooting rampage. Isn't this *exactly* the argument of 2A supporters, that if there's a maniac shooting people in public, better hope there's a "good guy with a gun" around? So now that's *not* the argument? Instead it's a valid reason for Rittenhouse to attempt to murder a 3rd person?

Further, and again in the name of facts, if you had watched the video, you'd know that this person armed with a handgun approached Rittenhouse *without the gun even being visible* (much less pointed at Rittenhouse) and was again attempting to disarm Rittenhouse without the use of lethal force. Rittenhouse shot him at point blank range. The third victim risked his own life attempting non-lethal de-escalation of a situation that had already resulted in the murder of two unarmed people.

But please go off about all racist bullshit you're learning from Q on 4chan about what *rEaLLy* happened in Kenosha.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on August 28, 2020, 08:18:24 pm
“Nobody drives into a city with guns because they love someone else’s business that much. That’s some bullshit. No one has ever thought, ‘Oh, it’s my solemn duty to pick up a rifle and protect that T.J. Maxx.’ They do it because they’re hoping to shoot someone. That's the only reason people join these gangs in the first place, and yes I said gangs. Enough with this 'militia' bullshit. This isn't the battle of Yorktown---it's a bunch of dudes threatening people with guns.

How come Jacob Blake was seen as a deadly threat for a 'theoretical' gun that he 'might' have and 'might' try to commit a crime with, but this gunman who was armed and had already shot people—who had shown that he was a threat—was arrested the next day, given full due process of the law and generally treated like a human being whose life matters? … The answer is that the gun doesn’t matter as much as who is holding the gun. Because to some people, Black skin is the most threatening weapon of all.”

Trevor Noah
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: octagon on August 28, 2020, 08:30:16 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/27/us/kyle-rittenhouse-kenosha-shooting-video.html
The tape doesn't lie.  First victim chases and grabs the gun after cornering shooter.  Skateboard guy clearly hits shooter with his skateboard after two other people attack him, one guy punches him from behind while another jumps on him while he is prone.  Glock guy (convicted felon with illegal firearm) has the pistol in his hand before he is shot in the same arm.  You have to be insane to think shooter didn't see it.  Or to think he pulled it out after he had a chunk of his arm blown off.  First guy and skateboard guy are on tape threatening shooter before first guy escalates by charging and then chasing shooter as he attempts to flee.

Tape doesn't lie.  NY Times agrees.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 29, 2020, 08:36:55 am
Tamir Rice was a twelve year old with a plastic gun who was murdered by police within seconds of their arrival.

The Kenosha Call of Duty Cosplay Killer walks around with a fully loaded rifle, in a town he doesn’t even live in, is given water by the police and thanked.

Oh yeah, and then he murders people and can’t even turn himself in to the police.

If you can’t see a problem here, you are the problem here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 29, 2020, 08:46:35 am
Here’s a quick thought: Maybe the citizens trying to disarm this loser are the ones who were trying to defend themselves?

Also, if you dress up in a war costume and walk around town with a fully loaded rifle, your self defense claim is a joke. You create a violent situation and then turn around and say you had to defend yourself from the very thing that you created?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 30, 2020, 08:41:15 am
A few other questions:
1. Was this kid out after curfew?
2. Was this kid legally carrying this style of gun?

What I think happened was a moron little boy, with delusions of grandeur, got scared.

I should rephrase, has always been scared. So it didn’t take much for this idiot to feel as though his life was in danger because he always feels that his life is in danger. This is not a reasonable fear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 31, 2020, 10:16:31 am
Florida's answer to the surge in Covid-19 cases in schools - remove the numbers from their website.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on August 31, 2020, 11:36:14 am
addition by subtraction
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 06, 2020, 12:17:44 pm
Just in case you wonder what Trump represents and what we are voting against, behold...

I see the liberal media is pushing the narrative that Blake is some innocent bystander that needlessly got shot by police. The media is running to his defense for no other reason than politics. You liberal racist douches on the left want to really do something, start the conversation about black on black crime. Get off your a$s and go help the less fortunate. The left are nothing but cowherds, hypocritical crybaby's still butt hurt by Trumps wining the election in 2016. Fukk Jacob Blake, he's nothing but a criminal thug..
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 06, 2020, 09:37:50 pm
Joe West:

AP Sports @AP_Sports
Washington GM Mike Rizzo ejected for yelling at the umpires from a luxury suite.

Crew chief Joe West says: “I wouldn’t take that from a player. I wouldn’t take that from a manager. If it was Donald Trump, I’d eject him, too. But I’d still vote for him.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 09, 2020, 11:09:57 am
This will be a tough one for the Trump cult to explain away. Though, I’m sure they’ll find a way.

Quote
President Donald Trump admitted he knew weeks before the first confirmed US coronavirus death that the virus was dangerous, airborne, highly contagious and "more deadly than even your strenuous flus," and that he repeatedly played it down publicly, according to legendary journalist Bob Woodward in his new book "Rage."

"This is deadly stuff," Trump told Woodward on February 7.
In a series of interviews with Woodward, Trump revealed that he had a surprising level of detail about the threat of the virus earlier than previously known. "Pretty amazing," Trump told Woodward, adding that the coronavirus was maybe five times "more deadly" than the flu.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/09/politics/bob-woodward-rage-book-trump-coronavirus/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 09, 2020, 11:43:44 am
That all fits in with what Michael Cohen said to Lester Holt and Rachel Maddox on Tuesday:   After Trump loses the election, he'll resign and President Pence will give him a blanket pardon covering anything and everything he may have done.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 09, 2020, 11:47:36 am
That all fits in with what Michael Cohen said to Lester Holt and Rachel Maddox on Tuesday:   After Trump loses the election, he'll resign and President Pence will give him a blanket pardon covering anything and everything he may have done.

That pardon wouldn’t cover any state issues he has. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on September 09, 2020, 01:43:16 pm
That all fits in with what Michael Cohen said to Lester Holt and Rachel Maddox on Tuesday:   After Trump loses the election, he'll resign and President Pence will give him a blanket pardon covering anything and everything he may have done.

That would be rather meaningless, since almost all the crimes he might be found guilto of would be state and local crimes, which would not be covered by a Presidential pardon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 09, 2020, 01:57:50 pm
Jack said the same thing as Dave but Dave's is funnier?  Must have told it wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 09, 2020, 02:00:50 pm
The idea that he has only committed state crimes is hilarous. Lets wait till he's out of office before we declare him saint trump the persecuted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 09, 2020, 02:22:15 pm
Some probabilities from Nate Silver/fivethirtyeight.com:


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EhfQYYmX0AAnP5n?format=jpg&name=small)



So there's about a 1 in 10 chance that Biden wins the popular vote, but loses in the Electoral College, while there is virtually no chance Trump could do the same. The Electoral College is broken, it's inherently biased towards one side.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 09, 2020, 02:26:02 pm
If today’s news doesn’t sink him, then we should just pack it up and end this country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 09, 2020, 02:27:08 pm
Method, total misunderstanding.  Nobody is saying that.  All that's being said is that a Pence pardon wouldn't cover state crimes.  Trump would still be liable for all of them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 09, 2020, 04:41:24 pm
If today’s news doesn’t sink him, then we should just pack it up and end this country.

The more heinous the reveal, the more it firms up Trump's 43-45%.  They aren't movable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 09, 2020, 04:47:13 pm
The more heinous the reveal, the more it firms up Trump's 43-45%.  They aren't movable.

Probably true about the Covid-19 news but it will be interesting to see how many of the losers and suckers in the military stick with him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on September 09, 2020, 04:55:56 pm
The more heinous the reveal, the more it firms up Trump's 43-45%.  They aren't movable.

Well, it's more like 41-43%. Trump has almost never been at 45% (except in Rasmussen polls, which are meaningless), and rarely above 43%. But the point still holds.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 09, 2020, 05:22:40 pm
Well, it's more like 41-43%. Trump has almost never been at 45% (except in Rasmussen polls, which are meaningless), and rarely above 43%. But the point still holds.

I use that number because it’s about what he pulled in the popular vote last time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 09, 2020, 05:45:00 pm
I'd like to think that a couple of % of those are movable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 09, 2020, 06:39:34 pm
I'd like to think that a couple of % of those are movable.

Me too, but the evidence suggests it's not the case.  When the entire narrative is that a deep state conspiracy is out to destroy Trump and to believe nothing, no revelation matters.  Even if it's on tape it will be rationalized away.

Admittedly, one or two points at the margins could make a huge difference at the polls.  It would have in 2016.  You have to keep trying of course, but rather than waiting for news stories to fracture Trump's base the best atrategy is to find that 1% by doing everything you can to counter vote suppression and outright fraud.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 09, 2020, 07:04:27 pm
You have to keep trying of course, but rather than waiting for news stories to fracture Trump's base the best atrategy is to find that 1% by doing everything you can to counter vote suppression and outright fraud.
That 1% could also be the key to taking control of the Senate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 09, 2020, 07:34:11 pm
That 1% could also be the key to taking control of the Senate.

Certainly.  If the election isn't stolen outright that could certainly be hanging by a shoestring either way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 11, 2020, 06:12:40 pm
There is a 100% chance this is an admission of guilt. 

@atrupar: "I think there's probably, possibly drugs involved. That's what I hear." -- during interview with Judge Jeanine, Trump casually accuses Joe Biden of using performance enhancing drugs https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1304472674375262208/video/1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 12, 2020, 04:43:03 pm
It really is amazing how shameless and blatantly hypocritical Republican politicians have become.

Lindsey Graham @LindseyGrahamSC
It’s been 72 hours since I released 11 years of state and federal tax returns and challenged @HarrisonJaime to do the same. Crickets. What is he hiding?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 13, 2020, 10:34:50 pm
https://getpocket.com/explore/item/why-did-women-vote-for-hitler-long-forgotten-essays-hold-some-answers?utm_source=pocket-newtab
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 13, 2020, 11:41:00 pm

https://twitter.com/MattGarrahan/status/1305052220325584896
How do you fight this kind of insanity?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 03:56:03 pm

So there's about a 1 in 10 chance that Biden wins the popular vote, but loses in the Electoral College, while there is virtually no chance Trump could do the same. The Electoral College is broken, it's inherently biased towards one side.

It's worse than that: it inherently values white votes more than others.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 03:59:07 pm
Have we heard from any of the conservatives here on the ***Fox-News-Confirmed*** reports of Trump's vile, heinous disparaging of fallen veterans?

I get that they're not going to care about Woodward tapes, since half the Trump base still thinks COVID is a hoax.

But military vets: isn't that the holy grail of the party of "guns, oil, and god"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 04:00:38 pm
I'd like to think that a couple of % of those are movable.

My wealthy, educated, world-traveled, boomer parents have leaned further into supporting Trump, because "Biden is going to take all our money".

My mother in particular is beginning the slide into Qanon. Her decades of consuming nothing but Limbaugh and Fox News has fully rotted her brain. It's heartbreaking.

What's happening to the conservative base at scale is terrifying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on September 14, 2020, 04:06:26 pm
I wonder what percentage of Trump voters are anti-Biden (or anti-Democrat) as opposed to pro-Trump?

I suspect it's much larger than some of you seem to think.

It's beyond belief that these two (four) imbeciles are the best our country could present for nomination.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 14, 2020, 04:07:52 pm
That's sad, tico.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 14, 2020, 04:08:38 pm
It's perverse to lump Biden and Trump together that way, Dave.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 04:09:23 pm
People can dislike Biden all they want.

But to lump Trump into an "imbecile" category alongside Biden, Harris, Pence disparages them.

Trump is a monster. Full stop.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 14, 2020, 04:14:38 pm
Have we heard from any of the conservatives here on the ***Fox-News-Confirmed*** reports of Trump's vile, heinous disparaging of fallen veterans?

I get that they're not going to care about Woodward tapes, since half the Trump base still thinks COVID is a hoax.

But military vets: isn't that the holy grail of the party of "guns, oil, and god"?

yes, they think it’s all lies.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 14, 2020, 04:15:14 pm
I wonder what percentage of Trump voters are anti-Biden (or anti-Democrat) as opposed to pro-Trump?

I suspect it's much larger than some of you seem to think.

It's beyond belief that these two (four) imbeciles are the best our country could present for nomination.

Very, very few. There is no real way a person could vote for Trump as a lesser of two evils.  It’s not possible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 14, 2020, 05:19:20 pm
It's worse than that: it inherently values white votes more than others.

Is there something more to this than the strained math of the Vox article? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 14, 2020, 05:20:27 pm
https://twitter.com/Ben13Porter/status/1305529425866502145?s=19&fbclid=IwAR3jbKtqfqH-_0gs7JCtySK_iJ7Ga3sEKt355ol2Xv_C7d86TbMCgca8Mu8
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 05:42:16 pm
Is there something more to this than the strained math of the Vox article? 

I'm not familiar with any Vox article on the subject (though I'm sure they exist), but there's a clear historical link between the electoral college and minority voter suppression. Not saying this was the exclusive and express purpose of it when originally instituted, but it's part of the complicated mess that is the EC.

Set aside any questions about the origins of the EC and minority voter suppression; it very clearly overweights white votes today. It's just a statistical truth. By inflating the value of rural votes, it simply cuts along clear demographic lines to inflate the value of white votes.

This effect is further compounded by the Senate where, for example, the ~900K people of SD (~90% white) have the same political power as the ~19M people of NY (~65% white).

Not saying we should therefore tear up the Republic, but there are simple statistical realities to our political system and demographics that elevate the power and voice of white people. It's a systemic problem.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 14, 2020, 05:44:54 pm
My wealthy, educated, world-traveled, boomer parents have leaned further into supporting Trump, because "Biden is going to take all our money".

My mother in particular is beginning the slide into Qanon. Her decades of consuming nothing but Limbaugh and Fox News has fully rotted her brain. It's heartbreaking.

What's happening to the conservative base at scale is terrifying.
  I feel your pain.  I'm somewhat in the same boat.   The total refusal to acknowledge his failures and lies kills me.   Four years ago, he lost me when he belittled McCain.  The way family tries to tap dance around that one is sad.  Now his further slander of the military--you just have to shake your head.  Yet, Jack, people do see him as a lesser evil, just like they bought into Hitler's garbage nearly 100 years ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 14, 2020, 05:47:45 pm
I'm not familiar with any Vox article on the subject (though I'm sure they exist), but there's a clear historical link between the electoral college and minority voter suppression. Not saying this was the exclusive and express purpose of it when originally instituted, but it's part of the complicated mess that is the EC.

Set aside any questions about the origins of the EC and minority voter suppression; it very clearly overweights white votes today. It's just a statistical truth. By inflating the value of rural votes, it simply cuts along clear demographic lines to inflate the value of white votes.

This effect is further compounded by the Senate where, for example, the ~900K people of SD (~90% white) have the same political power as the ~19M people of NY (~65% white).

Not saying we should therefore tear up the Republic, but there are simple statistical realities to our system and demographics that elevate the vote and voice of white people. It's a real, systemic problem.


The problem with eliminating the college is that today the split isn't necessarily white/black or big states/small states or North/South/East/West.   It's rural vs. urban, agricultural vs. industrial...which is really sad because they both need each other.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 05:49:10 pm
  I feel your pain.  I'm somewhat in the same boat.   The total refusal to acknowledge his failures and lies kills me.   Four years ago, he lost me when he belittled McCain.  The way family tries to tap dance around that one is sad.  Now his further slander of the military--you just have to shake your head.  Yet, Jack, people do see him as a lesser evil, just like they bought into Hitler's garbage nearly 100 years ago.

Curt, I'm glad there are sensible people like you who can see through the bullshit. Would that there were more. Because, yes, as you say, people see Trump as a lesser evil just as they did Hitler. That we can meaningfully make such comparisons is horrifying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 05:51:42 pm
The problem with eliminating the college is that today the split isn't necessarily white/black or big states/small states or North/South/East/West.   It's rural vs. urban, agricultural vs. industrial...which is really sad because they both need each other.

Curt, agreed that it's not *just* a race thing, but it's certainly *in part* a race thing. And as the US grapples with systemic racism laid bare, I'm reluctant to let those concerns be sidelined.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 14, 2020, 05:53:44 pm
So, for the person who is honestly on the fence, what is it about Biden that is worse than Trump? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 14, 2020, 05:55:21 pm
There’s no “problem” with eliminating the electoral college apart from entrenched power resisting it.  It was a stupid and unfair way to elect a president when it had no consistent party bias - and it still is now that demographic shifts have changed that.  One person, one vote - that’s fair to everybody.  Disenfranchised voters in both California and Wyoming have their votes mean something for a change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 05:55:21 pm
So, for the person who is honestly on the fence, what is it about Biden that is worse than Trump? 

For many it's abortion. I know people who believe deeply that Trump is an evil person and hate the notion of voting for him, but they also believe the potential of ending abortion demands their vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 14, 2020, 05:57:04 pm
So, for the person who is honestly on the fence, what is it about Biden that is worse than Trump? 
  I think they believe anything Democrat is evil, bringing the collapse of the Republic.  Trouble is, so is Trump.  Trouble is, Trump is anti-Democrat in order to keep himself in power, not because he believe in the Republic platform.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 14, 2020, 05:57:59 pm
  I think they believe anything Democrat is evil, bringing the collapse of the Republic.  Trouble is, so is Trump.  Trouble is, Trump is anti-Democrat in order to keep himself in power, not because he believe in the Republic platform.
That and Supreme Court nominations.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 14, 2020, 06:13:45 pm
  I think they believe anything Democrat is evil, bringing the collapse of the Republic.  Trouble is, so is Trump.  Trouble is, Trump is anti-Democrat in order to keep himself in power, not because he believe in the Republic platform.

Ok, but nobody who thinks that way is honestly on the fence.

And, for the one issue abortion voter, there is no way they would ever vote for a Democrat. They may find Trump distasteful but, again, I do not believe that person’s vote is actually in play.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 06:38:47 pm
Ok, but nobody who thinks that way is honestly on the fence.

And, for the one issue abortion voter, there is no way they would ever vote for a Democrat. They may find Trump distasteful but, again, I do not believe that person’s vote is actually in play.

In 2016, I was pretty firmly pro-life (outside of ****, incest, and health of mother) and voted for Clinton. Had voted R in every election prior. First election I was eligible to vote was 2004.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 06:39:03 pm
Apparently R A P E is censored.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 14, 2020, 06:43:38 pm
Wasn't censored in Blazing Saddles.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 14, 2020, 06:48:45 pm
https://www.tmz.com/2020/09/14/trump-denies-climate-change-california-wildfires-newsom-getting-cooler-science/

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/12/912301325/longtime-climate-science-denier-hired-at-noaa

Meanwhile, there are now five active named tropical storms.  That has never happened before.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 07:09:06 pm
Climate change will disappear, just like COVID, which Trump knew was lethal at the beginning of the year and buried so as to not spook the markets and worsen his reelection chances.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 14, 2020, 07:42:01 pm
I think the Electoral College is useful to give small states a bit more say than they would otherwise have.  But it has gotten out of whack.  There needs to be a change, but I don't know how to accomplish that.  For me, using the popular vote would be going too far.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 14, 2020, 07:53:24 pm
I think the Electoral College is useful to give small states a bit more say than they would otherwise have.  But it has gotten out of whack.  There needs to be a change, but I don't know how to accomplish that.  For me, using the popular vote would be going too far.

Why?

No other democracy uses such a system to elect their head of state, much less one where the head of state wields real power.  Small states already have far more say than they otherwise would, thanks to the Senate.  Even if you eliminated the EC individual voters in North Dakota and Alaska would wield far more power than in California or Texas.  Small states don't need help giving them "a bit more" say - they already have more say than big ones, to an undemocratic degree.

As it stands my CA vote is meaningless, because my state is not in play.  Neither are the votes of people in about about 40 other states.  As it stands the entire presidential election is contested in less than a dozen states (and in earnest even fewer) while the others are ignored.  Directly electing the president gives every vote equal weight.  Candidates will visit and advertise in places they haven't for decades.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on September 14, 2020, 08:19:58 pm
I think the Electoral College is useful to give small states a bit more say than they would otherwise have.  But it has gotten out of whack.  There needs to be a change, but I don't know how to accomplish that.  For me, using the popular vote would be going too far.
land should not have vote!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 14, 2020, 08:29:59 pm
I'm not familiar with any Vox article on the subject (though I'm sure they exist), but there's a clear historical link between the electoral college and minority voter suppression. Not saying this was the exclusive and express purpose of it when originally instituted, but it's part of the complicated mess that is the EC.

Set aside any questions about the origins of the EC and minority voter suppression; it very clearly overweights white votes today. It's just a statistical truth. By inflating the value of rural votes, it simply cuts along clear demographic lines to inflate the value of white votes.

This effect is further compounded by the Senate where, for example, the ~900K people of SD (~90% white) have the same political power as the ~19M people of NY (~65% white).

Not saying we should therefore tear up the Republic, but there are simple statistical realities to our political system and demographics that elevate the power and voice of white people. It's a systemic problem.


Thanks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 14, 2020, 08:35:36 pm
I think the Electoral College is useful to give small states a bit more say than they would otherwise have.  But it has gotten out of whack.  There needs to be a change, but I don't know how to accomplish that.  For me, using the popular vote would be going too far.

You could do what Nebraska did. 2 votes for winning the the state and then the rest get apportioned by house district.

Why?

No other democracy uses such a system to elect their head of state, much less one where the head of state wields real power.  Small states already have far more say than they otherwise would, thanks to the Senate.  Even if you eliminated the EC individual voters in North Dakota and Alaska would wield far more power than in California or Texas.  Small states don't need help giving them "a bit more" say - they already have more say than big ones, to an undemocratic degree.

As it stands my CA vote is meaningless, because my state is not in play.  Neither are the votes of people in about about 40 other states.  As it stands the entire presidential election is contested in less than a dozen states (and in earnest even fewer) while the others are ignored.  Directly electing the president gives every vote equal weight.  Candidates will visit and advertise in places they haven't for decades.

That is just going to drive politicians to cities and ignore rural concerns which is going to make divisions in the US worse. The founders never intended for 1 person, 1  vote because majority rule was never what they wanted.

Trust me political commercials and candidate visits aren’t fun or entertaining.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 10:26:11 pm
From an expert on genocide comes the “oh-****-we’re-closer-to-Nazism-than-we-realized” moment of the day:

https://www.justsecurity.org/72339/qanon-is-a-nazi-cult-rebranded/

Oh, and did you hear about the newly published whistleblower complaint that some ICE detainees are being forced into hysterectomies?

Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Eugenics.

Just casual, regular, non-monstrous, democracy stuff.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 14, 2020, 10:51:19 pm
One thing about the electoral college that needs to be remembered is that the origin purpose of the Constitution was to bind 13 sovereign nations into a mutual defense pact.   The Bill of Rights was to guarantee that the other 12 could not impose their beliefs and opinions on one or more.  The Supreme Court was to referee all matters between the states and see to it that the BOR was enforced.   The electoral college also made it clear that we were a republic not a democracy.  What is ironic is that the intent was to find honest electors who would see to it that an ass like Trump never got in.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 11:13:46 pm

What is ironic is that the intent was to find honest electors who would see to it that an ass like Trump never got in.

And it has not functioned in this way for many generations. And it is precisely the reason we have Trump.

Whatever problems it was intended to solve, the EC is now corrosive and a tool (witting or unwitting does not matter) of white supremacy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 14, 2020, 11:46:00 pm
One thing about the electoral college that needs to be remembered is that the origin purpose of the Constitution was to bind 13 sovereign nations into a mutual defense pact.   The Bill of Rights was to guarantee that the other 12 could not impose their beliefs and opinions on one or more.  The Supreme Court was to referee all matters between the states and see to it that the BOR was enforced.   The electoral college also made it clear that we were a republic not a democracy.  What is ironic is that the intent was to find honest electors who would see to it that an ass like Trump never got in.

And in the constitution African-Americans were 3/5 of a person and women basically didn't count as citizens at all.

The founders weren't infallible - they made mistakes that were mistakes 230+ years ago, when they were made.  There are plenty of elements of the constitution that are utterly  incompatible with a modern democracy.  The Electoral College is one such element.

If the Democrats were to win enough statehouses in a real wave election, the Popular Vote Compact might have a chance.  I don't see real change coming any other way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 15, 2020, 07:40:44 am
From an expert on genocide comes the “oh-****-we’re-closer-to-Nazism-than-we-realized” moment of the day:

https://www.justsecurity.org/72339/qanon-is-a-nazi-cult-rebranded/

Oh, and did you hear about the newly published whistleblower complaint that some ICE detainees are being forced into hysterectomies?

Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Eugenics.

Just casual, regular, non-monstrous, democracy stuff.

If just a fraction of that story is true that doctor needs his license pulled now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 16, 2020, 06:08:48 pm
i am shocked... the CDC is now out to get trump... the conspiracy against donald trump is... epic.

Next week. the sun rose, its obviously out to **** trump by making days go by and his presidency come to its conclusion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 16, 2020, 06:24:49 pm
He was pretty slick last night.  Being able to lie in the face of video proof is extraordinary.  No wonder people believe him; he is amazingly convincing with his performance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 16, 2020, 07:28:26 pm
So I’m supposed to believe the Trump knows more than the head of CDC about when a vaccine and how effective masks are?

Unless the US is sitting on 600 million doses of each of the of the leading vaccine candidates it is going to be a rolling distribution of the vaccine with likely only healthcare workers getting it in 2020. Why 600 million because all but one of the vaccines are going to be a series of 2 shots and they can’t manufacture enough for 300 million people in 1 week. I mean my practice is worrying about running out of syringes to give flu shots.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 16, 2020, 11:09:11 pm
Don't worry, he said on ABC that Coronavirus would go away because of herd mentality.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 17, 2020, 01:06:11 pm
So I’m supposed to believe the Trump knows more than the head of CDC about when a vaccine and how effective masks are?

Unless the US is sitting on 600 million doses of each of the of the leading vaccine candidates it is going to be a rolling distribution of the vaccine with likely only healthcare workers getting it in 2020. Why 600 million because all but one of the vaccines are going to be a series of 2 shots and they can’t manufacture enough for 300 million people in 1 week. I mean my practice is worrying about running out of syringes to give flu shots.

CBJ, you're supposed to believe Trumps knows more about everything than everyone. He's regularly stated he knows more about the military than the generals, the economy than leading economists, trade than anybody, etc.

It's classic, textbook narcissistic personality disorder, and potentially of the more dangerous malignant subtype.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 17, 2020, 01:41:02 pm
CBJ, you're supposed to believe Trumps knows more about everything than everyone. He's regularly stated he knows more about the military than the generals, the economy than leading economists, trade than anybody, etc.

It's classic, textbook narcissistic personality disorder, and potentially of the more dangerous malignant subtype.

The rule of thumb with Trump is that when he says he knows all about something, he knows nothing.  When he claims to know nothing, he knows a lot (and it’s always very damaging to him).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 17, 2020, 05:32:12 pm
It's difficult to decide which is more terrifying:  the level of Donald Trump's reality-impairment or the fact that his approval rating is still around 40%.  Rubes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 17, 2020, 05:54:10 pm
It's difficult to decide which is more terrifying:  the level of Donald Trump's reality-impairment or the fact that his approval rating is still around 40%.  Rubes.
Quit bad mouthing my relatives!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 17, 2020, 05:55:35 pm
COVID has one good thing going for it, I don't have to shake hands with all those disgusting people.  -- Donald Trump
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 17, 2020, 06:31:03 pm
Deplorable didn’t even begin to describe these people.   It’s going to be nauseating when everyone starts talking about unity and working together when Trump is out. F that. These people are horrible and there is nothing about the way they want to run the country that is worth considering. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on September 17, 2020, 06:37:45 pm
It's difficult to decide which is more terrifying:  the level of Donald Trump's reality-impairment or the fact that his approval rating is still around 40%.  Rubes.

Not for me. The latter is far more terrifying, since they are not going away after January.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 17, 2020, 07:56:49 pm
Not for me. The latter is far more terrifying, since they are not going away after January.

Neither is Trump, unless he's dragged out by the hair.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 17, 2020, 09:19:02 pm
Quote
The latter is far more terrifying, since they are not going away after January.

Yeah, you're right.  Imagine if Trump were competent rather than a delusional imbecile.  Tucker Carlson.  Or Tom Cotton, maybe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 17, 2020, 10:16:25 pm
I think the Woodward tapes reveal that there's more calculation and less delusion there than most people credit.  Though there's certainly plenty of both.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on September 18, 2020, 12:18:50 am
Think that Trump perhaps is the greatest marketer of a target audience who ever lived.

Before Trump, I would have said PT Barnum, but not even close anymore. To be so great at this, one has to be calculated and skillful in reaching and convincing the audience in that targeted group. Trump is without peer at that.

Think he also is very aware of how the anti and non-Trumpers operate too. He doesn’t bother to convince folks he knows are not his supporters. Doesn’t care. But, he has a keen sense of what they’re doing. And, he uses that to encourage his supporters—-of course with lies, gross exaggerations, slurs of all kinds. He is a master of playing to the fears of that targeted audience. Everybody has fears of some kind. It’s human nature.

Hoping that his targeted audience is going to be outnumbered in November by enough folks that don’t fall for his act. But, this guy is a marketing genius at what he does.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 18, 2020, 09:10:49 am
I know he scares a lot of people, but Trump mostly bores me.  No ideas.  No point in listening to what he says since it's almost impossible to extract the few things that might be true.  He's a typical bully and an attention seeker.  Hopefully, he will soon go back to reality TV which is where he belongs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on September 18, 2020, 09:21:56 am
I know he scares a lot of people, but Trump mostly bores me.  No ideas.  No point in listening to what he says since it's almost impossible to extract the few things that might be true.  He's a typical bully and an attention seeker.  Hopefully, he will soon go back to reality TV which is where he belongs.

Actually, he belongs in prison.  And hopefully he'll end up there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 18, 2020, 10:08:30 am
It's difficult to decide which is more terrifying:  the level of Donald Trump's reality-impairment or the fact that his approval rating is still around 40%.  Rubes.
The Trump base is nothing more than members of a cult not unlike that of Sun Myung Moon or Jim Jones.  They've lost the ability to think for themselves.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 18, 2020, 11:06:53 am
This whole “Biden has dementia” thing is going to look very bad.  Not that it matters to the cult but maybe it will chip away at others on the margins.

Charlotte Alter (@CharlotteAlter) Tweeted:
Biden, in an embarrassing senior moment, recites the divergent biological methods of two possible vaccines (molecular structure versus immune system enhancement) and also details the chemical specifics how they have to be stored and transported.

Awkward!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 18, 2020, 11:15:15 am
It is happening here.

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/it-can-happen-here?utm_source=pocket-newtab
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 18, 2020, 02:47:24 pm
It is happening here.

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/it-can-happen-here?utm_source=pocket-newtab

I can not stress this enough, if you want to know what the rank and file Trump voter is thinking, read the Bears board. It’s extremely alarming but that’s what we are up against this election and beyond.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on September 18, 2020, 03:49:56 pm
Clearly there are a number of folks here who are as frightened of Trump being re-elected as I am. After decades of being involved in election campaigns, I made a personal vow some years ago to permanently retire from any campaign activity. Not because I quit believing they were important, but because I was just worn out from that, and didn't have the stomach for that anymore.

I still feel the same way, except that I cannot justify standing on the sidelines in this election, so I am doing phone banking into battleground states several times a week, from home, at times I choose.  If any of you are interested, I encourage you to join me by by going to the following link. You will be able to go through a virtual training, get a script and do it at times you choose, for as long as you choose. Good luck to those who do so.

https://www.mobilize.us/2020victory/event/291103/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 18, 2020, 06:54:03 pm
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 18, 2020, 07:43:57 pm
Thanks for sharing that Ron. With the passing of RBG, the stakes, impossibly, have gotten even higher.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 18, 2020, 07:45:13 pm
The worst people on earth are about to teach a masterclass on hypocrisy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 18, 2020, 07:49:41 pm
And I'm disgusted that my first consideration is the political implication of RBG's passing, but this is the **** hellacious timeline in which we live.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 18, 2020, 08:03:37 pm

McConnell plans to hold a vote on a nominee. Hopefully at least 4 Republicans have enough integrity to say they won't vote yes on anyone until after the inauguration. I've already seen tweets saying that Collins and Murkowski have gone on record with reporters recently saying they would not confirm a justice until after the election. I also think Romney probably would like to stick it to Trump.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EiPSOhaWsAAqV6c?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 18, 2020, 08:10:09 pm
In another stunning example of why the electoral college must go: 4 of the current justices have been appointed by presidents who lost the vote. If McConnell has is way, it will be 5.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 18, 2020, 08:12:47 pm
McConnell will have his way. this was his alliance with trump the entire time. the chances of getting 4 republican senators from doing the right thing... is basically zero..

if somehow... a vote is delayed. this is the catalyst to get trump a 2nd term. his voter base is MASSIVELY getting off on this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 18, 2020, 08:25:56 pm
Disagree, method. Trump's base is already whipped up about him dismantling the Jewish ped0phile ring that controls the world. The base will follow him into a nuclear holocaust, but it's not going to grow past 43-44%.

Anything that increases turnout helps Biden. That's why the R's are working so hard to suppress it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 18, 2020, 09:11:36 pm
Disagree, method. Trump's base is already whipped up about him dismantling the Jewish ped0phile ring that controls the world. The base will follow him into a nuclear holocaust, but it's not going to grow past 43-44%.

Anything that increases turnout helps Biden. That's why the R's are working so hard to suppress it.

Tico,

I respect the **** out of your amazing way to communicate with people... be they folks that doing align with you politically, or on fantasy baseball0 Your command of the english language far exceeds me, I hope you are wrong... but here in FL i see 5:1 trump flags... and i live in the liberal part of hillsborough county....

STOP UNDERESTIMATING WHITE ANGER!

I know...  thats a shitty thing to say, but white anger is a real problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on September 18, 2020, 09:19:02 pm
Flags don't vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 18, 2020, 09:29:59 pm
Tico,

I respect the **** out of your amazing way to communicate with people... be they folks that doing align with you politically, or on fantasy baseball0 Your command of the english language far exceeds me, I hope you are wrong... but here in FL i see 5:1 trump flags... and i live in the liberal part of hillsborough county....

STOP UNDERESTIMATING WHITE ANGER!

I know...  thats a shitty thing to say, but white anger is a real problem.

I doubt many of the angry white guys were sitting on the sidelines and waiting for something like this to bring them back into play.  Trump supporters are well known and a pretty fixed number at this point. The voter base for Biden is more fluid and something like this is more likely to inspire them to vote for Biden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 18, 2020, 10:48:43 pm
Hate to be that guy, but Robert’s and Alito where nominated in Bush’s second term when he won 50.7% of the vote. Clinton and Trump’s nominees would be the only ones nominated without a plurality of the vote.

The Republicans will nominate and pass a Supreme Court justice to replace her because they suck. The Democrats will oppose the nominee because they suck. Both parties will argue the exact opposite of what they argued last election because principles don’t matter. Just hope for more of a Roberts appointment vs Cruz or any of the other Senate idiots.

The five year survival rate on pancreatic cancer is bad. RBG should have retired when Obama was President, but she didn’t want to. The sad thing is this country needs more RBG and Scalia’s that can argue their points and still be friends at the end of the day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 18, 2020, 10:50:43 pm
Clinton didn’t win a plurality? That must be the new math.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 18, 2020, 10:52:09 pm
Clinton didn’t win a plurality? That must be the new math.

Ok majority.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on September 18, 2020, 11:01:37 pm
Hate to be that guy, but Robert’s and Alito where nominated in Bush’s second term when he won 50.7% of the vote. Clinton and Trump’s nominees would be the only ones nominated without a plurality of the vote.

The Republicans will nominate and pass a Supreme Court justice to replace her because they suck. The Democrats will oppose the nominee because they suck. Both parties will argue the exact opposite of what they argued last election because principles don’t matter. Just hope for more of a Roberts appointment vs Cruz or any of the other Senate idiots.

The five year survival rate on pancreatic cancer is bad. RBG should have retired when Obama was President, but she didn’t want to. The sad thing is this country needs more RBG and Scalia’s that can argue their points and still be friends at the end of the day.

5 of the current Supreme Court justices were appointed by presidents who failed to get more votes than their opponent (GW Bush and Trump)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 19, 2020, 07:42:07 am
5 of the current Supreme Court justices were appointed by presidents who failed to get more votes than their opponent (GW Bush and Trump)

Both of Bush’s Supreme Court nominees happened in 2005. Bush was elected President in 2004 with 50.2% of the vote.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on September 19, 2020, 09:25:38 am
Both of Bush’s Supreme Court nominees happened in 2005. Bush was elected President in 2004 with 50.2% of the vote.



Bush would not have even been running in 2004 (certainly not as an incumbent) but for the Electoral College (and intervention by the Supreme Court) in 2000.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 19, 2020, 09:33:33 am
Bush would not have even been running in 2004 (certainly not as an incumbent) but for the Electoral College (and intervention by the Supreme Court) in 2000.
  Which is the spark that lit the most vicious division in America.  I went to bed with Bush declared the winner and Gore conceding to wake to the turmoil of the next day.  I wonder where we would be if Gore had just stuck with his concession or had simply asked for a complete Florida recount instead of cherrypicking the precincts he wanted recounted.  Had he done that, win or lose, I don't think the result would have been so bitter to either side.  Having the Supreme Court decide was not good for either of them. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 19, 2020, 10:37:41 am
Tico,

I respect the **** out of your amazing way to communicate with people... be they folks that doing align with you politically, or on fantasy baseball0 Your command of the english language far exceeds me, I hope you are wrong... but here in FL i see 5:1 trump flags... and i live in the liberal part of hillsborough county....

STOP UNDERESTIMATING WHITE ANGER!

I know...  thats a shitty thing to say, but white anger is a real problem.

method, I hear you here, and I do not in any way want to minimize this. And it's more than white anger. It's institutional racism and white supremacy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 19, 2020, 10:42:23 am
Both parties will argue the exact opposite of what they argued last election because principles don’t matter.

Hard disagree here. What McConnell did to Garland was craven. It was a brazen, flagrant rewriting of the rules to suit his political purposes.

D's are arguing that R's should now be consistent, as many pledged in the wake of McConnell's stunt. They're saying play by your own rules.

That is all. And that's *very* different than the "exact opposite of what they argued last election because principles don’t matter." It goes to the very heart of precedent, which our entire legal system is based on.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 19, 2020, 11:12:00 am
To all the fans of the electoral college and other gov't institutions that distort the value of individual votes: would sincerely like to hear your opinions on statehood for PR and DC.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 19, 2020, 11:34:13 am
On a related note, fun factoid of the day: did you know that 20% of the electorate controls the senate?

On one hand, there's the notion of ensuring that rural voices don't get completely drowned out.

And then on the other, there are longstanding gov't institutions that were designed when demographics were *wildly* different, and while it was ok to enslave black people and commit genocide against native peoples; and now those institutions are effectively tools of white supremacy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 19, 2020, 11:40:04 am
It’s probably time we get over our fetish for the “real Americans” - farmers and factory workers - who are a very small percentage of actual Americans.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 19, 2020, 04:06:16 pm
PR should be a state if they want to be one.
DC’s outside of the federal land should be returned to Maryland, just like part of it was returned to Virgina.

My issue with framing the Supreme Court in the manner Tico was, it is undermining the legitimacy of the Supreme Court. The court becomes illegitimate than it is easier for Democrats to argue to pack the court. The Supreme Court should be like an ump in baseball calling balls and strikes and not turned into Joe West and Angel Hernandez.

Hard disagree here. What McConnell did to Garland was craven. It was a brazen, flagrant rewriting of the rules to suit his political purposes.

D's are arguing that R's should now be consistent, as many pledged in the wake of McConnell's stunt. They're saying play by your own rules.

That is all. And that's *very* different than the "exact opposite of what they argued last election because principles don’t matter." It goes to the very heart of precedent, which our entire legal system is based on.


If the positions were reversed the Democrats would do exactly the same thing.  The executive and congressional branches are broken, let’s not try and break the last part of the federal government.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 19, 2020, 05:12:49 pm
If the positions were reversed the Democrats would do exactly the same thing.  The executive and congressional branches are broken, let’s not try and break the last part of the federal government.

Too late, the Supreme Court was broken by McConnell 4 years ago when he arbitrarily decided to not hold hearings for Garland. And the court system as a whole has been further broken by the continued appointment of unqualified judges over the last four years. Now they're acting in bad faith again and further politicizing the court by not following their own fake rule.

If this nomination gets confirmed before the election (and before inauguration if Biden wins), Democrats would be 100% justified in packing the court.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on September 19, 2020, 05:16:43 pm
PR should be a state if they want to be one.
DC’s outside of the federal land should be returned to Maryland, just like part of it was returned to Virgina.

My issue with framing the Supreme Court in the manner Tico was, it is undermining the legitimacy of the Supreme Court. The court becomes illegitimate than it is easier for Democrats to argue to pack the court. The Supreme Court should be like an ump in baseball calling balls and strikes and not turned into Joe West and Angel Hernandez.

If the positions were reversed the Democrats would do exactly the same thing.  The executive and congressional branches are broken, let’s not try and break the last part of the federal government.

Excuse my bluntness, but this is utter bullshit. Some people (especially Republicans and cynics) say this sort of thing (they all do it, they are all the same, etc) all the time and there is no basis for it. This was utterly unique and broke the sanctity of the appointment process. 

The Republicans in recent years have clearly demonstrated their complete disregard for institutional integrity and basic fairness (voter suppression anyone).  I have no problem condemning Democrats when they behave dishonorably (I fought the Daley machine in Chicago for decades), but the behavior of the Republican Party in recent years is like nothing I have seen in my lifetime.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 19, 2020, 05:26:31 pm
I wouldn't be shocked if Trump deferred offering a nominee.  His election chances are better if social conservatives see that they will get a conservative replacement for RBG only if Trump is reelected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 19, 2020, 08:12:30 pm
Pulling this over from the Today's Game topic...

RBG was such a mensch even that ill-tempered old fascist Scalia loved her.  But she really should have retired in 2015 and done the right thing for the country.

Well, McConnell would've pulled the same BS with that opening that he did with Scalia's seat. He would've found a way to justify not confirming a replacement in the last two years of the term because he cares about nothing but making sure Republicans have more power.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 19, 2020, 08:26:09 pm
Susan Collins becomes the first Republican senator to say they should wait to confirm a new Supreme Court justice until after the election.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-19/sen-collins-senate-shouldn-t-vote-on-nominee-before-election

As far as I can tell, though, she didn't go as far to say she'd definitely vote "no" on any nominee before the election. And if/when she loses in November, I wouldn't be surprised if she changed her mind in the lame duck period in December/January.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on September 19, 2020, 09:04:39 pm
Susan Collins becomes the first Republican senator to say they should wait to confirm a new Supreme Court justice until after the election.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-19/sen-collins-senate-shouldn-t-vote-on-nominee-before-election

As far as I can tell, though, she didn't go as far to say she'd definitely vote "no" on any nominee before the election. And if/when she loses in November, I wouldn't be surprised if she changed her mind in the lame duck period in December/January.

Murkowski had already said she would not vote for a replacement until after the inauguration.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 19, 2020, 09:09:50 pm
Yeah, but that was a hypothetical statement yesterday afternoon before the news was announced.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 19, 2020, 09:31:03 pm
Excuse my bluntness, but this is utter bullshit. Some people (especially Republicans and cynics) say this sort of thing (they all do it, they are all the same, etc) all the time and there is no basis for it. This was utterly unique and broke the sanctity of the appointment process. 

The Republicans in recent years have clearly demonstrated their complete disregard for institutional integrity and basic fairness (voter suppression anyone).  I have no problem condemning Democrats when they behave dishonorably (I fought the Daley machine in Chicago for decades), but the behavior of the Republican Party in recent years is like nothing I have seen in my lifetime.

Republicans have decade long griefs with Democrats on the court confirmations.  Each party does the takes it up a notch as payback and we get to where we are now.  Democrats block a bush appointees, Republicans block more Obama appointments and Reid ends the filibuster on federal judiciary appointments. McConnell then applies it Supreme Court and Br thinks Democrats should pack the court.  While the current Republican Party is a mess, Democrats will over reach and then when Republicans get back in power and then the pack the more because the Democrats did it. 

Both parties have moved to their extremes, helped by rigging districts so that they are safe Republican and Democrat districts and now we can’t even pass a freaking budget anymore.  Hopefully Biden can bring some sanity back to Washington and get the parties working to do something worth while for America or we are truly 100% f***** as a nation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 19, 2020, 09:41:34 pm
I’d almost rather Trumpers were just honest about their views rather than spouting the above false equivalency bullshlt.  That’s actually more damaging.

Mitch will schedule a vote after the election to protect his vulnerable members. I guarantee you four Republicans won’t vote to block a nomination under that scenario.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 20, 2020, 09:58:15 am
This will be the 4th time I haven’t voted for Trump in November so nice try. It is nice to know that you think your political side is perfect and has no responsibility for the current situation in the country.

Trump is 100% a Republican problem. The lack of functional government is a Democrat/Republican problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on September 20, 2020, 10:41:33 am
While I agree with CubBluejays that both parties are to blame for our dysfunctional government, I wholeheartedly agree with Ron's statement:

"The Republicans in recent years have clearly demonstrated their complete disregard for institutional integrity and basic fairness (voter suppression anyone).  I have no problem condemning Democrats when they behave dishonorably (I fought the Daley machine in Chicago for decades), but the behavior of the Republican Party in recent years is like nothing I have seen in my lifetime."

Republicans in the Senate who have enabled this horrific excused for a "President" should be ashamed.  History will judge them most harshly!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on September 21, 2020, 06:25:12 pm
I’m curious about this.


The US Constitution doesn’t set a number justices that serve on the court and leaves that up to the Senate. Instead of expanding the court if republicans succeed in sitting another conservative justice they reduce the number if they win back the senate.

Than a president Biden could reappoint all justices, is that possible?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 21, 2020, 06:36:50 pm
I think the Constitution sets that a Justice is for life unless impeached.   I recall that FDR's effort to pack the Court didn't go well.  The idea of packing the Court by either party is counter-productive because the next party in power can just undo everything.  It would become a silly circus.   I think the Republicans are making a serious mistake on trying to get somebody now before the election; the voters could be negative about that.  I think the Democrats packing the court threat is equaling ill advised because that gives all those pro-life and Court appointments voters rise to vote for Republican Senators.   

I think we should wait and see who Trump nominates.  Even a blind pig can find an acorn.   The Republicans have 5 weeks to the election; they have 12 weeks after the election.  If the election goes as badly for them as I think, they can still push something through lame duck.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 21, 2020, 07:04:49 pm
I’m curious about this.


The US Constitution doesn’t set a number justices that serve on the court and leaves that up to the Senate. Instead of expanding the court if republicans succeed in sitting another conservative justice they reduce the number if they win back the senate.

Than a president Biden could reappoint all justices, is that possible?

No, he can't replace and reappoint.  But the constitution says nothing about the number of justices, and it fact that number has already been changed extra-constitutionally several times.  If indeed Moscow Mitch manages to hold together enough votes and ram through a confirmation (no doubt after election day) and the Ds win control of the WH and Senate, expect a serious push to increase the court to 11.  Even small-c conservative Dems seem to be coming around to the idea.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 21, 2020, 07:29:51 pm
I'd even expect a push to 13 to give the Democrats control. An 11 justice court would still have the conservative side with a 6-5 advantage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 22, 2020, 04:05:28 pm
Republicans: why do we have to protect minorities?

Also Republicans: the Electoral College and Senate are awesome!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 22, 2020, 04:09:07 pm
Did you know that WY voters are effectively 40x more powerful than NY voters as it relates to the Senate?

Can you imagine the conservative outcry that would follow racial minorities enjoying that level of benefit from affirmative action?

It's pretty clear that Republicans aren't against minority protections. They're against minority protections for non-white peoples and systems.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on September 22, 2020, 06:36:28 pm
Did you know that WY voters are effectively 40x more powerful than NY voters as it relates to the Senate?

Can you imagine the conservative outcry that would follow racial minorities enjoying that level of benefit from affirmative action?

It's pretty clear that Republicans aren't against minority protections. They're against minority protections for non-white peoples and systems.

even though New York contributes way more
Federal Taxes Paid by State
2   New York   $140,510,002
50   Wyoming   $3,084,085
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 22, 2020, 07:37:16 pm
How much do each receive from the federal government?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 22, 2020, 07:56:30 pm
Also Republicans: the Electoral College and Senate are awesome!

It really is such a weird position that they take. They like the Electoral College because they're scared of a few high population states overwhelming the vote from 45 other states*. But at the same time, they love that there are only about 5 states that candidates really need to worry about in any presidential election (this year, it's Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, and maybe Michigan). Sure, there are others that could flip (North Carolina, Georgia, Texas).  But if those go, Democrats are just running up the margin.

It's almost like they don't actually care about having a few states overwhelm the rest of the electorate. It's just that it really bothers them when New York and California specifically have a lot of power.

* And as many have said, this is such a weird way to look at the electorate. Individuals vote, not states...so as long as each person gets one vote, no one's vote is getting over-weighted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 22, 2020, 08:06:57 pm
How much do each receive from the federal government?

Wyoming has a net income of $670 per resident from the federal government.  New York has a net income of -$1,792 to the federal government.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on September 22, 2020, 08:23:11 pm
Rank   State   Federal Aid as % of State General Revenues
1   Montana   46.1%
2   Wyoming   44.5%
3   Louisiana   43.7%
4   Mississippi   43.3%
5   Arizona   43.1%
6   New Mexico   40.6%
7   Alaska   39.3%
8   Kentucky   38.9%
9   West Virginia   38.1%
10   Indiana   38.0%
11   Tennessee   37.7%
12   Missouri   37.7%
13   Arkansas   37.2%
14   Alabama   36.8%
15   New York   35.9%
16   Pennsylvania   35.0%
17   South Dakota   34.8%
18   Georgia   34.3%
19   Maine   34.3%
20   Ohio   33.9%
21   Oklahoma   33.8%
22   New Hampshire   33.2%
23   Michigan   33.1%
24   Vermont   33.0%
25   Rhode Island   32.8%
26   Oregon   32.8%
27   Florida   32.8%
28   Texas   32.6%
29   Nevada   32.6%
30   South Carolina   31.9%
31   Maryland   31.2%
32   Nebraska   30.9%
33   Idaho   30.7%
34   California   30.7%
35   North Carolina   30.5%
36   Colorado   30.0%
37   Iowa   29.4%
38   Washington   29.2%
39   Massachusetts   28.7%
40   New Jersey   28.7%
41   Illinois   28.5%
42   Delaware   28.1%
43   Connecticut   27.0%
44   North Dakota   26.8%
45   Wisconsin   26.3%
46   Minnesota   26.0%
47   Utah   24.2%
48   Kansas   23.3%
49   Virginia   21.1%
50   Hawaii   20.7%
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 22, 2020, 08:41:09 pm
https://taxfoundation.org/states-rely-most-federal-aid/

The percentage of the state budget that comes from the federal government.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/federal-taxes-federal-services-difference-by-state-2019-1%3famp

Per capita what is paid back received.

Maybe there was a reason America was set up as a republic and not a democracy.

The Supreme Court hasn’t changed in number since 1869. Most of the changes in the number where because of expansion. Of the United States and additional court of appeals. The court has been packed 1 time and that was durning the Civil War. It is a bad idea.  Continued escalation between the parties in going to end poorly for the US. Hopefully someday some adults will actually be in positions of power.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 22, 2020, 08:44:05 pm
If the Rs steal another seat the Ds have no choice but to do it.  Unilateral disarmament has been a losing strategy for them and thus, for the country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 22, 2020, 08:45:17 pm
Cause Republicans will never come back in power and the escalate things more.  MERICA!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 22, 2020, 08:52:06 pm
Yup, just them them run amok and trash the place.  At least we'll have the moral high ground to view the smoldering ruins!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 22, 2020, 10:09:14 pm
Maybe it changes if the Democrats actually did take the high ground for once, because they have never tried it before.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 22, 2020, 11:17:58 pm
Like I said - false equivalency mythology is worse than overt Trumpism.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 23, 2020, 09:25:55 am
A possible wrinkle in the kerfuffle to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by the death of RBG:

The senate race in Arizona is a special election to fill the remaining term of the late John McCain.  If Mark Kelly, who has held a steady lead in the polls and was just endorsed by McCain’s widow, Cindy, defeats appointee Martha McSally, he could take office as soon as the November 3 election results are certified.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 23, 2020, 09:42:07 am
How much do each receive from the federal government?

The states that put more into the federal govt than they get back on a per capita basis are overwhelmingly blue: CA, NJ, CT, MA, IL, NY, NH, etc.

In a world where WY voters are 40x more enfranchised than NY voters, and NY puts in more money than they get out, are they supposed to dump some tea into the harbor?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 23, 2020, 01:09:19 pm
If I'm understanding the news correctly, the only officer charged in relation to Breonna Taylor's death is being charged with wanton endangerment for the fact that the rounds he shot that killed Taylor happened to endanger her *neighbors.*

Nevermind the "endangerment" of Taylor.

No charges whatsoever in relation to Taylor herself.

Unbelievable.

Cops can erroneously break into your home based on trumped up charges and kill you without consequence, as long as you don't have any neighbors nearby.

Burn it all to the ground.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 23, 2020, 01:39:36 pm
Where do you get "erroneously"?  What I heard was that the Grand Jury said the officers had a warrant and a right to be there and returned fire.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on September 23, 2020, 03:04:03 pm
Nobody from inside the house shot a weapon first and cops got around Castle Doctrine by...

It was the cops who had "one" witness to back their story of announcing their presence before they did a no-knock murder.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 23, 2020, 03:28:14 pm
Otto, that is media and Black Lives Matter speculation.  The Grand Jury, reviewing actual evidence, determined otherwise.  Just  another case of our losing trust in processes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on September 23, 2020, 04:39:16 pm
Well CurtOne


Don't you find it a bit curious that the cops executing a no-knock warrant for drugs in the middle of the night found a witness to say they announced that no-knock execution. Fired at least 10 shots with 6 hitting Breonna Taylor who was sleeping. In addition to that, fail to render any medical help and not ID her until days later.


It all smells....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 23, 2020, 06:15:25 pm
Where do you get "erroneously"?  What I heard was that the Grand Jury said the officers had a warrant and a right to be there and returned fire.

The original premise for issuing the no-knock warrant was the suggestion that a suspect in a drug investigation was receiving packages at Taylor’s house. In the warrant filing, the police claimed this was verified by the US Postal Inspector in Louisville. The Louisville Postal Inspector said the police account was wrong, and that no packages of interest were ever received at Taylor’s house.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 27, 2020, 12:55:07 am
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_cd61f114-0f5c-44c1-b985-cd8efb0cd6a2.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=300)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 27, 2020, 09:16:16 am
This is very normal stuff from the President of the United States (aka the King of Projection).  The fact that this lunatic is going to get 50M+ votes just shows how powerful the cult of white supremacy is in this country.

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) Tweeted:
I will be strongly demanding a Drug Test of Sleepy Joe Biden prior to, or after, the Debate on Tuesday night. Naturally, I will agree to take one also. His Debate performances have been record setting UNEVEN, to put it mildly. Only drugs could have caused this discrepancy???
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 27, 2020, 06:15:30 pm
The New York Times has reported that they've seen Trump's tax records, and they're pretty much exactly what you'd expect:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/09/27/us/donald-trump-taxes.html?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 27, 2020, 06:18:56 pm
It’s probably not a good idea to have a president who has personally guaranteed about $500M in debt he can’t possibly repay. Creates some major conflicts and will create some perverse incentives.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 27, 2020, 06:53:18 pm
This scenario is becoming more and more likely:

Biden beats Trump in battleground states controlled by republicans who then replace the electors selected by the voters with electors who favor Trump.  The Democrats send their own slate of electors to Washington.   The dispute ends up in front of the Supreme Court where a few judges are faced with a choice of doing what they are told or voting their conscience.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 28, 2020, 05:03:26 pm
Like I said - false equivalency mythology is worse than overt Trumpism.

I’m not excusing Republican or Trump behavior. If I was fine with it, I’d be voting for Republicans in this election.  Saying the Democrats are blameless and aren’t part of the problem is just being a biased partisan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 28, 2020, 06:03:00 pm
The Democrats aren't blameless.  I actually think one should be suspicious of anyone who actually wants to be elected to higher office.  That said, the scale of Appalling Behavior by Politicians has tipped so far to the Republican party over the past several years that it's almost not worth the breath to make the point that the Democrats aren't blameless.  At this point, it's like complaining your neighbor on one side hasn't returned your edge trimmer when the neighbor on the other side killed your dog, **** in your kitchen sink, and sold your child into slavery.

It's not just Trump.  The whole lot of them had ample opportunity to stand up to his disgusting behavior and chose time and again to take a pass.  I don't have any special affiliation for the Democratic party, but I sure as hell hope a whole shitload of Republicans get voted out.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 28, 2020, 06:08:27 pm
The Democrats aren't blameless.  I actually think one should be suspicious of anyone who actually wants to be elected to higher office.  That said, the scale of Appalling Behavior by Politicians has tipped so far to the Republican party over the past several years that it's almost not worth the breath to make the point that the Democrats aren't blameless.  At this point, it's like complaining your neighbor on one side hasn't returned your edge trimmer when the neighbor on the other side killed your dog, **** in your kitchen sink, and sold your child into slavery.

It's not just Trump.  The whole lot of them had ample opportunity to stand up to his disgusting behavior and chose time and again to take a pass.  I don't have any special affiliation for the Democratic party, but I sure as hell hope a whole shitload of Republicans get voted out.

Early leader for post of the month.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on September 28, 2020, 07:28:28 pm
Both sides are absolute garbage. Utterly despicable...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 29, 2020, 11:22:33 am
Please describe how it is that Biden merits the same descriptors as Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 29, 2020, 02:27:42 pm
"All my neighbors suck."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on September 29, 2020, 09:28:03 pm
During the debate, when Trump was asked if he would condemn white supremacy and right wing militias who are causing problems at protests, he didn't do it. The best he could do was tell the proud boys to "stand by." The two sides aren't the same.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 29, 2020, 11:17:57 pm
I can feel America's humiliation from 6K miles away.  What a shltshow.  Even after this sociopath is dragged screaming from the White House and into prison, America will never live this down.  And we don't deserve to.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 30, 2020, 12:16:02 am
Andrew Yang made an astute comment what Trump accomplished tonight:

Down ballot republicans will be hurt by the debacle and could give control of the senate to the Democrats
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 30, 2020, 01:30:27 am
Control of the senate is going to be totally dependent on how successful Trump is at stealing the election. There just isn't enough ticket splitting these days for the Rs to keep the senate if they lose the White House - they're vulnerable in too many races.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 30, 2020, 09:36:52 am
Senate races and other contests down the ballot will be affected by republicans who can no longer support the Liar-in-chief and simply stay home.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 30, 2020, 10:48:44 am
I was struggling with what I was going to do in the House of Representative race in my district.  In 2016 I voted for Don Bacon, voting for him wasn't option this year.  Kara Eastman is well to the left of what I would be comfortable voting for and she was the reason I voted for Bacon last time.  I've been struggling with voting for a Libertarian or Eastman and the Proud Boy comment just assured that I need to vote for Eastman even if I don't like her at all.  Luckily my mail in ballot arrived yesterday so I'm going to will it out and drop it off so I can't change my mind.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on September 30, 2020, 11:11:50 am
I was struggling with what I was going to do in the House of Representative race in my district.  In 2016 I voted for Don Bacon, voting for him wasn't option this year.  Kara Eastman is well to the left of what I would be comfortable voting for and she was the reason I voted for Bacon last time.  I've been struggling with voting for a Libertarian or Eastman and the Proud Boy comment just assured that I need to vote for Eastman even if I don't like her at all.  Luckily my mail in ballot arrived yesterday so I'm going to will it out and drop it off so I can't change my mind.


Letter to the editor in this morning's paper:


Exercise your right to vote

About 40% of eligible voters did not vote in 2016. That means that four in 10 voters left it up to the other six to determine who would run our country. You have to vote! You can't just abstain because you don't like either candidate, because that leaves it up to other people to make the decision for you.

Think of it this way: A vote for one candidate is a vote against the other one. Hold your nose while you cast your ballot if you have to, but vote for the person you dislike the least. Sometimes you have to choose between the lesser of two evils, if you will.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on September 30, 2020, 11:33:14 am
That kind of thinking is what got us Trump in the first place...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on September 30, 2020, 12:16:22 pm
Quote
That kind of thinking is what got us Trump in the first place...

Yes, but it's also a product of stupid people watching and believing Fox News.  And Facebook.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on September 30, 2020, 12:32:02 pm
and all of the members of the house and senate...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 30, 2020, 02:55:47 pm
People like to think of voting like you are getting married... its more like  being on public transit. Just because there isnt a bus that gets you to your destination doesnt mean you just stay at home. you take the one that gets you closest to where you want to go, and work it out from there.

Is trump that person for you? i hope more people answer no to that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 30, 2020, 03:49:13 pm
People like to think of voting like you are getting married... its more like  being on public transit. Just because there isnt a bus that gets you to your destination doesnt mean you just stay at home. you take the one that gets you closest to where you want to go, and work it out from there.

Is trump that person for you? i hope more people answer no to that.

I really don't think that works for conservatives. 

I'm going to agree a lot more with Republicans and Trump on issues than I am going to with any of the Democrats.  The issue has to be that Trump is a line that cannot, should not be crossed. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2020, 12:04:55 am
NBC just announced that Trump has tested positive for Covid-19.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2020, 01:35:08 am
This can only help him politically.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 02, 2020, 02:09:48 am
this is batshit crazy. insane story unfolding. potential for MASSIVE spread within COVID-negligent WH
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2020, 03:22:43 am
this is batshit crazy. insane story unfolding. potential for MASSIVE spread within COVID-negligent WH

If it isn’t all a scam.

If indeed they actually have it, better hope Biden didn’t catch it too - Trump was screaming at him for 90 minutes in an enclosed space.  And despite being told to be the Cleveland Clinic, his entourage all refused to put masks on so who knows how many people they infected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2020, 08:36:30 am
White House officials knew Hicks tested positive -- but Trump still traveled for a fundraiser

Quote
As the nation reacts to the news of President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump’s coronavirus diagnoses, some are also raising questions about the administration’s handling of the situation after top Trump aide Hope Hicks confirmed that she had tested positive.

A small group of White House officials knew by Thursday morning that Hicks had contracted Covid-19, according to CNN Correspondent Kaitlan Collins -- but Trump still took a trip to New Jersey for a fundraiser, and press secretary Kayleigh McEnany still held a news briefing at the White House on Thursday.

McEnany didn't wear a mask at the briefing, and made no mention of Hicks' diagnosis to reporters in the room, Collins said.

https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/coronavirus-pandemic-10-02-20-intl/h_da0bc1f63ac9a7ab1e5ea0a4135723b7
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2020, 09:24:40 am
There has also been zero contact between the White House and the Biden team regarding possible exposure.  These people really are the scum of the Earth.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 02, 2020, 09:32:06 am
His doctor released a letter saying he tested positive, so it isn't a scam.

RNC chair Ronna McDaniel also tested positive. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 02, 2020, 10:34:11 am
This woman ran for Nancy Pelosi's seat, but lost in the Republican primary. I don't think she realized she was pointing out how stupid many Republicans are for not taking the virus seriously.

DeAnna Lorraine @DeAnna4Congress
Does anyone else find it odd that no prominent Democrats have had the virus but the list of Republicans goes on and on?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2020, 10:53:45 am
This woman ran for Nancy Pelosi's seat, but lost in the Republican primary. I don't think she realized she was pointing out how stupid many Republicans are for not taking the virus seriously.

DeAnna Lorraine @DeAnna4Congress
Does anyone else find it odd that no prominent Democrats have had the virus but the list of Republicans goes on and on?

That and not wanting to look like some kind of wimp by not wearing a mask like their fearless leader set with his example.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 02, 2020, 11:09:38 am
Utah Senator Mike Lee has tested positive after visiting the White House a few days ago.

This is starting to look like a Cardinals-style outbreak. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 02, 2020, 11:14:22 am
I refuse to give the Cardinals credit for this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2020, 11:33:01 am
Not out of the realm of possibility:

D Trump and M Pence (so far still negative) need to be hospitalized and Nancy Pelosi becomes acting president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 02, 2020, 12:18:26 pm
Will trump be taking hydroxychloroquine and or drinking bleach now he has covid?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 02, 2020, 12:32:11 pm
Shocking news about the malaria sh!t not working.  Shocking news about his taxes.  Shocking about his behavior at the debate.  Not sure how much more shocks I can handle.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 02, 2020, 02:43:38 pm
Trump hasn't tweeted in 14 hours, and his last tweet was probably written by someone else. How likely is it that he wouldn't say "China virus" in this announcement?

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Tonight, @FLOTUS and I tested positive for COVID-19. We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately. We will get through this TOGETHER!


It has also been reported that Mike Pence filled in for him on a conference call with governors earlier this afternoon even though the invitations sent out this morning said Trump will be on the call. It's out of character for him to go completely silent like this--even if he was just resting and skipped his meeting, you'd think he would've had a Twitter rant or two by now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 02, 2020, 02:46:57 pm
Trump hasn't tweeted in 14 hours, and his last tweet was probably written by someone else. How likely is it that he wouldn't say "China virus" in this announcement?

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Tonight, @FLOTUS and I tested positive for COVID-19. We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately. We will get through this TOGETHER!


It has also been reported that Mike Pence filled in for him on a conference call with governors earlier this afternoon even though the invitations sent out this morning said Trump will be on the call. It's out of character for him to go completely silent like this--even if he was just resting and skipped his meeting, you'd think he would've had a Twitter rant or two by now.

This is very interesting if true.

@DrEricDing: Breaking—Nancy Pelosi has just been contacted by the White House on the protocols of continuity of government, according to MSNBC.

Pelosi also tested for #COVID19. Results pending. 

Getting serious folks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 02, 2020, 03:15:17 pm
Pelosi tested negative.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 02, 2020, 03:17:10 pm
Trump being treated with a Regeneron antibody cocktail.  That seems concerning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 02, 2020, 04:20:21 pm
Breaking news during the commercial break before the last half inning of the season: Trump is on his way to Walter Reed for tests.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 02, 2020, 04:23:47 pm
Breaking news during the commercial break before the last half inning of the season: Trump is on his way to Walter Reed for tests.

He’ll be on a vent tonight
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 02, 2020, 04:34:25 pm
I guess it's not just a few tests for him. He's staying for a few days.

Kaitlan Collins @kaitlancollins
PER THE WHITE HOUSE: "Out of an abundance of caution, and at the recommendation of his physician and medical experts, the President will be working from the presidential offices at Walter Reed for the next few days."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 02, 2020, 04:36:11 pm
Much like Boris Johnson going to the ICU for precautionary reasons. President Trump is sick.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 02, 2020, 04:36:25 pm
I guess it's officially time for a 2021 thread?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 02, 2020, 04:48:04 pm
12 hours in and he’s getting sent to the hospital isn’t a great sign. The infection tends to worsen as times goes on.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 02, 2020, 05:03:20 pm
Maybe he’s just going back to get the second half of that physical.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2020, 05:09:46 pm
Reporters waiting to see if Trump waves to them and smiles as he walks out to Marine 1 on his way to Walter Reed or if he is not shown.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 02, 2020, 05:22:13 pm
Reporters waiting to see if Trump waves to them and smiles as he walks out to Marine 1 on his way to Walter Reed or if he is not shown.

He wasn’t shown. He must be in terrible shape. What a shame.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2020, 05:23:26 pm
Trump was not shown but we were told he walked out under his own power.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2020, 05:26:02 pm
Trump was not shown but we were told he walked out under his own power.
Video now shown but there was nothing remarkable about it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 02, 2020, 06:03:50 pm
Anyone gloating that he is suffering is a **** bag. He deserves it, but lets not drop to his level.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 02, 2020, 06:06:30 pm
Anyone gloating that he is suffering is a **** bag. He deserves it, but lets not drop to his level.

So, we are allowed to say he deserves this but we shouldn’t laugh about it?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 02, 2020, 06:07:08 pm
I hope he has a speedy recovery.  It's an awful disease particularly for his demographic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 02, 2020, 06:27:43 pm
So, we are allowed to say he deserves this but we shouldn’t laugh about it?

No you are expected to be a decent human being, and that means not gloating at any other human beings suffering.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 02, 2020, 06:30:30 pm
I agree with you method, but, not gloating, but on the other hand it's hard to feel sorry for someone who has poo-pooed the virus, and  could have saved lives by using and encouraging the wearing of masks earlier.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2020, 06:49:28 pm
I agree with you method, but, not gloating, but on the other hand it's hard to feel sorry for someone who has poo-pooed the virus, and  could have saved lives by using and encouraging the wearing of masks earlier.

Not to mention potentially infecting a roomful of people at the debate by ordering his family not to wear masks, and a hundred or more by attending a fundraiser after he knew Hicks was positive and he'd been exposed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2020, 06:50:31 pm
I agree with you method, but, not gloating, but on the other hand it's hard to feel sorry for someone who has poo-pooed the virus, and  could have saved lives by using and encouraging the wearing of masks earlier.
And, instead of using the power of the federal government, he setup a system where the 50 states had to compete against each other and the rest of the world for ventilators and other critical supplies.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2020, 07:09:57 pm
Chris Wallace said on Fox that Trump and his group arrived at the debate site late so that they wouldn't be tested.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 02, 2020, 07:51:36 pm
The military personnel around Trump without N95 masks on is frustrating.  Having his chief of staff on Marine 1 with a vented N95 mask is frustrating. 

I get to discharge a COVID patient tomorrow. This disease sucks and I wouldn’t wish it on anybody. I can be frustrated with how difficult President Trump has made my life and how reckless he has been, because t just like smokers that get lung cancer I still feel bad for them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 02, 2020, 07:55:08 pm
North Carolina Senator Tom Tillis is the latest to test positive for COVID.

He's already looking like he's going to get voted out, so being forced off the campaign trail won't help him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 02, 2020, 08:07:00 pm
Looking like the Supreme Court nominee’s introduction in the Rose Garden was a spreading event. Lee, Tillis, Trump, Hicks,
Notre Dame’s President all have tested positive. Was McDaniel and Hicks there as well?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 02, 2020, 09:12:22 pm
I'm generally opposed at gloating at the suffering of other people and do a pretty good job at avoiding it.  In the history of the world, however, there are few more compelling arguments for it than this one, for all the reasons mentioned previously.

Yes, Hicks was at the Rose Garden thing.  Karma.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 02, 2020, 09:21:47 pm
I'm generally opposed at gloating at the suffering of other people and do a pretty good job at avoiding it.  In the history of the world, however, there are few more compelling arguments for it than this one, for all the reasons mentioned previously.

Yes, Hicks was at the Rose Garden thing.  Karma.

Kellyanne Conway has it, too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 03, 2020, 09:56:36 am
Looking like the Supreme Court nominee’s introduction in the Rose Garden was a spreading event. Lee, Tillis, Trump, Hicks,
Notre Dame’s President all have tested positive. Was McDaniel and Hicks there as well?
Amy Coney Barrett has already had Covid-19.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 03, 2020, 10:39:01 am
Chris Christie now tests positive. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 03, 2020, 10:41:12 am
Chris Christie now tests positive.

It seems pretty unlikely that Mike Pence will avoid this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 03, 2020, 12:39:09 pm
Amy Coney Barrett has already had Covid-19.

The event itself seems to be where a lot of the spread happened, not that ACB actually spread it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 03, 2020, 12:49:55 pm
Man if I ever get COVID and have nothing more that a cough and a fever I’d like to get admitted to the hospital and get experimental phase 2 drugs and Remdesivir. 

Of course if I was a lot sicker than that it could be an actual option. The most telling part about the press conference is that Dr Conely wouldn’t answer if he was on steroids, because that would give away what his actual condition was. I could totally believe his current condition is off of oxygen and afebrile, but that doesn’t mean he is out of the woods either.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 03, 2020, 02:44:29 pm
Add Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson to the list.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 03, 2020, 03:15:22 pm
Add Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson to the list.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/488451-senators-introduce-rules-change-that-would-allow-for-remote-voting

Quote
Leadership, however, has shot down talk of allowing the Senate to vote remotely. Instead, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said they could lengthen votes and encouraged senators to conduct "social distancing."

It is now quite unlikely that Amy Coney Barrett could be confirmed before the November 3 election.

Thanks, Mitch
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 03, 2020, 04:09:22 pm
If the Republicans need their votes to get her confirmed, I still fully expect Murkowski and Collins to vote yes. Unless I missed it, all that they said was that they didn't think a new justice should be considered until after the election/inauguration. I never heard them say that they'd take affirmative action and vote "no" to make sure it didn't happen. 

If a vote happens and the Republicans are a vote or two short, Collins and/or Murkowski will vote yes. And then they'll come out and say something like "I didn't support going through the process for filling the seat. But since McConnell started the process and held the vote, I felt it was my duty to vote."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on October 03, 2020, 04:29:13 pm
Anyone gloating that he is suffering is a **** bag. He deserves it, but lets not drop to his level.

And how the left really feels...

Jack Birdbath -
Quote
Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
« Reply #29660 on: October 02, 2020, 05:42:34 pm »

I hope he dies. And he’ll deserve this awful suffocating death.

Jack Birdbath -
Quote
Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
« Reply #29662 on: October 02, 2020, 05:58:15 pm »

He’s one of the 5-10 worst people on earth.  We are all better with him gone.  Let’s hope it happens very very soon.

Real class act....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 03, 2020, 04:32:46 pm
The world is so much better without Trump that I hope he’s gone ASAP. The leading candidate to make this happen is COVID but I’ll take anything.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 03, 2020, 04:47:35 pm
I am pulling for Trump to make a speedy recovery.  And to lose big next month.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 03, 2020, 04:50:11 pm
I am pulling for Trump to make a speedy recovery.  And to lose big next month.

The downside to his death is that he misses a humiliating defeat and probable criminal prosecution. Maybe I should hope he lives.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 03, 2020, 06:48:53 pm
He could use his illness as a premise to resign and avoid being a "loser" (officially).

If Trump really did knowingly go to a fundraiser and possibly the debate after testing positive, as appears to be the case, that should be the headline in every story talking about this.  And if he survives he should design in (even more) disgrace.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 04, 2020, 04:54:50 pm
Trump risking the lives of the people in his security detail for another photo opp. He's Covid Positive in an enclosed car with 3 people for a 20 minute drive.

WTF?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 04, 2020, 04:56:22 pm
Love Facebook's hypocrisy on death treats. I can read treats about AOC and others being deported or killed all the time. A meme saying the same about donald immediately gets pulled down.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 04, 2020, 05:23:22 pm
treats?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 04, 2020, 05:29:48 pm
You just know he'll now say the virus is no big deal like he's claimed all along.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 04, 2020, 05:39:34 pm
treats?

Hey, it is October.

Trump being placed on a drug specifically recommended only for critical patients hardly jibes with the rosy picture his doctor is being ordered to present.  They’ve lied about literally everything since day one - why should this be any different?

If he does survive this, taking the “See? It’s no big deal” route is exactly the worst thing he could do politically.  If he were to humbly admit he hasn’t taken it seriously enough and say he knew better now (which of course he’s incapable of doing) he might score a few political points.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 04, 2020, 06:31:58 pm
Trump risking the lives of the people in his security detail for another photo opp. He's Covid Positive in an enclosed hermetically sealed car with 3 people for a 20 minute drive.

WTF?
Nothing can get in and anything already inside, says inside
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 04, 2020, 07:16:14 pm
None of the meds Trump has been on is for only critical patients. 

President Trump needing to on Dexamethasone just means at some point he was sick enough to need oxygen. He was likely never close to Needing to be in an ICU setting. Trump was sick. Trump likely would have been worse off if he wasn’t the President and he would have had to waited to get the meds he ended up receiving.  He could still face some long term issues from the infection.

Driving around in an SUV was just reckless and put the agents at more risk than they should have.  At least he was wearing a mask. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 04, 2020, 07:35:06 pm
None of the meds Trump has been on is for only critical patients. 

President Trump needing to on Dexamethasone just means at some point he was sick enough to need oxygen. He was likely never close to Needing to be in an ICU setting. Trump was sick. Trump likely would have been worse off if he wasn’t the President and he would have had to waited to get the meds he ended up receiving.  He could still face some long term issues from the infection.

Driving around in an SUV was just reckless and put the agents at more risk than they should have.  At least he was wearing a mask. 

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1312831268208488448?s=20
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 04, 2020, 08:32:22 pm
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2021436

Here’s the actual study that he is tweeting about.

Improvement in mortality is better with patients that required intubation, but it still exists with patients that needed oxygen.  Dexamethasone is being given to patients that just need oxygen, so just being on it doesn’t mean he is critical.

All I feel comfortable saying is that he is sick and likely improved from Friday. The doctor in the linked tweet was speculating that he was headed to the ICU and had a 1/3 chance of a fatality. Based off information being released that seems to be reckless because there is just too much we don’t about his situation to make any judgements like that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 05, 2020, 12:38:26 am
Trump’s Treatment Suggests Severe Covid-19, Medical Experts Say

Many of the measures cited by his doctors are reserved for patients severely affected by the coronavirus.

Quote
The president’s medical team also said that he had been prescribed dexamethasone on Saturday. The drug is a steroid used to head off an immune system overreaction that kills many Covid-19 patients.

The drug is reserved for those with severe illness, because it has not been shown to benefit those with milder forms of the disease and may even be risky.


Please read the entire article.  It asks and answers many questions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/04/health/trump-covid-treatment.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 05, 2020, 01:11:02 am
Man, there are some salty comments by former secret service officers out there right now.  Even by Trump standards that practice funeral motorcade was incredibly narcissistic and cruel.  I have little sympathy for someone who chooses to work for him, but his secret service and marine escorts and pilots have no choice in the matter.

I wonder - is there simply no one in Trump's circle willing to tell him something like that is a terrible idea?  Or are they so far gone they can't see it's a terrible idea? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 05, 2020, 09:38:55 am
Lisa Tozzi
@lisatozzi
They are driving him around to get him to stop screaming and fall asleep.

It apparently the same people that thought gassing protesters and holding a bible upside down was a good idea.

I feel sympathy for Dr. Conely.  He's a miltary physician and getting the presidential detail is likely as good of a gig as there is.  Having to deal with a patient that thinks he has all the answers and is your boss at the same time can't be fun or rewarding.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 05, 2020, 09:59:25 am
Lisa Tozzi
@lisatozzi
They are driving him around to get him to stop screaming and fall asleep.

It apparently the same people that thought gassing protesters and holding a bible upside down was a good idea.

I feel sympathy for Dr. Conely.  He's a miltary physician and getting the presidential detail is likely as good of a gig as there is.  Having to deal with a patient that thinks he has all the answers and is your boss at the same time can't be fun or rewarding.

It’s hard to feel too bad for him. He’s the latest in a long line of people who have thrown away their integrity and credibility in service of criminal. Access to power is intoxicating, I guess.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 05, 2020, 10:10:31 am
It’s hard to feel too bad for him. He’s the latest in a long line of people who have thrown away their integrity and credibility in service of criminal. Access to power is intoxicating, I guess.

Not that I don't agree with you, but

Dr Conley is a Navy Commander.  As a member of the military, he is obligated to do what the commander-in chief orders.

So, to obey, or not to obey? It depends on the order. Military members disobey orders at their own risk. They also obey orders at their own risk. An order to commit a crime is unlawful. An order to perform a military duty, no matter how dangerous, is lawful as long as it doesn't involve the commission of a crime.

I'll leave it to the lawyers to determine the legality of what he was told to do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 05, 2020, 10:16:29 am
Not that I don't agree with you, but

Dr Conley is a Navy Commander.  As a member of the military, he is obligated to do what the commander-in chief orders.

So, to obey, or not to obey? It depends on the order. Military members disobey orders at their own risk. They also obey orders at their own risk. An order to commit a crime is unlawful. An order to perform a military duty, no matter how dangerous, is lawful as long as it doesn't involve the commission of a crime.

I'll leave it to the lawyers to determine the legality of what he was told to do.

I think doctors can disobey orders if there is medical reason to do so.  The question I have is what if President Trump throws a temper tantrum and wants Dr. Conley fired.  What happens to his career then?  Dr. Conley gave up money to join the military instead of going into private practice.  I have no idea how it is determined who becomes the presidential physician.  Maybe it something you have to apply and interview for or maybe it something you get chosen to do.  I can't imagine a dollar amount large enough to get me to want to be President Trump's doctor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 05, 2020, 10:31:58 am
President's press secretary Kaleigh McEnany has tested positive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 05, 2020, 11:01:28 am
I think doctors can disobey orders if there is medical reason to do so.  The question I have is what if President Trump throws a temper tantrum and wants Dr. Conley fired.  What happens to his career then?  Dr. Conley gave up money to join the military instead of going into private practice.  I have no idea how it is determined who becomes the presidential physician.  Maybe it something you have to apply and interview for or maybe it something you get chosen to do.  I can't imagine a dollar amount large enough to get me to want to be President Trump's doctor.

I bet he was recommended/endorsed by Ronny Jackson, the prior WH physician and one of history’s biggest quacks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 05, 2020, 11:54:59 am
I thought this might be an appropriate time to repeat a July 1 article written by Gordon Wittenmyer.  It should have been required reading for any White House employee.

Cubs pitching coach Tommy Hottovy revealed Wednesday morning on 670 The Score that he contracted COVID-19 last month and experienced severe symptoms before eventually testing negative 30 days after his diagnosis.


“I got crushed,” Hottovy, 38, said of symptoms that included six consecutive days of 100-plus temperatures and breathing difficulties that reached serious enough levels he was hospitalized 12 days into the ordeal.

He said he lost 18 pounds during that month and that even now, 45 days later, “just the lung capacity, the shortness of breath, the cardiovascular [fitness], I’m nowhere near [normal].”

Hottovy said he’s not sure where he contracted the virus, that he “masked up” and took precautions when leaving the house and that those he has been in close contact with regularly have all tested negative — including his wife and kids, “by the grace of God,” he said.

The coach continued Zoom calls with his pitchers through much of the process, at one point having enough trouble conducting business that manager David Ross had to take over, he said.

Hottovy said he thinks it helped to share his experiences with his players during the ordeal.

“I do think at the onset, it was frightening to a lot of guys,” he said, adding that being there to answer their questions seemed to help — and that he sees value in that going forward as well.

“I do think it’s important to be around … to be a resource,” he said.

He admitted he briefly considered opting out of participating in the planned 60-game season.

He said his emotional reaction at times during the worst days of the symptoms was “almost like depression” and said he dealt with bouts of blaming himself for bringing the virus into his home and exposing his family.

The Cubs and other teams around baseball are in the midst of intake testing of players and staff this week with Summer Camp scheduled to begin Friday and the two-month season to start about three weeks later.

“I’m extremely excited to be back with these guys and be supportive,” Hottovy said and suggested patience and a cautious approach to the process of keeping personnel safe while trying to conduct a season. “We’re going to make the best decisions during this process we can, but we really have to be flexible and mobile through this.”




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 05, 2020, 12:02:22 pm
President's press secretary Kaleigh McEnany has tested positive.
And two of her top aides.  Since knowing she had been exposed, she conducted a press briefing without wearing a mask.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 05, 2020, 12:11:12 pm
CNN commentator

"How is Vice President Pence not quarantined?"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 05, 2020, 12:15:22 pm
Windsor Mann
@WindsorMann
The Trump COVID policy: “Don’t mask, don’t tell.”

I bet he was recommended/endorsed by Ronny Jackson, the prior WH physician and one of history’s biggest quacks.

All I can see is that they are picked by the President.  Dr. Jackson started in the White House Medical Core in 2006 and was appointment Presidental Physican by President Obama.  Dr. Conley was in Afganistan and the was the Research Directed of the Portsmouth ER residency program prior to replacing Dr. Jackson.  They don't have any obvious career path intersections from what I can tell.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 05, 2020, 03:16:26 pm
That briefing could not have done much for Dr. Conley’s reputation. There was a lot of idiocy in there but the coup de grace was suggesting that we “look at the tweets” as a gauge of trump’s mental fitness.  Unless he was subtly telling us that the president is insane and unfit for anything, that was not a great comment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 05, 2020, 04:02:20 pm
Not sure if this is true, but British news suggests Conley was "handpicked" by Jackson:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8806599/How-naval-osteopath-handpicked-without-vetting-Trumps-doctor.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 05, 2020, 04:40:36 pm
Not sure if this is true, but British news suggests Conley was "handpicked" by Jackson:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8806599/How-naval-osteopath-handpicked-without-vetting-Trumps-doctor.html

The Daily Mail is closer to the National Enquirer.  I had to do some digging, but it appears NBC had a report in May that Dr. Conely was picked by Dr. Jackson from 2 anonymous sources in the Medical Unit.  I have no idea if Dr. Conely is good at his job.  He did things I wouldn't have done, but if I was in his situation I can't really say what I would have chosen to do either.  Some of the criticism about the press conferences are self inflicted errors, some of it may be what Trump is allowing him to say do to HIPAA. Attacks on him because he is a DO are lame though.  Joe Biden's doctor is also a DO.   

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 05, 2020, 06:13:11 pm
As soon as he got back to the White House, he takes off his mask. What a ridiculous person.

https://twitter.com/Acosta/status/1313254795172614144

His breathing appears to be very labored in that video, by the way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 05, 2020, 06:36:00 pm
When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you do is stop digging.   Not Donald Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 05, 2020, 06:36:33 pm
"What a ridiculous person" is about the kindest possible take I can imagine...

The WH staff has to be beside themselves.  There's no way he self-quarantines.  Hell, I expect him to be holding rallies without a mask within a week.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 05, 2020, 06:48:16 pm
He’s going to have to move on to something a lot stronger than adderall.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 05, 2020, 06:52:33 pm
As soon as he got back to the White House, he takes off his mask. What a ridiculous person.

https://twitter.com/Acosta/status/1313254795172614144

His breathing appears to be very labored in that video, by the way.
Perhaps not surprising for a mildly obese man after walking up those steps.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 05, 2020, 07:06:44 pm
He’s going to have to move on to something a lot stronger than adderall.

He already is, the steroids.  They're dangerous AF and you're not supposed to take them for more than a few days, but they're likely the only reason he can walk at the moment.  He may just order Conely to keep dosing him through the election and damn the consequences.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 05, 2020, 07:24:35 pm
The course for COVID is 10 days of Dexamethasone 6 mg. They effect everyone differently, but I have trouble on lower dose of corticosteroids.

He’s definitely need not out danger zone and I’d be really interested into what his CT showed.

The White House is going to need a lot of Lysol and Clorox wipes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 05, 2020, 07:54:56 pm
He already is, the steroids.  They're dangerous AF and you're not supposed to take them for more than a few days, but they're likely the only reason he can walk at the moment.  He may just order Conely to keep dosing him through the election and damn the consequences.

I’m thinking more like meth.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 05, 2020, 08:38:30 pm
I’m thinking more like meth.

I'm sure Don. Jr. has a connection there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 05, 2020, 11:06:05 pm
A reality star and a showman, I sure hope this isn't some desperation publicity stunt by Uncle Donald.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 05, 2020, 11:28:32 pm
Wait, you think there's any chance it's not?

Even if he's fully recovered (which he's not) he's still a walking biohazard, spreading the virus everywhere.

Takes off his mask as soon as he gets to the White House.

Is shown chest-heaving-for-breath, standing out on the balcony trying to create his ultimate dictator moment.

The obnoxious, Jack-Bauer-style footage of him getting off the chopper, entering the White House, saluting from the balcony, all set to the most melodramatic score ever.

Am I missing the sarcasm in your post? Because there's no question this is a publicity stunt. Just like his COVID-drive-by yesterday.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 05, 2020, 11:29:18 pm
I think he means the whole COVID-19 positive could be a publicity stunt.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 05, 2020, 11:38:14 pm
Cannot believe Trump's "don't let COVID dominate you" message.

Apparently the 215K dead just weren't winners like Trump. They let the virus grab them by the p u s s y. They were probably asking for it.

Also, what kind of deranged messaging are they testing with the "I'm a leader so I had to get sick with the virus" bullshit?

It's all a huge death cult.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 06, 2020, 11:24:40 am
The HHS secretary met with these people.

https://gbdeclaration.org/

Roughly half of the US population is at risk, so this will work great.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 06, 2020, 01:07:27 pm
The HHS secretary met with these people.

https://gbdeclaration.org/

Roughly half of the US population is at risk, so this will work great.



In case anyone needs clarification of this post:


The HHS secretary is Alex Azar.

Quote
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called for HHS Secretary Alex Azar on Tuesday to resign immediately as Democrats investigate whether Trump administration appointees meddled with coronavirus reports from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"The secretary of Health and Human Services, Alex Azar, has not only failed to push back against these outrageous moves by President Trump, he has been almost entirely silent about the chaos and mismanagement in his own agency," Schumer said on the Senate floor. "In Trump's administration, the most important skill is the ability to stand up to the president and resist political influence."

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/15/chuck-schumer-calls-for-hhs-secretary-alex-azar-to-resign-immediately.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 06, 2020, 02:55:43 pm
He's just so stupid and really bad at politics. He's shutting down any talk of a COVID stimulus--something that is popular with a large majority of Americans--and telling the Senate to focus on confirming Amy Coney Barrett (which is unpopular with more than half of Americans). It's almost like he wants to lose. Here's his series of tweets:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Nancy Pelosi is asking for $2.4 Trillion Dollars to bailout poorly run, high crime, Democrat States, money that is in no way related to COVID-19. We made a very generous offer of $1.6 Trillion Dollars and, as usual, she is not negotiating in good faith. I am rejecting their...

...request, and looking to the future of our Country. I have instructed my representatives to stop negotiating until after the election when, immediately after I win, we will pass a major Stimulus Bill that focuses on hardworking Americans and Small Business. I have asked...

@senatemajldr Mitch McConnell not to delay, but to instead focus full time on approving my outstanding nominee to the United States Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett. Our Economy is doing very well. The Stock Market is at record levels, JOBS and unemployment...

...also coming back in record numbers. We are leading the World in Economic Recovery, and THE BEST IS YET TO COME!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 06, 2020, 03:29:07 pm
(https://refuge-cdn.nolayingup.dev/original/3X/5/7/5731b98668e152ed65c5309ca9015b3007327b86.jpeg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 06, 2020, 03:29:47 pm
That pic is better if it’s smaller.  Anyway, the markets love his tweet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 06, 2020, 04:26:22 pm
So the billionaire who paid $750 in income taxes last year and was just medevac’d to one of the leading hospitals in the world to be cared for in a 6 room suite by an army of doctors with access to any and all treatments necessary - ALL OF THIS FOR FREE - thinks families who paid more in income taxes don’t need any more help, and that the unemployed are just losers that deserve their fate.

That about right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 06, 2020, 04:52:42 pm
You left out that people who die of COVID are suckers.  Or is that just soldiers?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 06, 2020, 06:28:07 pm
Stephen Miller tested positive.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 06, 2020, 07:29:13 pm
Stephen Miller tested positive.

Well, at least he has nothing to fear. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 06, 2020, 08:29:36 pm
These people are absolute evil. How did we get to a place in this country where people like this can get voted in and make this kind of policy?  And, the thing that should not be forgotten in all of the other absurd Trump stuff is that these concentration camps are still running at the border. 

Michael S. Schmidt (@nytmike) Tweeted:
NEW: “We need to take away children,” AG Sessions told prosecutors, according to a draft DOJ IG report. That statement contradicts Sessions’ previous claim that “we never really intended” to separate children. w/@shearm @ktbenner https://t.co/938OvsSuus
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 06, 2020, 09:14:05 pm
Based on the Twitter activity, it seems the meds Trump are on have pushed him over the edge.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 06, 2020, 09:37:42 pm
Immediately after WWI, Wilson was at the peace conference where the French minister wanted severe sanctions on Germany as punishment.  Wilson wanted kinder treatment because he believed harsh treatment would bring on another war.  It was a stalemate.  Then Wilson caught the Spanish flu.  After several days of being ill, Wilson returned to the table and almost in a delerium, capitulated to the French plan.  Sleep well tonight.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 06, 2020, 09:38:16 pm
It looks like someone told him that his "no stimulus until after the election" tweets this afternoon were a really bad idea.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
If I am sent a Stand Alone Bill for Stimulus Checks ($1,200), they will go out to our great people IMMEDIATELY. I am ready to sign right now. Are you listening Nancy? @MarkMeadows @senatemajldr @kevinomccarthy @SpeakerPelosi @SenSchumer

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
The House & Senate should IMMEDIATELY Approve 25 Billion Dollars for Airline Payroll Support, & 135 Billion Dollars for Paycheck Protection Program for Small Business. Both of these will be fully paid for with unused funds from the Cares Act. Have this money. I will sign now!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 06, 2020, 11:33:32 pm
25th Amendment - another so called constitutional "safeguard" Trump has proved is utterly ineffectual and useless in a real crisis.

The plans are already in the works to steal the election through alternate slates of electors if the voter suppression is insufficient.  It's past persuasion at this point - Trump has lost that fight.  But he will never go voluntarily, and the Rs will steal this election unless they're somehow stopped.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 07, 2020, 11:54:37 am
Yesterday when Trump said he was ending negotiations for another relief package, the stock market dropped 600 points.  This morning, it's climbing back up now that he's announced he's reconsidering.  I hope somebody is monitoring his market accounts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 07, 2020, 12:39:31 pm
That is presidential harassment now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 07, 2020, 03:36:46 pm
Yesterday when Trump said he was ending negotiations for another relief package, the stock market dropped 600 points.  This morning, it's climbing back up now that he's announced he's reconsidering.  I hope somebody is monitoring his market accounts.

I asked a stock broker about that possibility a couple years ago and he was very adamant that any shenanigans would not get past the Securities Exchange Commission.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 07, 2020, 03:41:05 pm
I think the NYT tax story sorta implied that he didn't have much of a stock portfolio because he had to sell of stocks to prop up his real estate investments.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 07, 2020, 03:56:08 pm
I asked a stock broker about that possibility a couple years ago and he was very adamant that any shenanigans would not get past the Securities Exchange Commission.

that is completely ludicrous.  We have sitting Senators that transparently conducted insider trades earlier this year when the virus started to ramp up and nothing happened to them. A normal person would probably get caught running a pump and dump scheme but there is no way this president would have anything happen to him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 07, 2020, 04:29:45 pm
https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/493497-insider-trading-by-congress-its-time-to-fix-the-law
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 07, 2020, 07:09:35 pm
The outbreak at the White House is even worse than has been reported:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/34-people-connected-white-house-previously-infected-coronavirus/story?id=73487381
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 07, 2020, 09:15:08 pm
In case anybody is wondering, pink eye is a symptom of coronavirus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 07, 2020, 10:29:33 pm
I can only imagine what the response from the right would be if H Clinton or Obama got their staff infected like this... but hey we get to roll the laws back to 1930!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 07, 2020, 10:48:53 pm
As usual, Trump's base votes one way. The other 60% of the country disagrees.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ejxv85oXgAAsu-m?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 07, 2020, 11:22:52 pm
If third party candidate the fly is included the results dramatically shift.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 08, 2020, 10:03:24 am
Senator from Utah argues against democracy:

Mike Lee @SenMikeLee
Democracy isn’t the objective; liberty, peace, and prospefity are.  We want the human condition to flourish.  Rank democracy can thwart that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 08, 2020, 10:33:18 am

The New England Journal of Medicine must be "fake news"

NEJM  @NEJM  18h
Why has the United States handled this pandemic so badly? The Editors note that although we came into this crisis with enormous advantages, our current political leaders have demonstrated that they are dangerously incompetent.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/ad_img/1313922200299343872/zT2-dLFL?format=png&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 08, 2020, 10:52:21 am
Really surprising to see the NEJM get so political.  Circumstances are compelling them to speak out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on October 08, 2020, 11:09:11 am
I guess it depends on whether you read this as a slap at the national level only, or at all levels (local, state, national)…

Different people will interpret it different ways.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 08, 2020, 11:58:52 am
Senator from Utah argues against democracy:

Mike Lee @SenMikeLee
Democracy isn’t the objective; liberty, peace, and prospefity are.  We want the human condition to flourish.  Rank democracy can thwart that.


Related to this, some of Trump’s very fine people were arrested in a plot to kidnap the governor of Michigan. Reminder - right wing and white supremacist terror groups are the most dangerous and prevalent in America right now. And they are all part of Trump’s base.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-governor-gretchen-whitmer/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on October 08, 2020, 12:03:46 pm
Dave23


Their referring to every politician who has downplayed the virus, scoffed at mask wearing and tweets BS about every aspect of it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 08, 2020, 12:09:43 pm
Related to this, some of Trump’s very fine people were arrested in a plot to kidnap the governor of Michigan. Reminder - right wing and white supremacist terror groups are the most dangerous and prevalent in America right now. And they are all part of Trump’s base.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-governor-gretchen-whitmer/index.html

This was also during the period when Trump was tweeting out "LIBERATE MICHIGAN" "LIBERATE VIRGINIA" etc.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 08, 2020, 12:11:57 pm
I guess it depends on whether you read this as a slap at the national level only, or at all levels (local, state, national)…

Different people will interpret it different ways.

Literally every single country whose COVID response is considered a model of success has had clear and strong leadership from their federal gov't and top leaders. Not surprisingly, those leaders have all also had wildly different approaches than the Trump administration.

Sure, different states, cities, etc., could have responded better, but there's a very clear distinction between successful responses to the virus and the US response, and we don't have to parse down to municipal levels to find it.

When solving a crisis, start with the low-hanging fruit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 08, 2020, 12:23:19 pm
Related to this, some of Trump’s very fine people were arrested in a plot to kidnap the governor of Michigan. Reminder - right wing and white supremacist terror groups are the most dangerous and prevalent in America right now. And they are all part of Trump’s base.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-governor-gretchen-whitmer/index.html

It's *almost* as if people who storm state capitol buildings armed with assault rifles are dangerous. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 08, 2020, 12:24:43 pm
We are 7 months into this pandemic.  Hospitals are still having to reuse n95 masks because the administration has nothing to help with PPE production in the United States.  I'm sure the White House staffers are reusing n95 because the President refuses to wear a mask and self isolate.

Why does in matter? 

https://nypost.com/2020/10/07/doctor-who-died-from-covid-19-wore-same-mask-for-weeks-if-not-months/

F*** Trump and Pence.  She is just one of 1,700 healthcare workers that have died because of their incompetence. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 08, 2020, 12:26:40 pm
Meanwhile in NZ, they're able to contract trace outbreaks down to elevator buttons and trash can lids.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 08, 2020, 12:38:57 pm
It's *almost* as if people who storm state capitol buildings armed with assault rifles are dangerous.

Imagine, if you would, the reaction if a group from BLM tried to arrest the gov of Texas.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 08, 2020, 12:43:16 pm
Meanwhile in NZ, they're able to contract trace outbreaks down to elevator buttons and trash can lids.

I can't even imagine what it would be like to live in a country that had that level of competence.  The US has the CDC head writing get out of school letters for the Vice President.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 08, 2020, 12:47:06 pm
I can't even imagine what it would be like to live in a country that had that level of competence.  The US has the CDC head writing get out of school letters for the Vice President.

It's almost as if +200K ppl (likely 400K by end of year) didn't have to die.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 08, 2020, 12:47:17 pm
I can't even imagine what it would be like to live in a country that had that level of competence.  The US has the CDC head writing get out of school letters for the Vice President.

We’ve lost so much institutional knowledge under Trump, in every conceivable part of the government, that regaining competence under Biden is going to be hard.  Hopefully he’s able to reboot a lot of the Obama admin and hopefully a lot of the career people who have been booted or marginalized want to come back. It’s going to be a slog rebuilding from the devastation wrought by the Trumpers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 08, 2020, 01:35:11 pm
New England Journal of Medicine follow up

When I posted the NEJM tweet about our leaders being dangerously incompetent, I failed to notice a link at the bottom of the tweet,

Here is the final paragraph:

Quote
Anyone else who recklessly squandered lives and money in this way would be suffering legal consequences. Our leaders have largely claimed immunity for their actions. But this election gives us the power to render judgment. Reasonable people will certainly disagree about the many political positions taken by candidates. But truth is neither liberal nor conservative. When it comes to the response to the largest public health crisis of our time, our current political leaders have demonstrated that they are dangerously incompetent. We should not abet them and enable the deaths of thousands more Americans by allowing them to keep their jobs.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2029812?source=nejmtwitter&medium=organic-social
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 08, 2020, 02:06:04 pm
This is getting serious, folks

DOJ Frees Federal Prosecutors to Take Steps That Could Interfere With Elections, Weakening Long-standing Policy

In an internal announcement, the Justice Department created an exception to a decades-long policy meant to prevent prosecutors from taking overt investigative steps that might affect the outcome of the vote.


Quote
The Department of Justice has weakened its long-standing prohibition against interfering in elections, according to two department officials.Avoiding election interference is the overarching principle (https://www.propublica.org/article/the-justice-department-may-have-violated-attorney-general-barrs-own-policy-memo) of DOJ policy on voting-related crimes. In place since at least 1980, the policy generally bars prosecutors not only from making any announcement about ongoing investigations close to an election but also from taking public steps — such as an arrest or a raid — before a vote is finalized because the publicity could tip the balance of a race.

But according to an email sent Friday by an official in the Public Integrity Section in Washington, now if a U.S. attorney’s office suspects election fraud that involves postal workers or military employees, federal investigators will be allowed to take public investigative steps before the polls close, even if those actions risk affecting the outcome of the election.

https://www.govexec.com/oversight/2020/10/doj-frees-federal-prosecutors-take-steps-could-interfere-elections-weakening-long-standing-policy/169115/

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 08, 2020, 05:53:39 pm
Senator from Utah argues against democracy:

Mike Lee @SenMikeLee
Democracy isn’t the objective; liberty, peace, and prospefity are.  We want the human condition to flourish.  Rank democracy can thwart that.


Fascism is certainly Republican Party policy these days, but it’s rare for them to slip up and admit it openly.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 08, 2020, 07:18:35 pm
Vice President Pence cancelled a trip to Indianapolis to vote to recover from his debate last night. He totally just got really fatigued from a strenuous debate and it doesn’t have anything to do with him having coronavirus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 09, 2020, 06:14:35 pm
Need a good laugh to end the week?

https://youtu.be/Ih-bVJ2RClc
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 09, 2020, 06:26:09 pm
To be fair, a few years ago I was in San Diego to see the Cubs play the Padres.  The local paper had a story about the city council meeting that night deciding whether or not to ban kite flying on the beaches.  It seems the kites might be scaring birds.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 09, 2020, 09:10:41 pm
A South Carolina Senate debate was cancelled tonight when Lindsey Graham refused to get a COVID test. Graham met in person with Mike Lee (no masks) on October 1, so he has clearly been exposed.

Since Graham is the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, a positive test could possibly derail the Supreme Court confirmation. So he's decided that he'd rather risk his health and make himself look like a coward in the final days of his Senate race just so he can push Amy Coney Barrett through.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 13, 2020, 11:17:36 pm
Mitt Romney is the best the Republicans have to offer at this point. Today, he released this silly statement where he did the both-sides thing by comparing President Donald Trump to a former Sportscenter/MSNBC host/current YouTube guy.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EkN0gEzUcAI_Gcw?format=jpg&name=small)


His argument is "The President of the United States has done a lot of awful things, including (but not limited to) embracing ridiculous conspiracy theories. The Democrat nominee has done none of that. But the Speaker of the House tore up a piece of paper once, and that guy who is trying to make money on YouTube now (but used to be on ESPN) is just as harmful as the president. The Democrats are just as bad."

This is what qualifies as a thoughtful Republican politician at this point. He doesn't have the courage to endorse Biden even when he basically says that Trump has been a demonstratively worse candidate than Biden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 14, 2020, 12:35:48 pm
His argument is "The President of the United States has done a lot of awful things, including (but not limited to) embracing ridiculous conspiracy theories. The Democrat nominee has done none of that. But the Speaker of the House tore up a piece of paper once, and that guy who is trying to make money on YouTube now (but used to be on ESPN) is just as harmful as the president. The Democrats are just as bad."

I don't think his argument is that Democrats are just as bad.  Trump is worse than anything that was come before him and nothing excuses his behavior.  If you want to see a change in the political climate it will take both sides, with a significantly larger lift on the Republican side, to improve things. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 14, 2020, 01:10:00 pm
I don't think his argument is that Democrats are just as bad.  Trump is worse than anything that was come before him and nothing excuses his behavior.  If you want to see a change in the political climate it will take both sides, with a significantly larger lift on the Republican side, to improve things. 
I agree.  "Normally" Republicans and Democrats are equally good and evil.  Trump, unfortunately has raised the bar and taken a lot of "good" people with him along with the dregs. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 14, 2020, 01:28:46 pm
Quote
"Normally" Republicans and Democrats are equally good and evil.

I agree with this.

It's become harder for the Republicans, though, as so many of their core principles become less popular with the majority.  As they become more desperate to retain power, it becomes necessary to employ shadier tactics.  While effective, they make it easier for a psychopath like Trump to take over.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 14, 2020, 02:30:36 pm
Of paramount importance is that our political leaders support the Constitution and engender confidence in the institutions of government.  One party is supporting a leader who fails miserably in this.  There is nothing close to equivalency here. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 14, 2020, 03:50:14 pm
Of paramount importance is that our political leaders support the Constitution and engender confidence in the institutions of government.  One party is supporting a leader who fails miserably in this.  There is nothing close to equivalency here. 

Which is why I voted for basically a straight Democratic ticket.  Again, I don't think it is an equivalency issue.  I think it is if we want things to improve then Republicans need a really good loss that flushes out the party and sends them back to the drawing board on what they want to be as a party.  In addition to the Republicans completely rebuilding their party the Democrats have a few issues to deal with as well.  It doesn't require them to completely remake their party, but things aren't going to get better if it is only the Republicans making changes. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 14, 2020, 06:11:23 pm
Covid-19 news

Baron Trump was infected and now tests negative

Quote
(CNN)People with blood type O may be less vulnerable to Covid-19 and have a reduced likelihood of getting severely ill, according to two studies published Wednesday. Experts say more research is needed.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/14/health/blood-group-covid-19-scn-wellness/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 15, 2020, 08:00:19 pm
From a Trump campaign advisor...this is supposed to be an insult? I having a hard time thinking of many people that are more universally liked and respected than Fred Rogers.

Mercedes Schlapp @mercedesschlapp
Well @JoeBiden @ABCPolitics townhall feels like I am watching an episode of Mister Rodgers Neighborhood.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 15, 2020, 09:17:14 pm
She didn’t even spell his name right. 

I very much got the vibe of warmth and compassion watching Biden and it was refreshing in such a good way. So she nailed the comparison.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 15, 2020, 10:04:18 pm
The most surprising part of this election is not that Trump is losing, but that Biden has a strongly net positive approval rating in this polarized age.  Turns out a lot of people really like a hard-working, decent grandpa who genuinely wants to help a few people out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 15, 2020, 10:13:08 pm
It was kind of surprising to me that some Democrats were upset all day that NBC was broadcasting a Trump town hall tonight. Trump in front of a camera right now is poison to his campaign. As someone who wants him to get embarrassed in 2 1/2 weeks, I want him unscripted and on TV as much as possible right now.

I didn't watch it...but from the clips I've seen on Twitter, he came across as unhinged again tonight (to anyone who isn't in his cult, at least). Meanwhile, Biden spent an hour and a half explaining his policy positions and proving (again) that the "he has dementia" argument against him has no basis in reality.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 15, 2020, 10:22:59 pm
An hour and a half??  He stayed an hour after the cameras turned off and kept answering questions.

I tend to agree Trump being on camera now hurts more than helps him.  But I think the reason the Biden people were upset is that they wanted as many people as possible to see him in that format, in which he excels.  Also they (and many neutrals, including at NBC) were upset because NBC basically rewarded Trump for dodging the second debate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 15, 2020, 10:39:03 pm
br, I'm not sure the guy was ever "hinged."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 19, 2020, 02:00:30 pm
Last week, McConnell announced he hadn't been to the White House since August because the administration was being so irresponsible in the way they were addressing COVID. Yesterday, Texas Senator John Cornyn claimed he has never agreed with Trump on the border wall or the deficit (but kept it secret and voted in line with Trump anyway). Today, while Trump is attacking Fauci, Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander is tweeting this:

Sen. Lamar Alexander @SenAlexander
Dr. Fauci is one of our country’s most distinguished public servants. He has served 6 presidents, starting with Ronald Reagan. If more Americans paid attention to his advice, we’d have fewer cases of COVID-19, & it would be safer to go back to school & back to work & out to eat.


It's 3 years and 50 weeks too late, but they're finally abandoning him. If/when he loses in embarrassing fashion, I guarantee that many, many more Republican Senators will quickly start to distance themselves from him. They'll talk about how they were never really with him. There's a problem with that, though--none of them have anything on their record to support that (with the possible exception of Romney).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 19, 2020, 03:18:30 pm
We could learn a lot before the November 3 election as well as after.  Moscow Mitch is planning to have the senate vote to confirm Amy Coney Barrett before the end of October.

It will be interesting to see how the "at risk" senators vote on her confirmation.     It's a chance to put something on their record before November 3.  Lindsey Graham is unlikely to reverse himself again but it wouldn't take very many who try to save their hides.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 19, 2020, 04:34:35 pm
Never happen.  She's a lock.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 19, 2020, 04:51:58 pm
Yeah...and if/when Mitt Romney casts his vote for her, he's back on the list with the other 52 Republican senators who didn't stand up to Trump. I can't take his "remove from office" vote seriously if he's still willing to rubber stamp a controversial Supreme Court justice for Trump six months later.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 19, 2020, 05:47:31 pm
Not to mention refusing to endorse the only viable alternative.

Of more interest is whether 50 Ds will agree to adding Supreme Court justices.  I suspect they’ll blow it as usual.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 19, 2020, 06:11:05 pm
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/10/19/stuart-stevens-collapse-of-republican-party-sot-vpx-lead.cnn
Yeah...and if/when Mitt Romney casts his vote for her, he's back on the list with the other 52 Republican senators who didn't stand up to Trump. I can't take his "remove from office" vote seriously if he's still willing to rubber stamp a controversial Supreme Court justice for Trump six months later.
If he votes for HER that's not necessarily a vote for Trump.  Like Souter, if she's fit to serve, she should be confirmed.  You're letting your biases convict an entire group of people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 19, 2020, 06:11:46 pm
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/10/19/stuart-stevens-collapse-of-republican-party-sot-vpx-lead.cnn  I agree.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 19, 2020, 06:13:20 pm
Not to mention refusing to endorse the only viable alternative.

Of more interest is whether 50 Ds will agree to adding Supreme Court justices.  I suspect they’ll blow it as usual.
  Every reasonable liberal I've talked to about this agrees this would be foolish.  Every time, 4 years or 40 years or 400 years, the other party gets into power and we end up with 100 judges at SCOTUS.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 19, 2020, 06:37:23 pm
  Every reasonable liberal I've talked to about this agrees this would be foolish.  Every time, 4 years or 40 years or 400 years, the other party gets into power and we end up with 100 judges at SCOTUS.

I'd argue the horse is already out of the barn. Republicans took the unprecedented step to reduce the number of Supreme Court Justices to 8 for over a year after Scalia died--they've already changed the number of justices on the court to get more power. Multiple justices have been confirmed closer to an election in U.S. history, so they broke all norms by not holding hearings for Garland.

Then they violated their own made-up precedent by pushing Barrett through with less than two months until an election. And by the way, you could argue that this is a real precedent they're breaking this time. No president has ever nominated a new justice this close to an election, even though there have been two openings in history that happened closer to an election.

McConnell also took the step to further politicize the courts by blocking Obama nominees on lower courts in his last two years. The Republican party has already packed and politicized the courts.

Basically, there are two choices. The first option is for the Democrats to respond to the Republicans' politicization of the courts and balance them. The court shouldn't be packed to the extent that there's a clear left lean, but adding two justices to make it a 6-5 court is more than fair IMO. The second option is to just ignore the broken norms and accept that the courts will not be apolitical for the next generation.

Every time, 4 years or 40 years or 400 years, the other party gets into power and we end up with 100 judges at SCOTUS.

I don't think it matters what the Democrats do--the Republicans have already proved they're willing to do whatever it takes to get more power in the courts. They are going to do everything they can to politicize the courts any time they're in power from now on because they've seen they can get away with it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 19, 2020, 07:05:13 pm
If the Democrats don’t add to the court and add balance, we risk a generation without any fair federal elections.  The current admin is trying to use the court to influence this election and there is a 100% chance they’ll continue and be successful if they get this 6-3 majority for the next decade or more.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 19, 2020, 07:15:45 pm
The governor of Texas has limited the number of drop off locations for mail-in ballots to one per county.

Suppose a challenge to that obviously voter suppression move reached the Supreme Court.     The 6-3 majority quickly uphold the challenge. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 19, 2020, 07:51:19 pm
Roberts sides with the liberal justices to extend Pennsylvania’s time to return mail in ballots.

If the Democrats add justices, the Republicans will add more when they return to power. It will just be continuing the tit for tat. Democrats blocked Bush judges, so Republican block Obama’s. Reid get rid of filibuster for non-supreme court justices, Republicans get rid of it for Supreme Court justices. It will be a never ending cycle. 

If we had a functional Congress then the Supreme Court wouldn’t be an issues.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 19, 2020, 09:46:09 pm
If the Democrats add justices, the Republicans will add more when they return to power. It will just be continuing the tit for tat. Democrats blocked Bush judges, so Republican block Obama’s. Reid get rid of filibuster for non-supreme court justices, Republicans get rid of it for Supreme Court justices. It will be a never ending cycle. 

If it turns into a never ending cycle, it's because the Republicans started the cycle when they refused to hold hearings on Garland (and by the way, multiple Republican Senators clearly stated that they had no plans to hold hearings on Garland even if Clinton won). Republicans already broke a lot of norms just to get more power in the courts. I'm not sure why the Democrats should be expected to ignore that and just accept partisan courts for a generation.

And if they accept partisan courts for a generation, then why should we expect the Republicans to stop politicizing the courts the next time they're in power? They've done it for the last five years with no consequences. They'll do it again next time regardless.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 19, 2020, 09:56:03 pm
Suppose trump wins, would anyone be surprised if he and Mitch tried to add a few more justices?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 19, 2020, 10:36:34 pm
  Every reasonable liberal I've talked to about this agrees this would be foolish.  Every time, 4 years or 40 years or 400 years, the other party gets into power and we end up with 100 judges at SCOTUS.

Unilateral disarmament - always a winning strategy.

The Rs under Moscow Mitch have been packing the courts for over a decade.  He basically sat on Obama's nominees and crammed through Trump's.  They stole a seat by refusing to confirm Garland, now they're stealing a seat by breaking their precedent and forcing through Barrett.  The Ds have been left with no other recourse and hearing conservatives whine about it and piously decry it is beyond hilarious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 19, 2020, 10:50:37 pm
Sometimes you guys are very smart with your comments, but your constant railing about Republicans doing this and doing that seems to be ignoring the fact that they are working within the Constitutional rules of checks and balances and you come off as naive.   This is politics.  Are you really so jaded that you don't think the Democrats wouldn't do the same thing if the shoes were on the other feet?  Did the Democrats block together to defeat Clinton's impeachment?  Did Democrats ram through several SCOTUS nominations?  Yes.  Actually, sometimes you guys sound as bad as the QAnon Trumpers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 19, 2020, 11:28:02 pm
That's a crock of BS, frankly.  Extra-constitutional stuff has been rampant the last four years and no one has enforced the constitution.

So who decides what's constitutional from now on if the Democrats don't increase the size of the Supreme Court (which, by the way, is fully constitutional and has precedent)?  A bunch of Trump-appointed justices.  Yeah, that's a winning formula.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 20, 2020, 07:44:06 am
Trumpiest organization in sports?

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-political-scene/trump-collides-with-the-world-of-baseball?utm_source=twitter&utm_social-type=owned&utm_medium=social&utm_brand=tny&mbid=social_twitter
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 20, 2020, 09:19:32 am
Both sides do stuff like this all the time, right?

@kaitlancollins: Two weeks before the election, President Trump says on Fox News that Attorney General Bill Barr should “appoint somebody" to investigate Joe Biden. “We’ve gotta get the attorney general to act. He’s gotta act. And he’s gotta act fast. He’s gotta appoint somebody."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 20, 2020, 09:30:34 am
Neither side should be doing stuff like that.  Trump is a jackass.  Can we agree on that?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 20, 2020, 10:15:13 am
I'd argue the horse is already out of the barn. Republicans took the unprecedented step to reduce the number of Supreme Court Justices to 8 for over a year after Scalia died.

Blackmun took 391 days, Kennedy took 237 days.  The longest supreme court vacancy was 841 days.  Scalia's seat was the 8th longest vacancy. 

If it turns into a never ending cycle, it's because the Republicans started the cycle when they refused to hold hearings on Garland (and by the way, multiple Republican Senators clearly stated that they had no plans to hold hearings on Garland even if Clinton won). Republicans already broke a lot of norms just to get more power in the courts. I'm not sure why the Democrats should be expected to ignore that and just accept partisan courts for a generation.

And if they accept partisan courts for a generation, then why should we expect the Republicans to stop politicizing the courts the next time they're in power? They've done it for the last five years with no consequences. They'll do it again next time regardless.

Republicans gripes about the court go back to Bork in 1987 and they have been making the unilateral disarmament talk since then. If you look at the Presidents in my lifetime of judicial appointments it goes Reagan (383), Clinton (378), Obama (329), Bush 43 (327), Carter (262), Trump (218),Bush 41 (193).

If Schumer was in charge of the Senate we would have done the exact same thing as McConnell if the roles where reversed.

We can either try and have a functioning government or the mess that the country has had in this new century.  The last time the government passed anything close to a budget was in 2006.  I'm shooting for a functioning government, but that is just me.  And both political parties have a role to play in why we are in this mess.  That doesn't stand as an excuse for anything Trump has done. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 20, 2020, 11:17:16 am
Blackmun took 391 days, Kennedy took 237 days.  The longest supreme court vacancy was 841 days.  Scalia's seat was the 8th longest vacancy. 

Republicans gripes about the court go back to Bork in 1987 and they have been making the unilateral disarmament talk since then. If you look at the Presidents in my lifetime of judicial appointments it goes Reagan (383), Clinton (378), Obama (329), Bush 43 (327), Carter (262), Trump (218),Bush 41 (193).

If Schumer was in charge of the Senate we would have done the exact same thing as McConnell if the roles where reversed.

We can either try and have a functioning government or the mess that the country has had in this new century.  The last time the government passed anything close to a budget was in 2006.  I'm shooting for a functioning government, but that is just me.  And both political parties have a role to play in why we are in this mess.  That doesn't stand as an excuse for anything Trump has done. 


Came here to say this. Court packing is not new, its happened both ways many times. What is new is that the anti-abortion crowd is increasingly a minority so the judges seem to be more extreme by holding onto the view of overturning roe vs wade.

Republicans figured out about 15 years ago that their money would go further by taking over state seats and the senate. They have executed that plan well, the democrats have figured it out and are starting to fight back.

The addition of strict constitutionalist does not favor the republicans. It only favors them if they can ensure that congress and specifically the senate are either always deadlocked or barely in their hands. If they go to the Dems, the dems can legislate what they want. This will of course not happen, as they wont agree on what their agenda is, half ass it, and cede power in 4 years.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 20, 2020, 11:20:53 am
Sometimes you guys are very smart with your comments, but your constant railing about Republicans doing this and doing that seems to be ignoring the fact that they are working within the Constitutional rules of checks and balances and you come off as naive.   This is politics.  Are you really so jaded that you don't think the Democrats wouldn't do the same thing if the shoes were on the other feet?  Did the Democrats block together to defeat Clinton's impeachment?  Did Democrats ram through several SCOTUS nominations?  Yes.  Actually, sometimes you guys sound as bad as the QAnon Trumpers.

With all due respect, you are comparing apples to chairs. The failure to allow Merrit Garland's nomination to come to a vote was utterly unique, and the claim that it was some sort of principle has been dramatically shown to be a lie after Ginsburg's death.

The Republican Senate also stonewalled on dozens and dozens of federal court appointments, not allowing them to come to a vote, which is why Trump has had so many openings to fill with utterly unqualified judges. And I challenge you to come up with anything similar from the Dems (at least in modern history) - either in terms of blocking so many appointments or in filling openings with indisputably unqualified candidates for the judiciary.

Under Nixon, Reagan and Bush, Democratic majorities looked for compromise. Tip O'Neill was a very partisan guy, but that never kept him from working to find compromise with Reagan to get legislation passed. Republicans of principle and conscience, such as Norm Ornstein have acknowledged that Newt Gingrich shepherded in a take no prisoners approach to politics that neither party had been guilty of in my lifetime, and the Republican Party has gotten progressively worse since then.

One doesn't have to believe Dems have been pure or flawless to acknowledge that what we've seen under McConnell is something far worse than had happened in recent times. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 20, 2020, 11:34:00 am
Many of us remember Grover Norquist and his “no new taxes” pledge that republicans agreed to or suffered the consequences.  To me, that is when being non-partisan began to disappear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 20, 2020, 12:06:17 pm
Neither side should be doing stuff like that.  Trump is a jackass.  Can we agree on that?

Yeah, well, only one side is doing that. And not a single Republican Senator has spoken up against it, much less taken any action regarding this sort of thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 20, 2020, 12:27:21 pm
With all due respect, you are comparing apples to chairs. The failure to allow Merrit Garland's nomination to come to a vote was utterly unique, and the claim that it was some sort of principle has been dramatically shown to be a lie after Ginsburg's death.

The Republican Senate also stonewalled on dozens and dozens of federal court appointments, not allowing them to come to a vote, which is why Trump has had so many openings to fill with utterly unqualified judges. And I challenge you to come up with anything similar from the Dems (at least in modern history) - either in terms of blocking so many appointments or in filling openings with indisputably unqualified candidates for the judiciary.

Under Nixon, Reagan and Bush, Democratic majorities looked for compromise. Tip O'Neill was a very partisan guy, but that never kept him from working to find compromise with Reagan to get legislation passed. Republicans of principle and conscience, such as Norm Ornstein have acknowledged that Newt Gingrich shepherded in a take no prisoners approach to politics that neither party had been guilty of in my lifetime, and the Republican Party has gotten progressively worse since then.

One doesn't have to believe Dems have been pure or flawless to acknowledge that what we've seen under McConnell is something far worse than had happened in recent times. 



Obama appointed more judges than Bush and there where court vacancies issues back when Bush 43 was President. Trump is closer to Bush 41 in Judges than he is to Carter for 1 term Presidents. Heck Carter in 4 years had almost as many judges as Nixon/Ford and Bush 43 and Obama.

Came here to say this. Court packing is not new, its happened both ways many times. What is new is that the anti-abortion crowd is increasingly a minority so the judges seem to be more extreme by holding onto the view of overturning roe vs wade.

Republicans figured out about 15 years ago that their money would go further by taking over state seats and the senate. They have executed that plan well, the democrats have figured it out and are starting to fight back.

The addition of strict constitutionalist does not favor the republicans. It only favors them if they can ensure that congress and specifically the senate are either always deadlocked or barely in their hands. If they go to the Dems, the dems can legislate what they want. This will of course not happen, as they wont agree on what their agenda is, half ass it, and cede power in 4 years.



The Sumpreme Court hasn’t been adjusted for packing reasons since the Civil War and Andrew Jackson’s impeachment. The Democrats under FDR pushed back on his attempts to pack the court, which is what this would be closest too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 20, 2020, 12:35:31 pm
Trumpiest organization in sports?

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-political-scene/trump-collides-with-the-world-of-baseball?utm_source=twitter&utm_social-type=owned&utm_medium=social&utm_brand=tny&mbid=social_twitter

I have friends who have decided they won't support the Cubs anymore. This gets pretty tiresome.  Two points. Do Kotlowitz and Zorn or anyone else actually believe the Ricketts family is currently profiting from current Cubs revenue, much less that this is going to the Trump campaign?  It's clear from the article that Todd is following in the political footsteps of his father Joe and oldest brother Pete, footsteps that I personally find reprehensible. But characterizing Todd Ricketts as Trump's "chief fund raiser" is an exaggeration, at best. He is "finance chair of the Trump Victory Committee" which does not make him Trump's chief fund raiser. If he were that major donors to Trump would not need reminding to recognize the name.

Do Kotlowitz and Zorn understand that Todd Ricketts has nothing to do with running the Cubs? The article itself points out that Todd has resented not having his input on the Cubs respected. Tom Ricketts, who seems to have carefully avoided any political involvement is the guy who effectively acts as owner of the Cubs. The only other family member who is directly involved with the Cubs is Laura Ricketts. She is a consistent and major support for Dems on the national, state and local level, yet this is never mentioned when the subject of the intersection between the Cubs and politics is discussed. Neither is Theo Epstein's support of liberal Dems.

This is a shallow article that had the purpose of advancing the author's personal point of view.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 20, 2020, 01:03:51 pm
Regarding the discussion of whether or not both sides game the rules to their benefit:

Of course they do.

Also:

I am not aware of any Supreme Court gamesmanship by the D's that in any way comes close to the absolute bullshit McConnell has pulled with Garland and now ACB.

These are not incongruous statements. More than willing to be proven wrong, but this is the case that needs to be argued for the "both sides" argument to hold water.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 20, 2020, 01:11:42 pm
So much for the notion that a legitimate grand jury process found the officers *actually* innocent in the Taylor case:

https://twitter.com/robferdman/status/1318605987738210305?s=20









Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 20, 2020, 02:11:25 pm
Came here to say this. Court packing is not new, its happened both ways many times. What is new is that the anti-abortion crowd is increasingly a minority so the judges seem to be more extreme by holding onto the view of overturning roe vs wade.

Republicans figured out about 15 years ago that their money would go further by taking over state seats and the senate. They have executed that plan well, the democrats have figured it out and are starting to fight back.

The addition of strict constitutionalist does not favor the republicans. It only favors them if they can ensure that congress and specifically the senate are either always deadlocked or barely in their hands. If they go to the Dems, the dems can legislate what they want. This will of course not happen, as they wont agree on what their agenda is, half ass it, and cede power in 4 years.


https://news.gallup.com/poll/313094/americans-abortion-views-steady-past-year.aspx
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 20, 2020, 02:27:03 pm
A pretty strong majority - over 60% - do not want to see Roe v Wade overturned.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 20, 2020, 02:32:31 pm
Regarding the discussion of whether or not both sides game the rules to their benefit:

Of course they do.

Also:

I am not aware of any Supreme Court gamesmanship by the D's that in any way comes close to the absolute bullshit McConnell has pulled with Garland and now ACB.

These are not incongruous statements. More than willing to be proven wrong, but this is the case that needs to be argued for the "both sides" argument to hold water.



I'll disagree.  It starts at point A, other side goes to point B, then response is point C.  It continues and continues with each side pointing to what the previous side did as justification.  ACB /Garland is point D.  Point E is packing the court.  It is a straight line of bad, justified with what amounts to nothing more than what why kids tell when they get it in a fight, "Yeah, but my brother did ...."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 20, 2020, 03:59:14 pm
When FDR wanted to pack the Court, it was a response to the Court undermining early New Deal legislation on constitutional grounds. This meant, of course, legislation passed by Congress and signed by the President...and then invalidated by the Court. Thereafter, the Court backed down, perhaps sensing the political winds.

The closest thing to the above today is a Gorsuch dissent recently in a case called Gundy v. U.S which, if it became a majority, potentially would undermine much of the regulatory state in which executive branch agencies implement federal legislation. Gorsuch goes back to pre-New Deal authority. This has been hard-right dogma for a long time for those who oppose a modern regulatory state.

Seems to me that this is the kind of thing, if the Gorsuch dissent became constitutional law, that might seriously trigger another court packing push. Short of that, a lot of Court decisions based on interpreting statutes passed by Congress can be overridden by a Democratic Congress passing laws that overrule the Court’s interpretation, such as what happened in the Ledbetter case years ago. There is a piece in the WaPost today discussing this.

In short, seems to me we are not yet in the domain of packing the Court, which is a bad idea—-unless you have a Court that is seriously undermining the will of Congress on ideological policy grounds. The Court doesn’t want that fight, I’m guessing.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on October 20, 2020, 04:03:32 pm
Reb

Excellent post.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 20, 2020, 04:35:41 pm
None so blind as those who will not see.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 20, 2020, 06:33:07 pm
Thanks, Reb.    Congress is the branch of government which has suffered the most infringements.  Presidents and Trump (Trump to the extreme) have used Executive Orders to circumvent Congress.  SCOTUS has often passed laws to thwart Congress' lack of action on some issues.   When you can circumvent the other branches so easily, checks and balances don't work.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 20, 2020, 06:34:32 pm
BTW, Trump now claims that Christmas will be canceled by Biden if Biden is elected.  Proof that Trump plans on resigning if he loses since Christmas comes sooner than Jan 20.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 20, 2020, 11:58:56 pm
When FDR wanted to pack the Court, it was a response to the Court undermining early New Deal legislation on constitutional grounds. This meant, of course, legislation passed by Congress and signed by the President...and then invalidated by the Court. Thereafter, the Court backed down, perhaps sensing the political winds.

The closest thing to the above today is a Gorsuch dissent recently in a case called Gundy v. U.S which, if it became a majority, potentially would undermine much of the regulatory state in which executive branch agencies implement federal legislation. Gorsuch goes back to pre-New Deal authority. This has been hard-right dogma for a long time for those who oppose a modern regulatory state.

Seems to me that this is the kind of thing, if the Gorsuch dissent became constitutional law, that might seriously trigger another court packing push. Short of that, a lot of Court decisions based on interpreting statutes passed by Congress can be overridden by a Democratic Congress passing laws that overrule the Court’s interpretation, such as what happened in the Ledbetter case years ago. There is a piece in the WaPost today discussing this.

In short, seems to me we are not yet in the domain of packing the Court, which is a bad idea—-unless you have a Court that is seriously undermining the will of Congress on ideological policy grounds. The Court doesn’t want that fight, I’m guessing.



Seems like Citizens United is already one good example.

Others to come soon if the Biden wins and the Dems get a majority. I expect HR 1 (or something very similar) along with a public option health care bill, along with climate change legislation to be examples of the early legislative actions to be attacked in the courts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 21, 2020, 12:34:21 am
Yeah, Citizens United was a bad result but much of it basically derived from previous Court precedent and reasoning (primarily Buckley v. Valeo in 1967) that established a first amendment protection for campaign contributions long before Citizens United. Generally, the Court is reluctant to take away rights previously conferred, even in somewhat different circumstances of the newer case. Guess we’ll see if that holds as to Roe.

As I said earlier, if/when the Court seems to be impeding policy decisions of the other branches based too much on its own policy grounds, all bets are off as to packing. Hope we don’t get to that point but possible that we will, I suppose. My guess is that if there is a consensus at the executive and legislative branches (as opposed to the usual divided government), the Court will take notice of that and avoid a fight. You can get some conservative opinions without necessarily having foundational implications.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 21, 2020, 10:09:02 am
Yeah, Citizens United was a bad result but much of it basically derived from previous Court precedent and reasoning (primarily Buckley v. Valeo in 1967) that established a first amendment protection for campaign contributions long before Citizens United. Generally, the Court is reluctant to take away rights previously conferred, even in somewhat different circumstances of the newer case. Guess we’ll see if that holds as to Roe.

As I said earlier, if/when the Court seems to be impeding policy decisions of the other branches based too much on its own policy grounds, all bets are off as to packing. Hope we don’t get to that point but possible that we will, I suppose. My guess is that if there is a consensus at the executive and legislative branches (as opposed to the usual divided government), the Court will take notice of that and avoid a fight. You can get some conservative opinions without necessarily having foundational implications.

You have far more faith in the Court's right wing (not conservative) Justices than I do. At the very least, I expect Alito, Thomas and Barrett not to respect any traditional restraints exercised by past Justices. I expect them to be utterly driven by ideological concerns.  I am less certain of Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.  Roberts is the only Justice from the "conservative" wing of the Court who seems to have any firm commitment to the institutional traditions of the Court.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 21, 2020, 10:22:47 am
The party of family values, the party of life:

https://twitter.com/jacobsoboroff/status/1318679776144420865?s=21

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 21, 2020, 10:28:21 am
The governor of Texas has limited the number of drop off locations for mail-in ballots to one per county.

Quote
“PLAY BALL!” ON THE VIDEOBOARD: Texas Governor Greg Abbott will help usher in Game One by calling out the traditional “PLAY BALL!” at Globe Life Field this evening.

MLB should have known better than to mix politics and baseball.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 21, 2020, 10:36:56 am
The party of family values, the party of life:

https://twitter.com/jacobsoboroff/status/1318679776144420865?s=21

Their only regret is that more families weren’t ruined.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on October 21, 2020, 10:37:36 am
Politics and baseball have been intertwined for longer than any of us have been alive...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 21, 2020, 10:49:52 am
Two weeks ahead of one of the most contentious presidential elections ever is not when to give airtime to one side but not the other.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on October 21, 2020, 11:05:25 am
So Trump throwing out a first pitch (if asked) would also be out of the question...even though he is the sitting President?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 21, 2020, 11:07:50 am
From a fan relations stand point, it would be suicide, hes easily one of the most divisive presidents ever.

But more power to you them if they wanna do it. White power specifically.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 21, 2020, 11:42:01 am
Has Trump ever thrown out the first pitch as President?  I don't think he has because his ego would be too bruised.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 21, 2020, 12:50:07 pm
So Trump throwing out a first pitch (if asked) would also be out of the question...even though he is the sitting President?

Yes.  MLB needs to avoid even any possibility of showing favoritism.

The equal-time rule specifies that U.S. radio and television broadcast stations must provide an equivalent opportunity to any opposing political candidates who request it. This means, for example, that if a station gives a given amount of time to a candidate in prime time, it must do the same for another candidate who requests it, at the same price if applicable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 21, 2020, 05:34:35 pm
Based on some news breaking today, it appears hunter biden's laptop actually belonged to Rudy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 21, 2020, 06:53:29 pm
Based on some news breaking today, it appears hunter biden's laptop actually belonged to Rudy.

Where did you see this? The only Giuliani news I've heard today is that he almost exposed himself to an actress playing an underage reporter in the new Borat movie.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 21, 2020, 06:55:04 pm
Yes. Nonsense on right wing sites about finding teenage **** on hunter bidens computer... its just rudy trying to expose himself to a young girl instead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 22, 2020, 09:54:57 am
We get another example of Republicans changing the rules to suit their needs. This time in the judiciary committee where they voted today on Barrett despite not having a quorum.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 22, 2020, 10:02:12 am
We get another example of Republicans changing the rules to suit their needs. This time in the judiciary committee where they voted today on Barrett despite not having a quorum.

If Biden wins, but R’s keep the Senate, McConnell will refuse to hold a vote on any Biden Supreme Court nominee. Book it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 22, 2020, 10:07:26 am
We get another example of Republicans changing the rules to suit their needs. This time in the judiciary committee where they voted today on Barrett despite not having a quorum.

If Biden wins the Presidency and Democrats win the senate would you be ok with Republicans not showing up to commitee meetings to effectively kill bills and nominations?


If Biden wins, but R’s keep the Senate, McConnell will refuse to hold a vote on any Biden Supreme Court nominee. Book it.

They shouldn't and I'd critcize them for doing that, but it isn't looking like they'll keep the Senate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 22, 2020, 01:09:53 pm
If Biden wins and the Dems take the Senate, Republicans will be talking about the importance of bi-partisanship and compromise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 22, 2020, 01:20:25 pm
If Biden wins and the Dems take the Senate, Republicans will be talking about the importance of bi-partisanship and compromise.

They will also suddenly become very concerned about the budget deficit and national debt.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 22, 2020, 01:50:31 pm
If Biden wins the Presidency and Democrats win the senate would you be ok with Republicans not showing up to commitee meetings to effectively kill bills and nominations?



The Dems have not failed to show up "to committee meetings to effectively kill bills and nominations." This has not been a practice, so why suggest that it has been?


If the Dems replicate what the Republicans did with Garland and Barrett, then that would be a valid comparison.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 22, 2020, 04:15:51 pm
Quote
but it isn't looking like they'll keep the Senate.

It's clear the gutless bastards don't deserve to.  It's a pity Lindsey Graham is likely to win his election.  I guess the fact that he's resorted to begging on Fox News is small solace.

If Trump loses, it will be interesting to watch what happens with his sycophantic Fox News crew (Carlson, Hannity, Ingraham).  Will they continue to fawn over him when there's nothing to gain?  Will they feel some resentment/guilt at their part in keeping such an imbecile in power (not that they'd ever express it)?  Will they turn on him as the investigations get rolling and demonstrate how corrupt his administration really is/was?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 22, 2020, 04:55:29 pm

If Trump loses, it will be interesting to watch what happens with his sycophantic Fox News crew (Carlson, Hannity, Ingraham).  Will they continue to fawn over him when there's nothing to gain?  Will they feel some resentment/guilt at their part in keeping such an imbecile in power (not that they'd ever express it)?  Will they turn on him as the investigations get rolling and demonstrate how corrupt his administration really is/was?

Yes.
ROFL
It's already demonstrated.  Fox News and their viewers simply refuse to acknowledge it, and there's no reason to think that will change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 22, 2020, 05:28:28 pm
I don't know about that.  Clearly to anyone paying attention it has been demonstrated, but I think it will be different once they can't suppress investigations.  I'm guessing there will be reams of evidence that will be tough to discount, and actual charges, and hearings, etc.  It wouldn't surprise me if the FoxSycs try to casually distance themselves if that's what the direction of the wind dictates, ala John Cornyn and Ben Sasse.  Who knows--maybe they'll double down on supporting him, but I bet they won't want to.  They're much less stupid than Trump.  Should be fascinating viewing.  Not that I'll do any of it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 01:17:49 am
So you guys are believing the polls again?  You might want to see the real numbers on early voting and registrations.  Dems need a big lead in VBM to withstand ED turnout that slants R. They aren't getting the margins they need.  Heck,  in MI it is almost tied.  NC, dems are behind 2016, FL too. MN should really scare you.  Even the senate race is within the margin of error.  It could be that R's are voting for Biden but that isn't what the polls say.  We will see but you guys better wrap your minds around the possibility Trump wins, perhaps comfortably if EV voting trends don't change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 23, 2020, 01:32:24 am
Quote
So far, much of the early voting appears to be driven by heightened enthusiasm among Democrats. Of the voters who have cast ballots in six states that provide partisan breakdowns, registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by roughly 2 to 1, according to a Washington Post analysis of data in Florida, Iowa, Maine, Kentucky, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

Additionally, those who have voted include disproportionate numbers of Black voters and women, according to state data — groups that favor former vice president Joe Biden over President Trump in recent polls.

Getting those QAnon conspiracy theories all pumped up and ready for 11/4, huh?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 01:39:46 am
With unprecedented increases in R registrations Gallup just said the electorate will be R+1. Yet all these polls Nate Silver touts are sampling D+4 or even +9. They did this in October 2016 then tightened them considerably right at the end to save their credibility. If the race "tightens" the last few days you'll know your boy is in trouble. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 01:46:55 am
And speaking of conspiracy theories, do you really believe Russia has planted a computer repair guy,  faked Hunter Biden's signature and convinced a navy veteran former business partner to spread disinformation on Biden's corrupt business dealings?  Don't forget the treasury department confirming the 3.5 million transfer from Putin friend former Moscow mayor's wife to Hunter, who complained he had to give half his money to his dad.  But you probably haven't heard about that because you watch CNN and MSNBC and swallow it all,  hook,  line and sinker.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 23, 2020, 02:32:00 am
Wow, Robb’s support for Trump is getting downright vitriolic.

Sorry to see Trump’s character replicated in yet another fan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 23, 2020, 02:42:59 am
Notorious liberal rag USA Today fact checks you:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/10/01/fact-check-unproven-claims-hunter-biden-got-3-5-m-russia/3586861001/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on October 23, 2020, 02:50:50 am
I  saw this on the bears board  and thought it might be relevant


So just so I follow this story:

Hunter Biden, who lives in Los Angeles, decides to fly 3000 miles across country, to drop off 3 MacBook Pros at a repair shop run by a blind guy who charges the insanely low price of $85.

He gets off the plane and drunk drives to the repair shop
(because there aren't repair shops in LA). He drops them off, signs a contract for repair and then disappears. The repair shop owner recovers and reads Hunter's *private* emails, a few of which mention a possible meeting with his dad and is so alarmed, he contacts the FBI.

The FBI arranges to pick up the hard drives, but the computer repair shop owner takes a totally normal step of copying them. Once he realizes the FBI isn't doing anything with them, he calls up the most credible ex-Mayor on Earth and hands them the contents of these drives.

That totally credible ex-Mayor sits on them for months, then chooses to release them 3 weeks before the election. The mainstream media asks to independently verify their validity but said ex-Mayor does what all people trying to prove facts do and ignores these requests.

Is this how stupid we are now?

No one who does data recovery would read through thousands of personal emails, even if the computer is abandoned. You'd just wipe the drives clean and sell the computers used.

If these emails were as alarming as it's being pushed, Giuliani wouldn't have sat on them for months.
And if Giuliani wanted to prove their validity, he'd turn them over to forensic experts.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1316844679783223297.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 23, 2020, 04:57:56 am
It’s sad we’re not free from trolls, even here.  But this is what Trump, Fox, and their supporters have done to our national discourse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 23, 2020, 07:21:27 am
And speaking of conspiracy theories, do you really believe Russia has planted a computer repair guy,  faked Hunter Biden's signature and convinced a navy veteran former business partner to spread disinformation on Biden's corrupt business dealings?  Don't forget the treasury department confirming the 3.5 million transfer from Putin friend former Moscow mayor's wife to Hunter, who complained he had to give half his money to his dad.  But you probably haven't heard about that because you watch CNN and MSNBC and swallow it all,  hook,  line and sinker.

The laptop is definitely part of a Russian scheme (as are the text messages that Rudy released yesterday). 

As for the dude who was at the debate last night, he’s apparently full of crap as well.  But, even if Biden were part of that company, it’s unclear what he’s supposed to have done wrong. First, this was as 2017 venture - after he was VP and before he was running so I don’t know why there would be an issue with a business run by private citizen. But, even if the venture proposed was problematic, it never got any money from China or did any deals.  Nothing happened so where is all this supposed corruption?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 07:43:27 am
Wow, Robb’s support for Trump is getting downright vitriolic.

Sorry to see Trump’s character replicated in yet another fan.
Vitriol is what you're all about Tico.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 07:44:37 am
It’s sad we’re not free from trolls, even here.  But this is what Trump, Fox, and their supporters have done to our national discourse.
It's sad you can't have your own little echo chamber where everyone agrees with you? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 07:52:35 am
I  saw this on the bears board  and thought it might be relevant


So just so I follow this story:

Hunter Biden, who lives in Los Angeles, decides to fly 3000 miles across country, to drop off 3 MacBook Pros at a repair shop run by a blind guy who charges the insanely low price of $85.

He gets off the plane and drunk drives to the repair shop
(because there aren't repair shops in LA). He drops them off, signs a contract for repair and then disappears. The repair shop owner recovers and reads Hunter's *private* emails, a few of which mention a possible meeting with his dad and is so alarmed, he contacts the FBI.

The FBI arranges to pick up the hard drives, but the computer repair shop owner takes a totally normal step of copying them. Once he realizes the FBI isn't doing anything with them, he calls up the most credible ex-Mayor on Earth and hands them the contents of these drives.

That totally credible ex-Mayor sits on them for months, then chooses to release them 3 weeks before the election. The mainstream media asks to independently verify their validity but said ex-Mayor does what all people trying to prove facts do and ignores these requests.

Is this how stupid we are now?

No one who does data recovery would read through thousands of personal emails, even if the computer is abandoned. You'd just wipe the drives clean and sell the computers used.

If these emails were as alarming as it's being pushed, Giuliani wouldn't have sat on them for months.
And if Giuliani wanted to prove their validity, he'd turn them over to forensic experts.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1316844679783223297.html
There is plenty of evidence this laptop is Hunter's, starting with the 25k pictures of him on it.  Some of his 14 yr old niece Natalie half naked in multiple reports. Multiple people on email chains have verified it's true independent of Giuliani. Give me a break here.  Even Biden hasn't said it isn't Hunter's laptop. The day it's released Biden calls a lid until the debate to "prepare," a 5 day lid 2 weeks before an election.  Nobody does that.  Evidence is everywhere this is true, but the media isn't interested because orangemanbad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 23, 2020, 08:33:49 am

The Dems have not failed to show up "to committee meetings to effectively kill bills and nominations." This has not been a practice, so why suggest that it has been?


If the Dems replicate what the Republicans did with Garland and Barrett, then that would be a valid comparison.

We get another example of Republicans changing the rules to suit their needs. This time in the judiciary committee where they voted today on Barrett despite not having a quorum.

So would you be ok with Republicans doing this and then Democrats being unable to vote things through?  Because this is what that quote was in response to.   If the Democrats take the Senate I fully expect them to get rid of the filibuster and so something like this would be an issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 23, 2020, 08:41:22 am
I’m no secret agent but I would imagine that the best way to make a scheme like this work is to mix whatever disinformation you are trying to plant in with authentic things - pictures, emails, etc.  So, I bet some of the stuff on that laptop are real. But, I really doubt that it was a coincidence that, at the exact same time Rudy is fishing around in Ukraine for dirt on the Biden’s that this laptop suddenly appears. It was known that the Russians were looking for a way to meddle, Rudy was publicly asking for information, and, in the aftermath, he’s made it clear that he doesn’t even know or care if this stuff is real, he just wants it out (see his comments re NY Post vs other media outlets and their fact checking and “it’s 50/50 if I worked with a Russian spy”).  This whole thing is so dumb. Thankfully it seems like only the already converted true believers are falling for this nonsense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 10:10:06 am
Funny how the media and Dems believed every"report" about Trump colluding with Russia, laughed at him for saying he was spied on and impeached him for asking Ukraine about Hunter's shady deals. An army of Trump hating prosecuters couldn't find anything.  The FBI now admits they spied on him and Hunter did receive 83k monthly to sit on a board of a gas company in Ukraine although he admitted knowing nothing about the industry.  He even admitted he only got the job because of his father's influence and name.  But these facts are all Russia, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 23, 2020, 11:34:29 am
So would you be ok with Republicans doing this and then Democrats being unable to vote things through?  Because this is what that quote was in response to.   If the Democrats take the Senate I fully expect them to get rid of the filibuster and so something like this would be an issue.

This is a pointless discussion. You keep acting like this extraordinary response by the Dems of boycotting the Judiciary Committee vote on sending the Barrett nomination to the Senate floor after such an extraordinary chain of events starting with Garland, and ending with a hyper-sped up confirmation process with Barrett is suggestive of some sort of a pattern by the Dems. It's not, and I'm guessing you realize that. I am not into prolonged virtual debates like you and Reb, so I'm stopping now.  You can have the last word - I only hope you will not set up and attack a strawman in doing so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 23, 2020, 12:19:08 pm
Vitriol is what you're all about Tico.

Nope. More than any other regularly engaged member in this thread, I believe I’ve consistently gone out of my way to attempt serious, thoughtful, amicable discourse with you, regularly going so far as to defend you and call others out when they use blatantly offensive and derogatory language towards you and your religious beliefs.

I’ve simply stopped tone policing myself when it comes to the anger I feel about a racist, narcissistic, wanna-be despot that is destroying all normalcy in gov’t while cheering on the worst of his radicalized, racist, violent supporters.

Do not mistake my anger for vitriol.

Further, you have not proven capable of rational discourse. You ignore rebuttals from sources you have previously agreed as neutral and fair and continue to peddle inane conspiracy theories, while also claiming to be a fair-minded person about these things.

You are happy to support a vile racist who sees no problems throwing kids in cages, courting dictators, cheating elections, lying without remorse, putting his ego over American lives as it relates to COVID, is plainly corrupt, a serial sexual abuser, etc.

I will continue to speak to you with respect. But respect demands neither being “nice” nor dignifying absolute horseshit arguments. The literal hours I’ve spent attempting otherwise with you in conversation have all been wasted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on October 23, 2020, 01:52:02 pm
I’ve been laughing all morning at this...poor dumb liberals thought he meant actual coyotes...lmao...


https://twitter.com/sophnar0747/status/1319524700721192967?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on October 23, 2020, 01:54:23 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201023/4ca8929e71ce9d0a37a4689584154165.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on October 23, 2020, 01:54:40 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201023/31f298013b3dce746cb77669f3a26922.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on October 23, 2020, 01:54:57 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201023/0424880d7575fb95fd0fc581d9639d60.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on October 23, 2020, 01:55:51 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201023/97c744b41aa66f3a09be9a6652837f56.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on October 23, 2020, 01:56:38 pm
I can’t imagine what they think drug mules really are...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 23, 2020, 03:10:26 pm
This is a pointless discussion. You keep acting like this extraordinary response by the Dems of boycotting the Judiciary Committee vote on sending the Barrett nomination to the Senate floor after such an extraordinary chain of events starting with Garland, and ending with a hyper-sped up confirmation process with Barrett is suggestive of some sort of a pattern by the Dems. It's not, and I'm guessing you realize that. I am not into prolonged virtual debates like you and Reb, so I'm stopping now.  You can have the last word - I only hope you will not set up and attack a strawman in doing so.

The question was directed at Jack, because he was implying the Republicans where doing something dastardly by voting on it.  It was nothing more than a question for Jack.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 23, 2020, 03:18:53 pm
Say the Hunter Biden stuff is true, how is it any different than Ivanka getting patents pushed through in China, or Trump selling memberships at Mar-A-Lago or lobbyists booking events at his hotels?

I will say that there should be more regulations on families of politicians making money off of selling access.  It Hunter Biden was Hunter Smith he isn't making this kind of money and he is far from the only family member of politician making money like this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 23, 2020, 06:40:49 pm

Alana Abramson
@aabramson
 · 8h
Returned ballots in PA so far, per PA SOS Kathy Boockvar:
•Dem = 1,023,402
•Rep = 293,318
•Other = 132,680
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 08:20:36 pm
If those numbers are true then PA is looking good for Biden. MI and MN are still looking great for Trump. AZ is actually ahead of 2016. NV is closer too, almost even according to a state Democrat campaign chair.  Trump can lose PA and still win comfortably. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 08:31:26 pm
Nope. More than any other regularly engaged member in this thread, I believe I’ve consistently gone out of my way to attempt serious, thoughtful, amicable discourse with you, regularly going so far as to defend you and call others out when they use blatantly offensive and derogatory language towards you and your religious beliefs.

I’ve simply stopped tone policing myself when it comes to the anger I feel about a racist, narcissistic, wanna-be despot that is destroying all normalcy in gov’t while cheering on the worst of his radicalized, racist, violent supporters.

Do not mistake my anger for vitriol.

Further, you have not proven capable of rational discourse. You ignore rebuttals from sources you have previously agreed as neutral and fair and continue to peddle inane conspiracy theories, while also claiming to be a fair-minded person about these things.

You are happy to support a vile racist who sees no problems throwing kids in cages, courting dictators, cheating elections, lying without remorse, putting his ego over American lives as it relates to COVID, is plainly corrupt, a serial sexual abuser, etc.

I will continue to speak to you with respect. But respect demands neither being “nice” nor dignifying absolute horseshit arguments. The literal hours I’ve spent attempting otherwise with you in conversation have all been wasted.
Not trying to pick a fight Tico. But I vote for policy,  not personality. Energy independence,  conservative justices, lower taxes, less regulation, cracking down on illegal immigration,  supporting police.

The racist argument is tired and not supported by his policies. Criminal justice reform, opportunity zones, funding black colleges, lowest black unemployment ever. He didn't say if you don't  vote for me,  you ain't black.  He didn't author a crime bill disproportionately putting black men in jail for simple drug use.  He didn't call black men super predators on his floor speech on the floor of the senate, he didn't say he didn't want his children living in racial jungle,  he didn't refer to Obama as finally showing a clean, articulate black man, he didn't eulogize a grandmaster kkk member and call him his mentor, that was your boy. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 23, 2020, 08:38:34 pm
If you’re going to cite Gallup in support of a favorable Trump showing, you have a big problem:  Gallup polling says voters overwhelmingly feel that Trump does NOT deserve re-election. This is particularly evident among Independents (the largest % voting block according to Gallup). 61% of Independents say Trump is undeserving of re-election.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/322340/voters-say-trump-not-deserve-reelection.aspx
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 23, 2020, 08:57:36 pm
Gallup also says 57% of people say they are better off than they were the last four years,  even with Covid. That metric, more than polls have accurately predicted whether an incumbent will be reelected. I'm not predicting a Trump win,  but he certainly has a much better shot than polls give him.  Now let's see, why does that seem familiar?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 23, 2020, 09:21:20 pm
So you guys are believing the polls again?  You might want to see the real numbers on early voting and registrations.  Dems need a big lead in VBM to withstand ED turnout that slants R. They aren't getting the margins they need.  Heck,  in MI it is almost tied.  NC, dems are behind 2016, FL too. MN should really scare you.  Even the senate race is within the margin of error.  It could be that R's are voting for Biden but that isn't what the polls say.  We will see but you guys better wrap your minds around the possibility Trump wins, perhaps comfortably if EV voting trends don't change.

Michigan and Minnesota don’t report early voting by party registration. So, what you said above makes no sense. Don’t just swallow what Trump says on the stump.

PA does report by party reg...and it’s been overwhelmingly Dem so far. Florida does too. Dems up by 9% Fla so far. See link below.

Look, 538 says Trump currently has 12% chances to win. Think that’s what Cubs had at some point in 2016 to win WS. If we go to the racetrack together and bet on a 8-1 horse, might feel hopeful about winning. I recently played an interactive  election tool that reflected those odds. Played once and it came up Trump. So, he could win, G-d Forbid.

https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 23, 2020, 09:44:33 pm
Look, 538 says Trump currently has 12% chances to win. Think that’s what Cubs had at some point in 2016 to win WS.

MLB pitchers hit .128 in 2019. So he has about the same chance to win as the average pitcher has of getting a hit. It's not something that shocks you when it happens, but is also something that rarely happens. (538 also has Biden at 33% to win in a landslide)

This is a fun new feature 538 released in the last couple of days. It's an interactive version of their model where you can see how the results in any state impacts each candidate's chance of winning.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-biden-election-map/?cid=abcnews

My understanding (from 538 and other media) that the key states to watch on election night are Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona, and maybe Texas to a much lesser extent. Trump basically needs to win all of them to have a chance; Biden is currently about a 2-1 favorite in the first three. There's a good chance that all of those states could be called on election night. If Biden wins any of those states, Trump will have a very, very tough time winning (they have Biden at 98% if he wins AZ, 99% if he wins NC, and >99% if he wins FL or TX).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 23, 2020, 09:56:53 pm
Gallup also says 57% of people say they are better off than they were the last four years,  even with Covid. That metric, more than polls have accurately predicted whether an incumbent will be reelected. I'm not predicting a Trump win,  but he certainly has a much better shot than polls give him.  Now let's see, why does that seem familiar?

It says a lot about perceptions about Trump that there is such a major disconnect between the “better off” question and the “deserves to be re-elected” question. With the exception of his can-shoot-somebody-on-Fifth Avenue base, folks widely perceive that Trump is unfit for office. What other explanation can there be for the disconnect?

Further, the “better off” question is less important than the favorability/unfavorability metrics, particularly here as the latter are remarkably consistent with Trump for virtually his entire term and are consistently well under what is necessary. Obviously, he’s going to lose the popular vote and his 12% shot is solely because of the peculiarities of the electoral college. That’s our system, so stuff can happen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 23, 2020, 10:32:41 pm
MLB pitchers hit .128 in 2019. So he has about the same chance to win as the average pitcher has of getting a hit. It's not something that shocks you when it happens, but is also something that rarely happens. (538 also has Biden at 33% to win in a landslide)

This is a fun new feature 538 released in the last couple of days. It's an interactive version of their model where you can see how the results in any state impacts each candidate's chance of winning.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-biden-election-map/?cid=abcnews

My understanding (from 538 and other media) that the key states to watch on election night are Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona, and maybe Texas to a much lesser extent. Trump basically needs to win all of them to have a chance; Biden is currently about a 2-1 favorite in the first three. There's a good chance that all of those states could be called on election night. If Biden wins any of those states, Trump will have a very, very tough time winning (they have Biden at 98% if he wins AZ, 99% if he wins NC, and >99% if he wins FL or TX).

Actually if Biden wins either Florida or Pennsylvania (or even Arizona, I believe). If you play around with the 538 tool, or at 270 to Win, you can see that. Biden has nearly a 7 point lead in Pennsylvania in the 538 polling average. Of course this assumes WI & MI where Biden has even more substantial leads.  Not that anyone should take anything for granted. I've been doing calling to voters in battleground states at least twice a week and will continue to do so til the election. This is truly an existential election for our country and our democracy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 23, 2020, 10:49:56 pm
Florida tabulates its mailed ballots before election day and can announce those as soon as polling closes. So, there figures to be a substantial count early in the night in Florida. Of course, if history is a guide it figures to be Florida close and so that wouldn’t change, whenever the vote is tabulated. But, if by chance it looks bad for Trump in Florida 3-4 hours after polls close, possible we’ll know a lot that night. Not counting on that, but possible.

There are rumors that to avoid a marathon days-long count, Florida will be putting a runner at 2B top of every hour. That’s what people are saying. Saw that in a retweet from a VERY reliable source.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 24, 2020, 12:27:44 am
Actually if Biden wins either Florida or Pennsylvania (or even Arizona, I believe). If you play around with the 538 tool, or at 270 to Win, you can see that. Biden has nearly a 7 point lead in Pennsylvania in the 538 polling average. Of course this assumes WI & MI where Biden has even more substantial leads.  Not that anyone should take anything for granted. I've been doing calling to voters in battleground states at least twice a week and will continue to do so til the election. This is truly an existential election for our country and our democracy.

There are basically two states that matter in this election.  One is PA - because if Biden wins PA, MI and WI he gets to 270.  And he's not losing MI or WI if he wins PA - that's the toughest nut of the three.  PA would essentially be the undisputed key state in a normal election year.

Because this isn't a normal election year and we have a proto-fascist president who refuses to commit to a peaceful transfer of power, the other state that matters is Florida.  Because Florida will be decided on election night (barring anything really crazy like Gore-Bush), and if Trump loses FL he has no realistic path to claiming he was cheated in a close election.  PA won't be decided on election night if it's close, FL will - and that makes FL equally important given the peculiarities of the moment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 24, 2020, 08:03:59 am
Nate Cohn
@Nate_Cohn
One important election night twist: early mail ballots are really good for Biden in Arizona so far, reversing the traditional pattern (you may recall McSally led and then Sinema over took post election day).
Now, I'd expect Biden to have the Election Night lead in Arizona.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 24, 2020, 09:56:19 am
Polls separate the optimists from the pessimists.

I remember Carter vs. Reagan.  Weekend polls showed Reagan with a 3 point lead with a plus or minus margin of error as 4.  Carter supporters had hope.  Somebody in the group that was discussing the possibilities said, yeah, but that means Reagan could be up by 7.   We all know how that turned out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 24, 2020, 09:58:10 am
AZ has been trending Trump and McSally this week with several polls showing a lead there for both.  PA continues to be interesting, the early vote looks good for D's. However,  are all this registered D's voting for Biden? It was the crossovers that won PA for Trump last time.  How many 538 A+ pollsters are taking into account the shy Trump vote, which will be greater than last time? Nate Silver is not the end all of election predictions. He touts his model as one of the best because he gave Trump a 29% or so chance in 2016. Sorry,  but if a polling firm is 71% wrong I'm hiring a new firm,  especially if they go by the same metrics that failed before.  Another unknown in this election is the increased approval of Trump among young black males and Latinos. If Trump gets even a small bump in these communities it becomes nearly impossible to see a Biden win. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 24, 2020, 10:08:26 am
You can look at FL overall but the trends since EV began are moving R in a big way.  On election day in 2016 HRC has a sizeable lead and lost by 112k. If trends continue Biden will have less of a lead than her and will have cannibalized much of his ED voters as well.  A FL dem operative said they would need a 650k lead on election day to overcome ED R turnout. They are no where near that and losing ground daily while the panhandle hasn't even begun.  Florida could be called quite early on election night.  BTW, R's are nearly even in Miami Dade County.  That's how bad FL is trending for Biden. The only chance Biden had there is that large numbers of R's are voting Biden. Problem is,  Trump has a 96% approval among R's so not likely. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 24, 2020, 01:31:03 pm
2016 Florida early voting trends won’t tell us much about 2020. That’s because who votes by mail/early in-person has totally flipped. In 2016 Florida Democrats cast 154,694 more ballots at early voting locations than Republicans, and the GOP cast 58,244 more mail votes than Democrats. This year, way more Democrats than Republicans are voting by mail and, so far in a few days since early in-person voting, more Republicans are voting in-person than Dems.

So, it is foolish to characterize this as anybody’s advantage at this point. We just don’t know at this point.

Also, there are nearly 1M non-party early votes in Fla so far and nobody knows how they are trending. That’s a lot of votes and we know that national polling has Trump doing poorly with Independents. Maybe Fla will be different and maybe it won’t. Independents may well decide Florida victor.

Finally, as to R allegedly being “nearly even” in Dade County, it’s 59.4 Dem and 40.6 R. That’s Trumping math I guess.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 24, 2020, 07:20:42 pm
Political Polls
@PpollingNumbers
·
17m
Returned Mail Ballots by Party Registration*

Dem:     10,866,723 (52.5%)
Rep:      5,045,574   (24.4%)
Others: 4,664,046  (22.5%)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 24, 2020, 09:07:39 pm
There are almost as many non-party affiliated mail ballots returned so far as Republican mail ballots.

4,686,272 Independents.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 24, 2020, 09:35:01 pm
How many 538 A+ pollsters are taking into account the shy Trump vote, which will be greater than last time?

This is a small thing...but of all the ways Republicans have rationalized Trump's poor performance in polls, the "shy Trump vote" thing is the silliest. It's not real, there isn't a significant number of shy Trump voters out there. Why would they hide their preference in an anonymous poll? It's just silly that Fox News and talk radio have convinced their followers that this is a real thing.

The problem with the polls in 2016 was that pollsters didn't survey enough non-college educated white voters in the rust belt. And they've adjusted for that. There is no evidence that "shy Trump voters" were part of the polling error. 

The polls in 2016 underestimated Trump...but don't forget that the polls in 2012 underestimated Obama. They were still clearly in his favor going into election day, but he beat expectations in that election. Democrats/Republicans are worried/hopeful that this is 2016 all over again...but it's very possible that pollsters could have over-adjusted and this year will be more like 2012.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 24, 2020, 10:01:40 pm
There are almost as many non-party affiliated mail ballots returned so far as Republican mail ballots.

4,686,272 Independents.

Bear in mind those numbers are from only the states that report party ID of early votes, and represent less than half of the total returned.  But there's no specific reason to believe the breakdown from the other states would be significantly different.

The Rs have made a big gamble here, betting that they can suppress enough of these mail votes through corrupt SoS and judges to make up for the fact that these votes are banked.  They're relying on a big Election Day turnout when the Trump virus seems to be gearing up for another major spike.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 24, 2020, 10:02:34 pm
This is a small thing...but of all the ways Republicans have rationalized Trump's poor performance in polls, the "shy Trump vote" thing is the silliest. It's not real, there isn't a significant number of shy Trump voters out there. Why would they hide their preference in an anonymous poll? It's just silly that Fox News and talk radio have convinced their followers that this is a real thing.

The problem with the polls in 2016 was that pollsters didn't survey enough non-college educated white voters in the rust belt. And they've adjusted for that. There is no evidence that "shy Trump voters" were part of the polling error. 

The polls in 2016 underestimated Trump...but don't forget that the polls in 2012 underestimated Obama. They were still clearly in his favor going into election day, but he beat expectations in that election. Democrats/Republicans are worried/hopeful that this is 2016 all over again...but it's very possible that pollsters could have over-adjusted and this year will be more like 2012.

The polls in 2016 were closer to the final result than the polls in 2012.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 24, 2020, 10:23:14 pm
Not trying to pick a fight Tico. But I vote for policy, not personality.

Well, at least the mask is off, and we can now clearly state for yet another “values voter” that it was never actually actually about values.

By the way, pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony, and sloth are not “personality.” The book that is so important to you has another name for these traits.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 24, 2020, 10:23:14 pm
They're relying on a big Election Day turnout when the Trump virus seems to be gearing up for another major spike.

It was gearing up a week or two ago. Now it's just spiking.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 25, 2020, 08:13:39 pm
538 polling average in Texas (Biden has actually moved to 47.6% since Nate Silver tweeted this image a couple hours ago):


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ElNZ4vSWMAI3q6u?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 25, 2020, 09:09:41 pm
Ds have outperformed their polls in TX in the last two elections.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 26, 2020, 12:39:55 pm
Nebraska's second district is going to go for Biden.  Trump is having to have one of his spreader rallies at the Airport because he is doing so poorly in the western parts of Omaha.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 26, 2020, 12:44:29 pm
Meanwhile, Biden has decided it’s worth his time to do two stops in Georgia tomorrow only a week before the election. This comes after Harris stopped in Georgia late last week.

No way they’d be in spending that much time in Georgia right now if they didn’t really believe the presidency and/or both Senate seats are truly in play.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 26, 2020, 01:51:28 pm
Tico, I am still voting for values. I am voting against the killing of a million "inconvenient" babies next year.  Sorry,  that will always sway me no matter what.  I could go on but we are both entrenched so why bother?  Both sides believe they will blow out the other.  Should make for a fun election night for some.  We'll see. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 26, 2020, 04:50:01 pm
You clearly spoke your priorities earlier when enumerating policies largely related to the preservation of minority-rule and casually writing off Trump’s flagrantly abusive behaviors as “personality.” I understand that the abortion issue also matters to you, but even the callous way you talk about that reveals the hollowness of your arguments, to say nothing of the disconnect between identifying as “pro-life” and then marching in lockstep with this administration.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 26, 2020, 04:58:36 pm
And no, election night is not going to be fun for me. It’s either going to be a relief or a nightmare.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 26, 2020, 05:16:50 pm
You clearly spoke your priorities earlier when enumerating policies largely related to the preservation of minority-rule and casually writing off Trump’s flagrantly abusive behaviors as “personality.” I understand that the abortion issue also matters to you, but even the callous way you talk about that reveals the hollowness of your arguments, to say nothing of the disconnect between identifying as “pro-life” and then marching in lockstep with this administration.

I’ll never be able to get over the fact that all these “pro-life” people are voting for the guy who set up concentration camps on the border and made permanent family separation official immigration policy.  Or, think that the guy who has presided over this historically botched pandemic response which has directly resulted in thousands of needless deaths (with a lot more to come) should get four more years. Frankly, the argument that this administration is pro-life is so stupid that it can’t be taken seriously.  Pro-life is the excuse for voting for more of this but it’s not the actual reason.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 26, 2020, 10:37:09 pm
It would be about a lot more than "personality" if a Democratic president were even 1/10 as corrupt as the Trump administration.  But Fox News doesn't say it's okay to believe in Trump's corruption. . . .
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 27, 2020, 12:28:07 am
Rallies Are the Core of Trump’s
Campaign, and a
Font of Lies and Misinformation


A recent rally in Wisconsin was typical. In 90 minutes, President Trump made 131 false or inaccurate statements.

By Linda Qiu and Michael D. Shear
Oct. 26, 2020


President Trump's speech in Janesville, Wis.
Passages highlighted in red are false or inaccurate.


The speech is too large to copy. Click on this link to see the speech


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/26/us/politics/trump-rallies.html



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 27, 2020, 09:40:12 am
But he opposes abortion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 27, 2020, 09:49:40 am
But he opposes abortion.

What are the odds that he actually cares one bit about abortion? Frankly, he despises people like Robb and the rest of the holy rollers. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 27, 2020, 10:35:35 am
The way things look currently, Biden will win if he wins any one of the following states:  Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, or Ohio.  Or, if he loses all of those states, he still wins if he wins in Arizona and Iowa.  Biden is currently polling about even or ahead of Trump in all of those states.  If Biden loses all of those states except Arizona, he still wins if he gets one more electoral vote from either Nebraska’s second district (where he has a significant lead in the polls) or Maine’s second district (where he is polling slightly ahead of Trump).
 
The vote from Arizona will theoretically be in on election night, and that will be an important one to watch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 27, 2020, 11:46:15 am
Statement from former US Attnys - who were appointed and served under Republican Presidents from Eisenhower to George W - in an editorial published today:

"As we watch the turbulent events unfolding in our country today, we are concerned that the President has departed from this traditional mandate in several troubling ways. First, the President has clearly conveyed that he expects his Justice Department appointees and prosecutors to serve his personal and political interests in the handling of certain cases - such as the investigations into foreign election interference and the prosecution of his political associates - and has taken action against those who have stood up for the interests of justice. He has politicized the Justice Department, dictating its priorities along political lines and breaking down the barrier that prior administrations had maintained between political and prosecutorial decision making - a barrier that has been fundamental to maintaining confidence among the American people that their Justice Department is acting as a fair and impartial arbiter of prosecutorial discretion. Finally, he has undermined the Department's ability to unify and lead our nation's law enforcement by picking political fights with state and local officials in a naked effort to demonize and blame them for the disturbances in our cities over the past several months. For these reasons, we believe that President Trump's leadership is a threat to the rule of law in our country, and we do not support his reelection.

In contrast with President Trump, former Vice President Joe Biden has devoted his career to supporting law enforcement, protecting the independence of the Justice Department, and working to ensure that the federal government exercises its law enforcement powers fairly and impartially and in the interests of all Americans. And, as he has often mentioned during this turbulent time, Joe Biden understands that unity - and not division - is the key to meeting the challenges that our country is facing. Unlike the current president, Joe Biden and his Justice Department will make every effort to unite law enforcement and the nation in the pursuit of justice - to defend the rule of law, to serve and protect all Americans, and to build a criminal justice system that provides equal justice under the law."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 27, 2020, 11:46:55 am
But he opposes abortion.

Over under on the number of pregnancies Trump has ensured aborted? I'm going to say 4.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on October 27, 2020, 11:58:14 am
Over under on the number of pregnancies Trump has ensured aborted? I'm going to say 4.

Ill easily take the over here...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 27, 2020, 12:25:46 pm
Quote
Over under on the number of pregnancies Trump has ensured aborted? I'm going to say 4.

I was literally going to post the exact same thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 27, 2020, 02:08:16 pm
That Jesus fella who is so important to so many Trump voters also had a lot of choice words for people who said one thing in the name of religious piety but then did another.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 27, 2020, 04:36:45 pm
The way things look currently, Biden will win if he wins any one of the following states:  Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, or Ohio.  Or, if he loses all of those states, he still wins if he wins in Arizona and Iowa.  Biden is currently polling about even or ahead of Trump in all of those states.  If Biden loses all of those states except Arizona, he still wins if he gets one more electoral vote from either Nebraska’s second district (where he has a significant lead in the polls) or Maine’s second district (where he is polling slightly ahead of Trump).
 
The vote from Arizona will theoretically be in on election night, and that will be an important one to watch.

This is assuming the count isn'r rigged or hijacked after the fact by the courts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 27, 2020, 06:45:03 pm
Douglas county makes up the largest part of Nebraska second district. In 2016 about 219,000 (65,000 voted in Saroyan county which has Offutt Air Force Base) people voted. As of Oct 20, 160,000 early ballots where requested and 100,000 had been returned.

Sasse isn’t going to Trump’s event in Omaha, but the Iowa Republicans are showing up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 27, 2020, 07:15:04 pm
This is assuming the count isn'r rigged or hijacked after the fact by the courts.
Great.  Trump wants us to feel the election will be rigged and now so does deeg.  Paranoia reigns. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 27, 2020, 07:22:46 pm
One more week, going to be a fun one.  Trump could still lose if the polls are too be believed.  Or he will win and you will all cry foul because Nate Silver was wrong again.  Contrary to belief here Trump can win fair and square next week in fact I expect it.  Dem advantage in early voting there shrunk again today,  big time.  NC early advantage shrinking daily, almost down to what it ended up in 2016. OH is looking done already.  R's are 2 ahead in early voting, James is up there as well.  Many polls showing Trump getting 14-15% of Black vote this time. Don't be too smug that crossovers will help D's. Could easily be the other way around.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 27, 2020, 07:23:48 pm
Rallies Are the Core of Trump’s
Campaign, and a
Font of Lies and Misinformation


A recent rally in Wisconsin was typical. In 90 minutes, President Trump made 131 false or inaccurate statements.

By Linda Qiu and Michael D. Shear
Oct. 26, 2020


President Trump's speech in Janesville, Wis.
Passages highlighted in red are false or inaccurate.


The speech is too large to copy. Click on this link to see the speech


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/26/us/politics/trump-rallies.html




https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/24/fact-check-19-false-claims-in-barack-obamas-speech-for-joe-biden-in-florida/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 27, 2020, 07:30:13 pm
That Jesus fella who is so important to so many Trump voters also had a lot of choice words for people who said one thing in the name of religious piety but then did another.
Like saying he never discussed his son's business while demanding a cut of the money the same son was raking in selling off influence to the highest foreign bidder?  Or do you really believe Hunter was paid millions for his great business acumen?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 27, 2020, 07:39:49 pm
I wonder what he would say about tear gassing peaceful protesters in order to schedule a photo op.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 27, 2020, 07:48:25 pm
It's because of support from people like you, Robb, that Trump has a good chance to win.  You should be very proud.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 27, 2020, 08:08:57 pm
I’m guessing Robb’s social media feeds are a greatest hits of right wing conspiracies right now - Hunter Biden, rigged polls, and COVID truthing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 27, 2020, 08:29:31 pm
Sometimes I am very, very grateful for the Ignore option.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 27, 2020, 08:32:16 pm
One more week, going to be a fun one.  Trump could still lose if the polls are too be believed.  Or he will win and you will all cry foul because Nate Silver was wrong again.  Contrary to belief here Trump can win fair and square next week in fact I expect it.

I would wager that everyone here realizes there is a chance for Trump to win fair and square next week. It's very unlikely--all the evidence shows that he's down big. Since you brought up Nate Silver, 538 gives Trump a 12% chance of winning. A 1 in 8 probability isn't trivial, but you're likely to be disappointed if you expect that outcome.

Pennsylvania is still close enough that a slightly-larger-than-2016 polling error could give it to Trump, and that is most of Biden's vulnerability right now. But we know what caused the polling error in MI/WI/PA in 2016 (under-sampling non-college educated white voters), and pollsters have taken that into account this time around. 538's PA Senate projection in 2018 was off by less than a point, and MI actually underestimated the Democrat.

Quote
Dem advantage in early voting there shrunk again today,  big time.  NC early advantage shrinking daily, almost down to what it ended up in 2016. OH is looking done already.  R's are 2 ahead in early voting, James is up there as well.  Many polls showing Trump getting 14-15% of Black vote this time. Don't be too smug that crossovers will help D's. Could easily be the other way around.

You're grasping at straws. The fact that Biden has a lead in North Carolina to begin with shows just how bad Trump's position is. Ohio was always expected to go to Trump, but Biden is still at 42% to win there. Georgia and Iowa are toss-ups. Arizona and Florida are leaning towards Biden right now. 538 even has Biden with a 1 in 3 chance in Texas. Biden has several paths to 270; Trump has one reasonably likely one: win Pennsylvania, and don't lose any of North Carolina, Ohio, Georgia, Arizona, Florida, or Texas.

And trying to forecast the vote based on party affiliation in early voting is a fool's errand.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 27, 2020, 08:48:24 pm
By the way...while I don't think you can forecast anything about the actual results based on early voting party affiliation, I think it is really interesting how many people have already voted in some states...especially Texas. They're already 87% of the way to their total number of votes cast in 2016 despite the fact that they have more restrictive absentee voting rules than most states. I'm interested to see how that turnout translates on election night.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 27, 2020, 10:08:48 pm
The whole Trump game plan is get enough results challenged in the courts where his captive judges/justices can flip them.  Disqualify as many mail ballots as possible.  Supplemented by sending armed terrorists to the polls in minority districts and, as a backup, working in PA and other places to have alternate slates of "loyal" electors chosen by R legislatures in defiance of the popular vote because of "fraud".  They know they have no chance in a legit vote, but they've known and planned for that for months.

It's yet another case of false equivalency to equate Trump's utterly baseless voter fraud claims with what he's already publicly avowed to do to steal the election.  He's telegraphing every punch, and these people are too disconnected with reality to duck.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 28, 2020, 12:18:26 am
By the way...while I don't think you can forecast anything about the actual results based on early voting party affiliation, I think it is really interesting how many people have already voted in some states...especially Texas. They're already 87% of the way to their total number of votes cast in 2016 despite the fact that they have more restrictive absentee voting rules than most states. I'm interested to see how that turnout translates on election night.
Texas has also set it up so some people have to drive as far as 50 miles to the nearest ballot box drop off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 28, 2020, 01:35:13 am
I think Texas is a state where Abbot's bald-faced efforts to stifle voting have backfired by making people even more determined to vote.  Bloomberg likely has better polling data than anything available publicly, and he's decided to make a huge financial buy there. Biden is doing a 3-day swing there - just added - which he would never do if his internal polling wasn't encouraging.  Texas is very much in play, and losing there would effectively make any attempt to steal the election by Trump fruitless.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 28, 2020, 06:55:15 am
This is a nice summary of the selfishness and incompetence of Trump. And, since these people are still going to vote for him, the stupidity and hopelessness of his cult.

@MeidasTouch: Wow. After Trump's rally tonight, he left thousands of supporters stranded in the blistering cold miles away from their cars. @omaha_scanner is currently reporting at least 30 patient contacts and 7 patient transports to the hospital. Elderly supporters were hit the hardest. https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1321322058656047104/photo/1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on October 28, 2020, 07:08:24 am
Remember you all said Trump didnt have a prayer last time either.

I dont give a **** who wins and wont vote.

I can adapt to either.

Hell I think I agree with Biden more than I do Trump to be honest.

If you think Trump's gonna lose Georgia or NC you're fooling yourself though.

The South is Trump country.

I understand how Florida could be in question somewhat though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 28, 2020, 08:34:13 am
What a ringing endorsement for the south.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 28, 2020, 10:05:35 am
The stock markets are down big-time again this morning.  Poor earnings reports and fears of coming Coronavirus shutdowns, both in Europe and the U.S., are cited as factors.

How many more times are we going to hear "we've turned the corner on Covid-19"?  I guess Trump has fired all the advisors who had the guts to tell him when to try something else.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 28, 2020, 01:04:39 pm
If Trump had a coherent plan for dealing with COVID would he be winning or would his other negatives still bring him down?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 28, 2020, 01:11:14 pm
If Trump had a coherent plan for dealing with COVID would he be winning or would his other negatives still bring him down?

Winning enough states to win the election. Not sure if he’d get ahead in the vote but it would be close.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on October 28, 2020, 03:09:38 pm
I encourage everybody to read this fivethirtyeight.com article analyzing sports owner political contributions. It includes a list of specific owners and whether they contribute to Democrats or Republicans. Not surprisingly, the contributions are overwhelmingly to Republicans.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/inside-the-political-donation-history-of-wealthy-sports-owners/

A couple of things may surprise Cub fans.

Two owners of the Cubs are listed. Laura Ricketts is the 5th highest donor, contributing $1,715,415 to Dems. Only one owner has contributed to Democrats (Peter Angelos).

Todd Ricketts contributes $162,235 to Republicans. There are over 30 owners who have made larger political contributions than Todd Ricketts. 

I would ask folks to please keep these facts in mind the next time anyone claims the Cubs are a right wing organization and contributing to them amounts to building up Trump or Republican war chests.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 28, 2020, 04:59:37 pm
Winning enough states to win the election. Not sure if he’d get ahead in the vote but it would be close.

Disagree.  His approval rating was never about 43% anytime in his term - there were never many undecideds when it comes to him.  It'd be closer in the polls, probably, but he'd still be losing.

But let's be honest - when was Trump ever going tp have a "coherent plan" for anything in the public interest?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 28, 2020, 05:10:39 pm
Ron, 

Under the current system, it’s hard for me to criticize someone who is interested in an election and decides to support a candidate of either party with a legal contribution.


The following pretty much falls into the category of wishful thinking.

Among other things, cutting the current election cycle at least in half would be a good start towards reducing campaign expenses.

Then I’d like to see a thorough analysis of the pros and cons of having publicly financed campaigns for members of Congress and the presidency.   Candidates receiving large sums from special interest groups and PACs would become a thing of the past.  They would then be able to vote for what is best for the country instead of what helps their reelection.   

Find a way to make lobbyists become an endangered species.

So called “dark money” is an abomination.  Get rid of it.

No more “I’m XXX YYYYYYY and I approve this message” would be needed at the end of TV commercials.


Does this have even a ghost of a chance of being done?    Probably not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 28, 2020, 05:26:28 pm
I would wager that everyone here realizes there is a chance for Trump to win fair and square next week. It's very unlikely--all the evidence shows that he's down big. Since you brought up Nate Silver, 538 gives Trump a 12% chance of winning. A 1 in 8 probability isn't trivial, but you're likely to be disappointed if you expect that outcome.

Pennsylvania is still close enough that a slightly-larger-than-2016 polling error could give it to Trump, and that is most of Biden's vulnerability right now. But we know what caused the polling error in MI/WI/PA in 2016 (under-sampling non-college educated white voters), and pollsters have taken that into account this time around. 538's PA Senate projection in 2018 was off by less than a point, and MI actually underestimated the Democrat.

You're grasping at straws. The fact that Biden has a lead in North Carolina to begin with shows just how bad Trump's position is. Ohio was always expected to go to Trump, but Biden is still at 42% to win there. Georgia and Iowa are toss-ups. Arizona and Florida are leaning towards Biden right now. 538 even has Biden with a 1 in 3 chance in Texas. Biden has several paths to 270; Trump has one reasonably likely one: win Pennsylvania, and don't lose any of North Carolina, Ohio, Georgia, Arizona, Florida, or Texas.

And trying to forecast the vote based on party affiliation in early voting is a fool's errand.
When one candidate has a 96% approval rating in his party, calculating their share of the registered vote is actually very accurate. Clinton had a300k + EV lead in NC last time. As of today Biden's lead there is actually less. Florida is all but gone for Biden now. Due to their VBM strategy, they needed a bigger EV lead there than Clinton had. Much bigger. D operatives know it's over. Georgia EV numbers look good as well. With Trump doubling his Black vote, increasing strength among Latinos and at 96% among R voters, these "polls" showing Biden up big aren't doing his voters any favors. Unless they are meant to create a narrative that the election was stolen, a statement Hillary just made again about 2016.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 28, 2020, 05:28:02 pm
Ron, 

Under the current system, it’s hard for me to criticize someone who is interested in an election and decides to support a candidate of either party with a legal contribution.


The following pretty much falls into the category of wishful thinking.

Among other things, cutting the current election cycle at least in half would be a good start towards reducing campaign expenses.

Then I’d like to see a thorough analysis of the pros and cons of having publicly financed campaigns for members of Congress and the presidency.   Candidates receiving large sums from special interest groups and PACs would become a thing of the past.  They would then be able to vote for what is best for the country instead of what helps their reelection.   

Find a way to make lobbyists become an endangered species.

So called “dark money” is an abomination.  Get rid of it.

No more “I’m XXX YYYYYYY and I approve this message” would be needed at the end of TV commercials.


Does this have even a ghost of a chance of being done?    Probably not.
I agree completely with this, (which may give you pause). I would love to see public funding of candidates. An extra benefit would be seeing who is good with a budget and who is not, a skill too rare among politicians of both parties.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 28, 2020, 05:33:56 pm
Do we have an icon for inexcusably, insufferably dumb? 
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcR6A3sVEVHj_rSzdQgX-KFPjPKOvHhzoHicpw&usqp=CAU)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 28, 2020, 05:34:23 pm
It's because of support from people like you, Robb, that Trump has a good chance to win.  You should be very proud.
So I should vote for the guy who has used his political connections to enrich himself and his family at the expense of the country's foreign policy? The guy who passed the crime bill to send minorities to prison for smoking pot, calling them super predators? The guy who brushed his son's sexual abuse of his niece under the rug, not reporting it to authorities? The guy who forgets his own name, what office he is running for and lies about what policies he supports as need suits him? That's the moral choice in this election? Like I said, I vote policies, because neither man is someone to look up to. There is no moral high ground in this election, all that matters is orangemanbad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 28, 2020, 05:43:03 pm
So I should vote for the guy who has used his political connections to enrich himself and his family at the expense of the country's foreign policy? The guy who passed the crime bill to send minorities to prison for smoking pot, calling them super predators? The guy who brushed his son's sexual abuse of his niece under the rug, not reporting it to authorities? The guy who forgets his own name, what office he is running for and lies about what policies he supports as need suits him? That's the moral choice in this election? Like I said, I vote policies, because neither man is someone to look up to. There is no moral high ground in this election, all that matters is orangemanbad.

You are deep in alternative fact land. I’d love to see your browser history.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 28, 2020, 06:26:44 pm
When one candidate has a 96% approval rating in his party, calculating their share of the registered vote is actually very accurate. Clinton had a300k + EV lead in NC last time. As of today Biden's lead there is actually less. Florida is all but gone for Biden now. Due to their VBM strategy, they needed a bigger EV lead there than Clinton had. Much bigger. D operatives know it's over. Georgia EV numbers look good as well. With Trump doubling his Black vote, increasing strength among Latinos and at 96% among R voters, these "polls" showing Biden up big aren't doing his voters any favors. Unless they are meant to create a narrative that the election was stolen, a statement Hillary just made again about 2016.

You're assuming voter registration means something. But in a lot of states, it just doesn't. For example...in Georgia, I'm sure I registered as something 20 years ago when I first moved here, but I have no idea what that is because it just doesn't matter. We have an open primary, and we pick which partisan (or non-partisan) ballot we want on election day. People's political opinions change, but many of them have no reason to make the effort to change their registration.

If Trump is telling the truth that he has a 96% approval rating in his party (he never cites his source, and Google will tell you the rating is typically in the mid-80s), he's basing it on a cherry-picked poll where participants self-identify their party. There's no reason to believe a voter's self-reported party in a poll is highly predictive of their actual registration.

Other problems:
- You're not considering other demographics like age, education, race, location, etc.
- You're not considering independents, who are breaking heavily towards Biden in polls.
- You're not considering that polls show Republicans crossing party lines far more than Democrats in this election. 

I stand by my original claim: it's a fool's errand. Maybe someone with a really sophisticated understanding of political science and statistical modeling could give you some kind of semi-accurate projection. But for the average guy on the internet, it's just not possible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 28, 2020, 06:29:16 pm
You are deep in alternative fact land. I’d love to see your browser history.

Anyone who uses the mocking phrase "Orange man bad" is almost guaranteed to get all their news and information from MAGA-approved sources.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 28, 2020, 06:35:54 pm
You're assuming voter registration means something. But in a lot of states, it just doesn't. For example...in Georgia, I'm sure I registered as something 20 years ago when I first moved here, but I have no idea what that is because it just doesn't matter. We have an open primary, and we pick which partisan (or non-partisan) ballot we want on election day. People's political opinions change, but many of them have no reason to make the effort to change their registration.

If Trump is telling the truth that he has a 96% approval rating in his party (he never cites his source, and Google will tell you the rating is typically in the mid-80s), he's basing it on a cherry-picked poll where participants self-identify their party. There's no reason to believe a voter's self-reported party in a poll is highly predictive of their actual registration.

Other problems:
- You're not considering other demographics like age, education, race, location, etc.
- You're not considering independents, who are breaking heavily towards Biden in polls.
- You're not considering that polls show Republicans crossing party lines far more than Democrats in this election. 

I stand by my original claim: it's a fool's errand. Maybe someone with a really sophisticated understanding of political science and statistical modeling could give you some kind of semi-accurate projection. But for the average guy on the internet, it's just not possible.
Obama is toast.  --Jes Beard
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 28, 2020, 07:24:23 pm
If only there was a site run by a baseball nerd that focused on polling issues.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/we-have-a-lot-of-new-polls-but-theres-little-sign-of-the-presidential-race-tightening/

If you look at fivethirtyeight and the polling from 2016 Trump/Clinton was more like sine wave. 2020 was been Biden pulling away since COVID hit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on October 28, 2020, 08:28:00 pm
Someone I trust told me if I didnt vote by party then vote by the issues that are important to me.

With that being the case covid is an issue that's important to me and I dont like how the Trump republicans have handled themselves or the virus.

Im all for Biden getting a chance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 28, 2020, 08:43:26 pm
But you don’t care enough to actually vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on October 28, 2020, 09:24:58 pm
Like saying he never discussed his son's business while demanding a cut of the money the same son was raking in selling off influence to the highest foreign bidder?  Or do you really believe Hunter was paid millions for his great business acumen?

This has been debunked by sources you’ve agreed are fair and balanced. The fact that you keep peddling this Russian disinformation shows that you’re simply lying when you talk about the “varied” and “unbiased” news sources you claim to consume. Stop lying. Whether it’s to yourself or others, stop lying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 28, 2020, 09:47:06 pm
Someone I trust told me if I didnt vote by party then vote by the issues that are important to me.

With that being the case covid is an issue that's important to me and I dont like how the Trump republicans have handled themselves or the virus.

Im all for Biden getting a chance.

Dusty- You should vote. I know this may sound sentimental, but I think about it from time to time: a whole lot of folks sacrificed and even gave their lives so that we can vote and choose our leaders. It’s worth taking a small portion of your day to do that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 28, 2020, 10:13:43 pm
This has been debunked by sources you’ve agreed are fair and balanced. The fact that you keep peddling this Russian disinformation shows that you’re simply lying when you talk about the “varied” and “unbiased” news sources you claim to consume. Stop lying. Whether it’s to yourself or others, stop lying.

Why continue to engage a troll?  They thrive on attention.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 28, 2020, 10:32:10 pm
Dusty- You should vote. I know this may sound sentimental, but I think about it from time to time: a whole lot of folks sacrificed and even gave their lives so that we can vote and choose our leaders. It’s worth taking a small portion of your day to do that.
But, Reb, those guys were all suckers and losers.  Mr. Trump says so.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 29, 2020, 04:26:16 am
Quote
America’s top infectious diseases expert, Dr Anthony Fauci, has praised Melbourne’s response to the coronavirus, saying he “wished” the US could adopt the same mentality.
In an interview hosted by the University of Melbourne and the Melbourne-based Doherty Institute, Fauci said Australia was “one of the countries that has done actually quite well” in handling the virus.
“I really wish that we could transplant that kind of mentality here,” he said. “Because masks in the United States have almost become a political statement.”
Fauci, who is the most senior member of the White House’s coronavirus taskforce, said that Melbourne’s lockdown and mandatory mask-wearing had struck the right balance between public health and opening up the economy.
“A couple of hours before I came to my home here to pick up this Zoom, I was at a meeting virtually in the situation room in the White House,” he said. “If I were to use the word ‘shutdown’ the country or ‘lockdown’, I would be in serious trouble. They would probably be throwing tomatoes at me or something.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 29, 2020, 04:32:47 pm
I'm not sure I'll ever understand the almost maniacal "you should vote" line of thinking.  Sure, it's everyone's right and duty to become informed enough to make a good decision and vote.  Way too many people, however, don't care enough to do the first part of that.  With social media and Fox News, people are stupider than ever. 

"I seen that guy being strong and in charge on TV.  Maybe he should be president."  Even a little bit of research revealed what a corrupt, disgusting person and appalling candidate Donald Trump was, and that was before the election, but too many people couldn't be bothered with that.  Now we are where we are (my belief remains that the election of Donald Trump as president is the worst thing to happen to the US in my lifetime).  There are many reasons for his election, but one of the most significant one is "stupid people were duped into voting for him."  "Stupid" is overstating it, of course.  Substitute "malleable, uninformed, naive, uneducated, disinterested." 

Dusty is a great example.  He clearly doesn't care enough to make an informed, good decision on voting, so he doesn't.  I commend him for that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on October 29, 2020, 04:51:26 pm
Don’t let Trump devalue the importance of voting—-that’s actually what he wants.

Trump is the outlier. Pretty much all the rest of the time, reasonable people can disagree on the better candidate. But, human nature being what it is, a highly skilled charlatan can fool a whole lot of people. In other contexts, this can also happen to the highly intelligent elites too. See Bernie Madoff. Anybody can be fooled and on a mass scale too.

In our country (Now), you don’t have to have a high IQ, own property, be a white male, pass a news quiz, or pass some other litmus test of good value to vote. A lot of those folks buried at Arlington Cemetery would be ineligible to vote under some of those criteria. Yet, they died preserving democracy for some of us damn fools, thank goodness.

If 95% of eligible voters voted—even those damn fools—the country would be better off. So, from my perspective, better to encourage voting than discourage voting based on somebody’s personal litmus test.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 29, 2020, 04:57:09 pm
Some places require it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 29, 2020, 05:24:25 pm
Reb, I wholeheartedly agree.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 29, 2020, 05:48:54 pm
Some places require it.

@Method https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting

Not endorsing it.  Just saying it exists.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 29, 2020, 05:58:29 pm
I think that if there is something you care about and voting can impact it (like Dusty and Covid), then you should vote. But, voting with no goal or real idea why you are voting should not happen. At least take the time to figure out why a vote matters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 29, 2020, 06:13:00 pm
This has been debunked by sources you’ve agreed are fair and balanced. The fact that you keep peddling this Russian disinformation shows that you’re simply lying when you talk about the “varied” and “unbiased” news sources you claim to consume. Stop lying. Whether it’s to yourself or others, stop lying.
What sources have debunked this?  What media have investigated this at all?  You are seriously going to say this is Russian disinformation?  Good grief you seriously need to do some research. You guys call Foxnews bad. How about media who won't even look into a story to see if it's credible? The same media who pushed collusion for 3 years until an army of liberal prosecutors admitted it was a lie. 
Step out of the bubble. The truth is out there. The FBI, CIA, director of intelligence and senate have confirmed this is Biden's laptop. The receipt he signed also proves it.  His business partner,  a lifelong Democrat just confirmed it all with documents to back it up. 

Again with the name calling. Liar, troll, cultist, idiot. So far just a few of the labels of the party who cares towards me simply because I have the audacity to disagree. I pity you your vitriol. It seems to be a construct of the liberal mind.  Tolerance for all,  unless you dare disagree with me.  Then you deserve to be silenced, cast out and shunned.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on October 29, 2020, 06:29:26 pm
Just to be clear, I believe everyone should take the time to understand enough to vote.  I view it as a civic responsibility and priviledge.

Too many people won't do both parts.  If you get your news from Facebook, I would prefer that you not vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 29, 2020, 06:30:23 pm
So Fox News is okay?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 29, 2020, 06:33:02 pm
What sources have debunked this?  What media have investigated this at all?  You are seriously going to say this is Russian disinformation?  Good grief you seriously need to do some research. You guys call Foxnews bad. How about media who won't even look into a story to see if it's credible? The same media who pushed collusion for 3 years until an army of liberal prosecutors admitted it was a lie. 
Step out of the bubble. The truth is out there. The FBI, CIA, director of intelligence and senate have confirmed this is Biden's laptop. The receipt he signed also proves it.  His business partner,  a lifelong Democrat just confirmed it all with documents to back it up.
 

You are being taken for a ride.  Given your background, you are definitely susceptible to this kind of manipulation.   Also, NBC is part of the media and they published a story digging into this “Biden is owned by China stuff” and, shockingly, it’s BS.  https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1245387?__twitter_impression=true

Also, WSJ looked into this 2017 business which apparently is the fake scandal of the day and, of course, found nothing there.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hunter-bidens-ex-business-partner-alleges-father-knew-about-venture-11603421247?st=63rov64dd53en0v&reflink=article_copyURL_share

Again with the name calling. Liar, troll, cultist, idiot. So far just a few of the labels of the party who cares towards me simply because I have the audacity to disagree. I pity you your vitriol. It seems to be a construct of the liberal mind.  Tolerance for all,  unless you dare disagree with me.  Then you deserve to be silenced, cast out and shunned.

Those seem like accurate and fairly benign descriptions of you and your behavior.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 29, 2020, 06:57:57 pm
I think it is hubris to take the position that many people are too stupid (or lazy) to deserve to vote.  The whole point of a democracy is to give everyone the opportunity to express their preferences (no matter how poorly reasoned) at the ballot box.  I would much prefer to see 100% voter turnout than what we have now (with millions of people choosing to be disenfranchised).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 29, 2020, 07:08:44 pm
It's hard to top Donald Trump when it comes to being disingenuous but Georgia senator Kelly Loeffler has managed to do just that

https://youtu.be/zez_ilIEPxQ
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 29, 2020, 07:45:08 pm
Loeffler is awful. The polling has been very positive in her race lately, though. 538 actually has Raphael Warnock as a 2 in 3 favorite to win that race now. He's the favorite to get the most votes next week and is polling much better than both Loeffler and Doug Collins in a potential runoff (which would happen in December if no candidate wins a majority on election day).

Really, all the polling in Georgia has been moving sharply in a positive direction recently. Biden is now projected as a slight favorite, and Jon Ossoff has moved from about a 25% chance to beat David Perdue to a 42% chance in just the last week or so. It's not out of the question that Biden could win Georgia and the Democrats could pick up two Senate seats in Georgia. I'm not expecting that...but it's definitely plausible, which no one would've predicted 6 months ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 29, 2020, 09:10:18 pm
GA is trending very well, but the ability of the GOP establishment there to steal elections is a force to be reckoned with.  Kemp used it to become governor and you can bet he's got every card in the deck being played.

Loeffler really is a joke - she may not even make the runoff.  Hard to say who's the most pathetic - her, or McSalley, who is about to lose two elections within a year for seats she was never elected to.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on October 30, 2020, 08:57:42 am
So who expects civil unrest like we've never seen next week?

I dont foresee anything like that going on around here but in other places I fully expect it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 30, 2020, 09:07:05 am
I love how cleaning up voter roles by removing dead people and people who have moved out is considered suppression. If so,  I am all for suppressing the dead vote. If you think Georgia is flipping this year then good luck.  You must also believe FL, NC, TX and AZ are as well.  Going to be a long election night for pollsters who have have completely misread the electorate either purposefully to create a narrative, or ignorantly. Not sure what is worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on October 30, 2020, 09:22:30 am
I cant see Trump losing any southern states.

He's Abraham Lincoln around here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 30, 2020, 09:23:41 am
I love how cleaning up voter roles by removing dead people and people who have moved out is considered suppression. If so,  I am all for suppressing the dead vote. If you think Georgia is flipping this year then good luck.  You must also believe FL, NC, TX and AZ are as well.  Going to be a long election night for pollsters who have have completely misread the electorate either purposefully to create a narrative, or ignorantly. Not sure what is worse.

Limiting access to polls and, coincidentally in areas that are heavily Democratic, is definitely voter suppression.

You may be the most hypocritical person I’ve ever met.  It’s expected with super religious people but you take the cake.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 30, 2020, 09:25:11 am
I cant see Trump losing any southern states.

He's Abraham Lincoln around here.

Ironically, the south’s Lincoln is a fierce defender of the Confederacy.  What a world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 30, 2020, 09:49:32 am
I cant see Trump losing any southern states.

He's Abraham Lincoln around here.
  I just threw up in my mouth a little.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 30, 2020, 09:51:04 am
I think the fact that Republicans are voting in larger numbers now is not necessarily good news for Trump.  I only know one Republican voting for Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 30, 2020, 10:06:33 am
The confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett may turn out to be a small negative for Donald Trump.

A couple days ago CNN interviewed a guy who described himself as very much pro-life.  His comment was that now that she is on the court, he had to switch his vote to Joe Biden.  Voters like him can't be too numerous but every little bit helps.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 30, 2020, 10:08:16 am
The confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett may turn out to be a small negative for Donald Trump.

A couple days ago CNN interviewed a guy who described himself as very much pro-life.  His comment was that now that she is on the court, he had to switch his vote to Joe Biden.  Voters like him can't be too numerous but every little bit helps.
Exactly.  One of his best cards was that he would nominate more judges. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 30, 2020, 10:21:15 am
If you think Georgia is flipping this year then good luck.  You must also believe FL, NC, TX and AZ are as well.  Going to be a long election night for pollsters who have have completely misread the electorate either purposefully to create a narrative, or ignorantly. Not sure what is worse.

I specifically said I didn't expect Georgia to flip, but it's definitely something that could happen. All three races (President & both Senate seats) are toss-ups right now and could go either way. If you're expecting that AZ, FL, NC, and GA will all go to Trump, you're the one who needs the luck. Biden has been steadily ahead in the polls for months in AZ, FL, and NC.

There are reports this morning that Trump has cancelled his plans to hold a public event at his hotel on Tuesday. Instead, he's just going to stay at the White House. As much as he likes to be the center of attention at his rallies, I'd take that as a sign that he knows he's in trouble.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/523528-trump-changes-election-night-plans-cancels-party-at-trump-international
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 30, 2020, 11:19:46 am
Most states are already surpassing 2016 vote totals. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 30, 2020, 06:32:33 pm
I specifically said I didn't expect Georgia to flip, but it's definitely something that could happen. All three races (President & both Senate seats) are toss-ups right now and could go either way. If you're expecting that AZ, FL, NC, and GA will all go to Trump, you're the one who needs the luck. Biden has been steadily ahead in the polls for months in AZ, FL, and NC.

There are reports this morning that Trump has cancelled his plans to hold a public event at his hotel on Tuesday. Instead, he's just going to stay at the White House. As much as he likes to be the center of attention at his rallies, I'd take that as a sign that he knows he's in trouble.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/523528-trump-changes-election-night-plans-cancels-party-at-trump-international

Actually Georgia is looking very blue in the trendlines right now, maybe closer than Florida to the tipping point.  But GA and Kemp have already proven their world-beating ability to steal elections, so you can only call it a crapshoot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 30, 2020, 06:38:47 pm
Observation from a new Fox News poll released this afternoon:


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ElnLB1JXEAEBNqX?format=png&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 30, 2020, 07:05:20 pm
Numbers and what they mean are now the subject of endless conjecture by both sides.   And it will continue that way.  Don't let the speculation mislead you.

Republican are happy that their registered voters are now showing up at election sites more than Democrat registered voters in Florida - But who are the voting for?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 30, 2020, 08:41:58 pm
Numbers and what they mean are now the subject of endless conjecture by both sides.   And it will continue that way.  Don't let the speculation mislead you.

Republican are happy that their registered voters are now showing up at election sites more than Democrat registered voters in Florida - But who are the voting for?

If Biden is to win he will need R's to vote Biden in large numbers.  Good luck with that.  Democrats have no idea how angry Conservatives still are about the Kavanaugh hearings and Russiagate. Republicans have closed the gap in registrations in most of the battleground states,  and people don't register the year of the election to vote for the other side.  Trump won independents in 2016, has historically high support of Republicans and leads in all the key categories for an incumbent other than left leaning polls. If he wins it will be because he won,  not due to voter suppression, or cheating or Russian interference.  It will be because he won the most electoral votes, which I fully expect him to do.  My guess is he carries all states he won before and adds MN and possibly NV.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 30, 2020, 09:40:09 pm
If Biden is to win he will need R's to vote Biden in large numbers.  Good luck with that.  Democrats have no idea how angry Conservatives still are about the Kavanaugh hearings and Russiagate.

No he doesn't need many R votes. Polls show Biden is winning independents by a wide margin, and he's winning Democrats by a larger margin than Trump is winning Republicans. He doesn't need Republicans in large numbers (even though all evidence points to Republicans crossing over more than Democrats). And I think you're underestimating how angry Democrats still are about Garland, Kavanaugh, and especially Barrett. Oh yeah, we are also really pissed at Trump for still downplaying, misleading, and not seriously addressing the biggest medical crisis in a century.

My guess is he carries all states he won before and adds MN and possibly NV.

You're going to be disappointed on election night. Both those states are very likely to go to Biden decisively.

The most likely result is that at least a couple of AZ, FL, NC, and GA get called for Biden on election night and things look good enough for him in MI and WI that it's clear he's won the election. It could still go the other way...but this looks more like the 2012 election than the 2020 election right now. All evidence clearly points to a Democrat win, but Trumpers are still finding ways to convince themselves that it's actually their guy who has the big lead.

I mean really...I get it if you think your guy is going to find a way to slightly win the Electoral College while losing the popular vote by 5 points...that's an unlikely but possible outcome. But you're just delusional if you think Trump is going to do better than he did 4 years ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 30, 2020, 09:51:32 pm
If Trump doesn't win it will be because the Dems stole the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 31, 2020, 12:25:18 am
Republicans are making a last-ditch effort in some states to say instead of having to be postmarked by election day, mailed in ballots must arrive on or before election day.

Imagine the IRS announcing on April 10 that your tax return must be in their hands by April 15, not just postmarked by then.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 31, 2020, 02:02:54 am
Evan Rosenfeld
@Evan_Rosenfeld
Stanford University study: “Our results suggest that [President Trump’s] rallies have resulted in more than 30,000 incremental cases [of Covid-19] and likely led to more than 700 deaths.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 31, 2020, 07:49:05 am
The turnout in this election is going to be well above 2016 with younger people voting in larger numbers. None of those numbers should make Trump or Republican senators feel good. Hopefully this will be the flushing out election that Republicans need to redo their message to voters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on October 31, 2020, 08:40:56 am
If you all honestly saw the way the Trump republicans carried themselves and acted around these parts you'd hope Korea just dropped a nuclear bomb right in the middle of the South.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 31, 2020, 08:45:30 am
If you all honestly saw the way the Trump republicans carried themselves and acted around these parts you'd hope Korea just dropped a nuclear bomb right in the middle of the South.

I think most of us are well aware.  And, these Trump cretins are all over, not just the south.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on October 31, 2020, 09:04:00 am
So yes I came back a more humble person with the attitude that I missed this place and was gonna try harder to be less confrontational and to get along with those who were willing to get along with me but Ive also come back realizing that Im not a Trump republican.

Those people will also say that if that's the case then Im not a christian and my response to that is "No. Im not the same type of Christian you all are."

Everyone no matter their race,religion,or sexual preference deserves the same chance at a peaceful life and deserves to have as much as their hands are willing to work for.

I just want my son to have a peaceful life and to know to treat others as he would hope to be treated himself.

As far as the virus goes the Trump supporting,defiant,republicans are the reason its where it is now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 31, 2020, 09:32:07 am
Amen, Dusty.  I'm glad you're back.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: dogstoothe on October 31, 2020, 01:04:20 pm
I voted for the gal down the street. It was a write in vote. But let me tell you something, to see her up at the podium, or any where else, you would vote for her too, amen and hallelujah.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 31, 2020, 02:53:04 pm
Nate Silver tweeted this map of what the election will look like if the polling averages are off by exactly as much as they were four years ago:


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ElrTXR9XYAYN0SU?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 31, 2020, 03:15:58 pm
He said that the margins in  GA, PA, and FL would be <1% which is within the margin of theft. But, that’s 65 EV’s which would not be enough. This could end up being a very close landslide which is odd, to say the least.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 31, 2020, 03:56:37 pm
Earlier Saturday afternoon:
Trump just said it at Reading PA rally: “If we win on Tuesday or — thank you very much, Supreme Court — shortly thereafter…"


How much does Joe Biden have to win by before that scary scenario becomes possible?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 31, 2020, 04:05:38 pm
Earlier Saturday afternoon:
Trump just said it at Reading PA rally: “If we win on Tuesday or — thank you very much, Supreme Court — shortly thereafter…"


How much does Joe Biden have to win by before that scary scenario becomes possible?


FL, TX, or GA.  At the very least, by more than whatever votes arrive after Election Day and are separated out for the court’s “review” in PA, MI, and WI.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 31, 2020, 04:48:40 pm
This is a useful resource. It tells you how quickly to expect votes to be counted in every state:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-results-timing/

It sounds like we should more or less know what happened in NC, FL, GA, AZ, and TX on election night unless they are very tight races. Depending on the margin, we could have a pretty good idea what happened in IA and OH too.

Wisconsin should be counted overnight with full results on Wednesday morning...so if the polls are even close to correct, there shouldn't be any reason for the courts to get involved there. Michigan allows for mail ballots to be processed starting on Monday, so hopefully they'll be able to count enough of those on election day that the courts won't be an issue there either.

Pennsylvania is the real concern. They're going to count election night votes much more quickly than absentee votes, so Trump will almost certainly be leading there on Tuesday night by a fairly big margin. If it's close nationally, Trump is going to try everything possible to shut down the vote counting there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 31, 2020, 05:37:11 pm
If Joe Biden wins, there still remains the possibility that a few governors would declare that massive fraud took place and appoint their own slate of electors.   Ron DeSantis in Florida and Greg Abbott in Texas wouldn't hesitate. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on October 31, 2020, 06:11:21 pm
If Joe Biden wins, there still remains the possibility that a few governors would declare that massive fraud took place and appoint their own slate of electors.   Ron DeSantis in Florida and Greg Abbott in Texas wouldn't hesitate. 

I've read this speculation before, and it feels a little conspiracy theory-ish to me. If Trump loses so bad that Biden takes Texas, then Republican governors are going to desert him immediately.

Plus, they don't have the Electoral College to steal their next elections for them--they'd essentially be setting back (maybe even ending) their own careers just to boost a guy who has become toxic to their party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 31, 2020, 06:42:44 pm
br  I hope you're right but I'm not going to count on it.    Republicans have had a number of opportunities in the past but, with few exceptions, it hasn't happened.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 31, 2020, 07:08:54 pm
The election will be decided in PA, MI, MN and WI. If Trump is struggling to carry TX, FL and GA he has already lost. All governors in the decisive states are Democrats. This election will be won either way,  not stolen.  Both sides feel very confident,  are sure they will win easily, one is obviously wrong. I'll be here Tuesday night right or wrong so you all can gloat our team me how Trump and Russia stole another election. Should be a fun night. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 31, 2020, 07:41:13 pm
Trump’s only real chance is for more stuff like this:

Quote
Police use pepper-spray on protesters — including children — marching to Alamance polls

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article246861942.html#storylink=cpy

And this:

Quote
Texas Republicans Ask Federal Judge to Throw Out 117,000 Legally Cast Ballots

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/texas-drive-through-voting-throw-out-ballots.html

It’s a f-ing disgrace that anyone supports crap like this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 31, 2020, 08:13:42 pm
https://twitter.com/jameshohmann/status/1322686577093545986?s=19
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 31, 2020, 08:17:09 pm
Trump’s only real chance is for more stuff like this:

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article246861942.html#storylink=cpy

And this:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/texas-drive-through-voting-throw-out-ballots.html

It’s a f-ing disgrace that anyone supports crap like this.
Can't believe anyone would associate with this:  https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas/status/1321604259725664256?s=19
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 31, 2020, 08:21:19 pm
I agree, associating with Project Veritas is questionable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 31, 2020, 09:12:19 pm
Because actual video of people breaking the law destroys your narrative?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 31, 2020, 09:19:48 pm
You must not know of the many, many issues with the PV stuff.  Like everything else you seem to favor, it’s not real.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 31, 2020, 09:52:07 pm
https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/05/09/database-swells-to-1285-proven-cases-of-voter-fraud-in-america/

https://www.newsweek.com/voter-fraud-realheres-how-democrats-want-steal-2020-election-opinion-1509180

https://lidblog.com/proof-voter-fraud/

Voter fraud is a real threat to our democracy. I don't care if people vote for D or R or I or Aliens, their votes should be filled out by the actual person registered and counted one time. Voter ID or some other method of ensuring one citizen one vote is essential to our republic. I disagreed vehemently with Trump when he would not agree to accept the results of the 2016 election ahead of time because it destroys confidence in the election. Then Hillary and the left took it up a notch the next four years, still not accepting the results of the election to this day. She has even suggested Biden should not concede under any circumstances. Terrible on both ends! With violence and intimidation and tribalism becoming the norm this is dangerous for the country, regardless who wins. Decentralized control of our elections has been a strength until now. But in this hyper partisan atmosphere, it might be naive. I don't know the answer, perhaps facial recognition will become reliable enough? I don't know. But this needs fixing, and both sides should be in agreement on this. 



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on October 31, 2020, 09:55:27 pm
Did you watch the video? Or did you decide ahead of time it was garbage because it might hurt your picture of D's as without blemish while the evil R's try to take away your rights?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 31, 2020, 10:13:57 pm
https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/05/09/database-swells-to-1285-proven-cases-of-voter-fraud-in-america/

https://www.newsweek.com/voter-fraud-realheres-how-democrats-want-steal-2020-election-opinion-1509180

https://lidblog.com/proof-voter-fraud/

Voter fraud is a real threat to our democracy. I don't care if people vote for D or R or I or Aliens, their votes should be filled out by the actual person registered and counted one time. Voter ID or some other method of ensuring one citizen one vote is essential to our republic. I disagreed vehemently with Trump when he would not agree to accept the results of the 2016 election ahead of time because it destroys confidence in the election. Then Hillary and the left took it up a notch the next four years, still not accepting the results of the election to this day. She has even suggested Biden should not concede under any circumstances. Terrible on both ends! With violence and intimidation and tribalism becoming the norm this is dangerous for the country, regardless who wins. Decentralized control of our elections has been a strength until now. But in this hyper partisan atmosphere, it might be naive. I don't know the answer, perhaps facial recognition will become reliable enough? I don't know. But this needs fixing, and both sides should be in agreement on this.

Voting fraud is a non-issue. It happens from time to time but in insignificant numbers (and usually by Republicans).  However, voter suppression and disenfranchisement is a massive issue, is happening now, and is affecting millions of votes. But, you don’t care about that because it impacts mostly black people and you don’t think they deserve to have a fair shot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 31, 2020, 10:14:59 pm
Did you watch the video? Or did you decide ahead of time it was garbage because it might hurt your picture of D's as without blemish while the evil R's try to take away your rights?

Project Veritas is well known for releasing edited and misleading videos to support the false charges they are making. I have no doubt this is more of the same.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 01, 2020, 02:25:19 am
Keep feeding the troll, it's working great.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 01, 2020, 07:52:27 am
From a Democrat pollster friend:

Something to think about this weekend: some data analysts are pointing to high turnout of registered Republicans and saying that's a surprise and a warning sign for Biden, etc.

What they don't account for is 10 to 13% of registered Rs are voting for Biden. Opposite-party voting of this magnitude hasn't been seen since 1980 or 1984. So you have to take at least 10% of the Republican data and put it in Biden's column.


That is my hope.  If Trump wins, the Republican Party ceases to exist.  It will be Trumpers vs. Democrats in the future and the Republican Party takes its place among the Libertarians, Whigs, and Federalists.   There are so many long time Republicans who have publicly endorsed Biden that if the rank and file don't follow suit, the Party will have to be rebuilt.  Of course, in the void, the Democrats could split between the ultra liberals and the more conservative.  I just wish Bush had done what had been rumored.  That might have been the final nail for Trump lovers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 01, 2020, 08:35:01 am
Keep feeding the troll, it's working great.

He’s not a troll. He believes this ****. I have no expectation that I can change his mind - he’s already too deep into a couple cults - but it’s worth pointing out nonsense when it’s out there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 01, 2020, 09:16:43 am
From a Democrat pollster friend:

Something to think about this weekend: some data analysts are pointing to high turnout of registered Republicans and saying that's a surprise and a warning sign for Biden, etc.

What they don't account for is 10 to 13% of registered Rs are voting for Biden. Opposite-party voting of this magnitude hasn't been seen since 1980 or 1984. So you have to take at least 10% of the Republican data and put it in Biden's column.

John Bolton has said he is writing in the name of another Republican.   Is that a separate category that should be accounted for? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 01, 2020, 09:29:56 am
To slow the heart rate between now and Tuesday night, remember the following:

Biden leads in PA, AZ, NC, FL and GA. OH is a tossup. He is less than 2 points behind Trump in IA and TX.  Trump needs to win every one of those 8 states to win.

And two of the better polling organizations (each rated A+ by fivethirtyeight.com) dropped PA polls today. NY Times/Sienna has Biden up 49-43; ABC/Washington Post has Biden up 51-44.

I will be looking for early results from NC and AZ, both of which could have early calls. FL and GA will likely be too close for certainty on Tues. PA will likely involve a lengthy count because of all the mail-in ballots and the different counting practices individual counties.

But if any of those 8 states are called for Biden, the only remaining questions will be the margin of victory and the makeup of the Senate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 01, 2020, 09:40:05 am
Kamala Harris is in Georgia today, and Barack Obama will be here tomorrow. Joe Biden was here a week ago. Harris was here a couple weeks ago. Jill Biden has made a couple of recent campaign visits on her own.

I've never seen a Democrat candidate campaign this much in Georgia. The campaign is obviously convinced they can flip Georgia. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 01, 2020, 10:03:51 am
Ron, Trump doesn't necessarily need to win Az if he wins the other states plus the NE 2nd and ME 2nd.  Each would have 269 electoral votes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 01, 2020, 10:26:44 am
Ron, Trump doesn't necessarily need to win Az if he wins the other states plus the NE 2nd and ME 2nd.  Each would have 269 electoral votes.

I don't believe anyone expects that to happen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 01, 2020, 11:20:49 am
Trump’s chances at NE-2 is slim. The Rep. Bacon, R, is touting Biden/Bacon voters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 01, 2020, 12:15:55 pm
538 has Biden's odds at 74% in NE-2.  Not exactly a lock.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 01, 2020, 12:16:54 pm
This is a long, well researched, and encouraging article.

Why Joe Biden Is Going to Win

https://kendallkaut.substack.com/p/why-joe-biden-is-going-to-win
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 01, 2020, 12:36:28 pm
538 has Biden's odds at 74% in NE-2.  Not exactly a lock.

I get the anxiousness.  I'm not saying not to be worried. Even fivethirtyeight's overall forecast gives Trump a 9-10% of winning, which is not nothing.  But they also give Biden nearly 3x greater chance of a landslide.  But being overly pessimistic doesn't do anyone any good. I'm not advocating for overconfidence or complacency. I've been saying all along we should all do everything we can to defeat Trump. I did more calling into Florida yesterday and I'll likely do one more session of calling before Tuesday.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 01, 2020, 12:43:51 pm
I'm not feeling pessimistic.  Just pointing out that Trump has a plausible path to victory if he wins in Arizona.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 01, 2020, 01:08:29 pm
There are numerous news stories about storefronts being boarded up in Washington, D.C., Boston, New York, and other cities.

Trump saying he will not protest the election results might help (don't hold your breath) but I'm worried that there will be rioting if he loses and "celebrations" if he wins.  I hope everyone here is safe.

(https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/10/election-windows-2.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=662)









[/color][/size]

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 01, 2020, 03:45:48 pm
538 has Biden's odds at 74% in NE-2.  Not exactly a lock.

I live there. More people are voting in Douglas (Omaha) county which isn’t good for Trump. The Western parts of Omaha, which are closer to suburbs in most cities have a lot more Democratic signs and less Trump stuff. Could he win sure, but the chances are a lot better that he won’t.  He’s have to do a lot better in Sarpy county which has more suburban areas now than 2016 to go with Offut AFB (SAC).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 01, 2020, 04:31:52 pm
NE-2 is the last place I’m worried about.  It won’t be close.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 01, 2020, 09:14:27 pm
Even Democrats agree they need to bank significant margins to overcome superior election day R turnout. It hasn't happened.  In Florida, Biden will have cannibalized much of his ED turnout and will still end up worse than Clinton on Tuesday. Biden is way behind 2016 in NC. Trump is way ahead in bellwether Maricopa. Latest polls Democrat leaning pollsters showing Trump pulling ahead there.  R's now up 2 in MI and WI early voting.  Milwaukee not showing up like they need.  If you are banking on 15% net crossover of R's to Biden, good luck with that.  Remember,  Latino and black voters are crossing over in historic numbers to Trump. In some polls as high as 20%, although I'm not sure I believe that.  But 15% would be a doubling  of his support from black voters in 2016. There will be crossover on both sides.  No way it will be high enough to carry Biden to victory if they don't win election day voting. Lots of panic on Twitter by D operatives.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 01, 2020, 09:17:27 pm
There are numerous news stories about storefronts being boarded up in Washington, D.C., Boston, New York, and other cities.

Trump saying he will not protest the election results might help (don't hold your breath) but I'm worried that there will be rioting if he loses and "celebrations" if he wins.  I hope everyone here is safe.

(https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/10/election-windows-2.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=662)









[/color][/size]


Those boards aren't for Trump voters,  LOL. Those are for the Antifa thugs planning to "peaceful" protest his reelection by destroying property, rioting and looting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 01, 2020, 09:24:07 pm
Even Democrats agree they need to bank significant margins to overcome superior election day R turnout. It hasn't happened.  In Florida, Biden will have cannibalized much of his ED turnout and will still end up worse than Clinton on Tuesday. Biden is way behind 2016 in NC. Trump is way ahead in bellwether Maricopa. Latest polls Democrat leaning pollsters showing Trump pulling ahead there.  R's now up 2 in MI and WI early voting.  Milwaukee not showing up like they need.  If you are banking on 15% net crossover of R's to Biden, good luck with that.  Remember,  Latino and black voters are crossing over in historic numbers to Trump. In some polls as high as 20%, although I'm not sure I believe that.  But 15% would be a doubling  of his support from black voters in 2016. There will be crossover on both sides.  No way it will be high enough to carry Biden to victory if they don't win election day voting. Lots of panic on Twitter by D operatives.

I see you're still pretending you can read the tea leaves in early voting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 01, 2020, 09:30:42 pm
Reading early voting is not an exact science but party approval, voting registration trends,  better off than 4 years ago polling, approval ratings and enthusiasm for candidate trends do allow an educated guess. Am I 100% certain who wins on Tuesday? Nope. Does the data suggest Trump will win? Yep. Like I said,  I'll be here either way so if I am wrong you can all come and gloat. We will see.  🙂
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 01, 2020, 09:51:17 pm
Does the data suggest Trump will win? Yep.

Come on.

better off than 4 years ago polling

Wait, did I misread this, or are you saying Trump's polls are better now than they were 4 years ago? You can't be serious.

voting registration trends

Most of the Republicans' advantage here that I've read about focuses on the months since the primaries. It ignores anything the Democrats did when they actually had a reason to register voters before their competitive primaries. It also completely ignores the huge successes in registering voters that people like Stacy Abrams and Beto O'Rourke have had in the two years since the midterms.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 01, 2020, 10:27:07 pm
2/3 of the 2016 electorate has already voted.
Biden’s poll numbers have been larger and more stable than Clinton’s
Biden is around 10% chance of losing, Clinton was 29%
Improved state polling accounting for education level in white’s get rid of the “silent” Trump voter.
Biden has a better shot at winning Texas than Trump does of the Presidency.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 01, 2020, 10:29:21 pm
If Arizona goes for Biden, you can call it the McCain revenge.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 01, 2020, 10:31:15 pm
...Trump is way ahead in bellwether Maricopa. Latest polls Democrat leaning pollsters showing Trump pulling ahead there.  R's now up 2 in MI and WI early voting.  Milwaukee not showing up like they need...

MI and WI do not report early voting by party registration. So, you’re just making up stuff there.

AZ does report by party registration statewide and more returns statewide as of Sunday by registered Democrats than by R—-a big change from 2016. No data by county and would be statistically impossible for Trump to be “way ahead” in Maricopa but behind statewide.

Further, as in most every state, there is a huge, no-party unaffiliated vote. Polling nationwide shows that Trump likely to lose the unaffiliated vote. That will be a big factor in swing states. But, for purposes of your factually unsupported claims here, nobody can say any particular candidate is ahead without knowing how unaffiliated voters are breaking.

Finally, there can be no data or conclusions about what early voting means for the final result because the level of early voting is totally without precedent in U.S. voting history. Anybody and everybody who does early voting modeling says that. We won’t know anything about what the early vote means until after the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 02, 2020, 02:49:15 am
Ralston has already called NV for Biden based on early voters, the one guy in the one state where that's pretty reliable.  Says he's blowing HRC's numbers out of the water.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/11/the-math-is-not-there-top-nevada-election-forecaster-says-its-almost-game-over-for-trump/#.X5-oAh77TQw.twitter
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 02, 2020, 06:43:56 am
Brjones, this is the poll from Gallup. https://www.winknews.com/2020/10/23/voters-tell-whether-theyre-better-off-than-they-were-four-years-ago/

56% said they were better off than 4 years ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 02, 2020, 07:52:06 am
They also say that the country is worse off than 4 years ago.  But I guess that wouldn't really matter to Trumpists.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 02, 2020, 12:24:36 pm
This is an op-ed by Benjamin Ginsburg, who "spent four decades in the Republican trenches, representing GOP presidential and congressional campaigns, working on Election Day operations, recounts, redistricting and other issues, including trying to lift the consent decree."

"Nearly every Election Day since 1984 I’ve worked with Republican poll watchers, observers and lawyers to record and litigate any fraud or election irregularities discovered."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/01/ben-ginsberg-voter-suppression-republicans/

Anyone who thinks Rob would be interested in this Republican Election Lawyer's views on the behavior of his Party and Trump can pass this on to him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 02, 2020, 12:26:37 pm
Wish he had said it louder and BIGGER.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 02, 2020, 12:49:40 pm
Brjones, this is the poll from Gallup. https://www.winknews.com/2020/10/23/voters-tell-whether-theyre-better-off-than-they-were-four-years-ago/

56% said they were better off than 4 years ago.

Okay, I misunderstood you the first time.

I thought you didn't believe polls. I know you've rejected hundreds that show Biden is clearly ahead in the race. Seems like a pretty big coincidence that the one poll you believe is the one that tells you want you already wanted to hear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 02, 2020, 01:07:41 pm
Okay, I misunderstood you the first time.

I thought you didn't believe polls. I know you've rejected hundreds that show Biden is clearly ahead in the race. Seems like a pretty big coincidence that the one poll you believe is the one that tells you want you already wanted to hear.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/09/politics/gallup-poll-better-off-donald-trump/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 02, 2020, 03:13:31 pm
Director of Battleground Strategy Nick Trainer tells reporters that Biden campaign just outlined on a zoom call that said Trump was within one state of winning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 02, 2020, 03:16:06 pm
Unfortunately, that state is California.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 02, 2020, 03:23:42 pm
This is an op-ed by Benjamin Ginsburg, who "spent four decades in the Republican trenches, representing GOP presidential and congressional campaigns, working on Election Day operations, recounts, redistricting and other issues, including trying to lift the consent decree."

"Nearly every Election Day since 1984 I’ve worked with Republican poll watchers, observers and lawyers to record and litigate any fraud or election irregularities discovered."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/01/ben-ginsberg-voter-suppression-republicans/

Anyone who thinks Rob would be interested in this Republican Election Lawyer's views on the behavior of his Party and Trump can pass this on to him.
I don't think you quite understand why Trump is popular with those who like him. He was elected by a constituency that was tired of Washington politics who had made failed promises on both sides of the aisle, Republican as well as Democrat. The fact that so many establishment Republicans hate him simply reinforces the belief that he is not part of them. If you think 100 former Bushies or Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney hating Trump will hold sway over Trump's followers, you are wrong. The establishment loving Trump would be detrimental. As far as Ginsburg's allegations, if Republicans or Democrats are guilty of fraud in any way I hope they are all prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If either of the candidates is guilty of such crimes, I hope they are prosecuted and impeached. But one man's allegations don't sway me in the least. Too many have lied to cover up the corruption in Washington the last 4 years to make me trust one man, especially Ginsburg, who is a known slimeball. Who next are you going to drag out? Anthony Scaramucci?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 02, 2020, 03:24:55 pm
Unfortunately, that state is California.
Care to place a bet, Curt? How about our 1st round picks next spring?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 02, 2020, 03:30:03 pm
It was just a joke, but I like your thinking positive about next season.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 02, 2020, 03:32:06 pm
I was joking too, I think.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 02, 2020, 07:33:22 pm
Today, a federal judge rightly decided that 127,000 curbside votes cast in Harris County, Texas would not be thrown out. Then one of the lawyers who was trying to get him to throw them out said the quiet part out loud:

Jennifer Hiller @Jennifer_Hiller
What’s at stake in the fight over 127,000 Harris County drive thru ballots? Plaintiffs attorney Jared Woodfill in the courtroom after the decision: “If Harris County goes against Trump in large numbers then he could lose Texas... As far as I’m concerned this is ground zero.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 02, 2020, 07:40:45 pm
Today, a federal judge rightly decided that 127,000 curbside votes cast in Harris County, Texas would not be thrown out. Then one of the lawyers who was trying to get him to throw them out said the quiet part out loud:

Jennifer Hiller @Jennifer_Hiller
What’s at stake in the fight over 127,000 Harris County drive thru ballots? Plaintiffs attorney Jared Woodfill in the courtroom after the decision: “If Harris County goes against Trump in large numbers then he could lose Texas... As far as I’m concerned this is ground zero.”


Strange that Robb is not up in arms about this attempt at election fraud.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 02, 2020, 07:55:12 pm
Another Trump tweet quickly gets moderated by Twitter...this one is about the Supreme Court refusing to tell Pennsylvania not to accept postmarked absentee ballots until Friday (in accordance with state election laws):

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
The Supreme Court decision on voting in Pennsylvania is a VERY dangerous one. It will allow rampant and unchecked cheating and will undermine our entire systems of laws. It will also induce violence in the streets. Something must be done!


By the way, Arkansas, Kansas, Mississippi, and West Virginia all have postmarked absentee ballot deadlines that are later than Pennsylvania's deadline. I wonder why they're not challenging the election laws in those states.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 02, 2020, 08:16:54 pm
Insert Gore military ballot joke.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 02, 2020, 08:58:54 pm
I don't think you quite understand why Trump is popular with those who like him. He was elected by a constituency that was tired of Washington politics who had made failed promises on both sides of the aisle, Republican as well as Democrat. The fact that so many establishment Republicans hate him simply reinforces the belief that he is not part of them. If you think 100 former Bushies or Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney hating Trump will hold sway over Trump's followers, you are wrong. The establishment loving Trump would be detrimental. As far as Ginsburg's allegations, if Republicans or Democrats are guilty of fraud in any way I hope they are all prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If either of the candidates is guilty of such crimes, I hope they are prosecuted and impeached. But one man's allegations don't sway me in the least. Too many have lied to cover up the corruption in Washington the last 4 years to make me trust one man, especially Ginsburg, who is a known slimeball. Who next are you going to drag out?

The cognitive dissonance between hailing Dear Leader Trump for all his virtues and then calling out Ginsburg as a “known slime ball” who is not to be believed.

And no, we understand very well why the Trump base supports him. For some, it’s falling for the con that the man who **** in gold toilets and inherited hundreds of millions from his abusive father is somehow an everyman; for others it’s about the preservation of systems of white power that are dying beneath a demographic sea change.

Fox News and other propagandist outlets dress up these narratives in a veneer of patriotism and religion that simultaneously allow people to feel good about their chosen myth while taking them deeper down the rabbit hole of deception, avarice, xenophobia, and narcissism that is the domain of Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 02, 2020, 09:03:55 pm
That last paragraph was very eloquent. Well done!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 02, 2020, 11:32:49 pm
The final 538 forecast has Biden at 89%, and the Senate at 74%. I know there's no real difference, but I would have (irrationally) felt more comfortable with 90% and 75%.

Dixville Notch went 5-0 to Biden. The silliest thing in American politics is reporting those votes at 12:01 on every election day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 12:04:05 am
Nate Silver @NateSilver538
Final joint probabilities:

72%: DEM trifecta
17%: Biden + GOP Senate + DEM House
6%: Trump + GOP Senate + DEM House
3%: Trump + DEM Senate + DEM House
2%: GOP trifecta

Other combinations have negligible chances.


I hope the 72% wins this time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 03, 2020, 03:24:21 am
Biden should take a page from Drumpf's playbook and declare victory.  If you're ahead they should stop counting, right?  It's unanimous - 5-0 in the popular vote and 4-0 in the Electoral College.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 03, 2020, 04:40:41 am
Todays the big day...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 06:54:01 am
Nate Silver @NateSilver538
Final joint probabilities:

72%: DEM trifecta
17%: Biden + GOP Senate + DEM House
6%: Trump + GOP Senate + DEM House
3%: Trump + DEM Senate + DEM House
2%: GOP trifecta

Other combinations have negligible chances.


I hope the 72% wins this time.
This could be the final nail in Silver's credibility. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 03, 2020, 06:55:20 am
I prefer the 17%.  When one party has the whole ball of wax, we usually get screwed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 06:56:29 am
Biden should take a page from Drumpf's playbook and declare victory.  If you're ahead they should stop counting, right?  It's unanimous - 5-0 in the popular vote and 4-0 in the Electoral College.
Millsfield also votes early. The combined tally with Dixville Notch was Trump 16-10 over Biden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 03, 2020, 07:06:43 am
Must be tough to maintain the secret ballot in Dixville Notch.   Recorder should say it was 4-1 just to make people suspicious of each other for 4 years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 03, 2020, 08:18:05 am
Some little burg in one of the states where mailed in ballots can start to be counted before election day should steal Dixville Notch's thunder by announcing their vote totals in October when the number of ballots received equals the number of eligible voters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on November 03, 2020, 09:44:27 am
Care to place a bet, Curt? How about our 1st round picks next spring?

My team sucks... i'll take that bet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 10:50:19 am
Florida numbers.  https://twitter.com/monk_cryptic/status/1323664511681892354?s=19
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 10:52:38 am
My team sucks... i'll take that bet.
Mine too! You're on!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2020, 11:17:33 am
Florida numbers.  https://twitter.com/monk_cryptic/status/1323664511681892354?s=19

Nate Silver
@NateSilver538
Here's what I show in an average of recent Florida polls that show crosstabs by partisanship:

Among Dems, Biden leads 91-7
Among independents, Biden 49-43
Among Republicans, Biden trails 9-89

Although of course we're scrambling party ID and party registration here, with those numbers, Biden would be a favorite in a GOP +3 electorate or anything bluer.


If Florida is going to get around 10,000,000 votes that means pretty much every vote cast forward has to be Republican to get there.

https://www.baynews9.com/fl/tampa/news/2020/11/01/florida-republicans-narrowing-gap-with-democrats-in-votes-cast

This is from 11/1
Democrats: 3,410,789
Republicans: 3,315,884
No party: 1,973,972

He ins't including Miami-Dade which of last report had 100,000 more Dem votes.  It doesn't change the fact that unless it is all Republicans voting today it is going to be very hard for Trump in Florida and if he doesn't win Florida he's done.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 03, 2020, 11:29:10 am
So it's true that around 10% of Republicans are voting for Biden.   But who in the hell are those 7 Dems who voted for Trump.  That's scary.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2020, 01:15:02 pm
Cryptic Monk did get me looking at the Florida election returns. 

Orange County (Orlando) went for Clinton by 134,678 votes according to the NY Times with 525,110 votes cast.

As of 1ish EST they are already at 600,000 votes cast.  The party breakdown for registered voters is 379,707 D, 258,361 No Party, 224,928 R.  That is around 68% voter turnout. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 01:48:30 pm
At this point R's have a 100k+ lead in votes cast in FL and growing by the hour. They started today down 100k. With Trump capturing larger percentages of black and latino votes, there will be crossover on both sides.  Enough that it won't be determinative in the final result. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on November 03, 2020, 01:57:15 pm
At this point R's have a 100k+ lead in votes cast in FL and growing by the hour. They started today down 100k. With Trump capturing larger percentages of black and latino votes, there will be crossover on both sides.  Enough that it won't be determinative in the final result.

I'm one of those R's so are my parents... thats 3 votes for biden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2020, 02:25:06 pm
At this point R's have a 100k+ lead in votes cast in FL and growing by the hour. They started today down 100k. With Trump capturing larger percentages of black and latino votes, there will be crossover on both sides.  Enough that it won't be determinative in the final result. 

Trump needs around R +400,000-500,000 to have a chance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 02:45:24 pm
Reading the tea leaves now is just as much of a fool's errand as trying to predict how early voting is going to turn out.

It's just a few hours until they start counting Florida. Then we might finally get some reliable indicators of the direction of the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2020, 04:35:44 pm
Nate Silver
@NateSilver538
·
32m
GOP +1.8% on turnout by party registration so far in Florida. Will probably get up to +2.0% by the end of the night though the pace of GOP gains has really slowed down.
Quote Tweet

UMichVoter
@umichvoter99
 · 39m
FLORIDA, 4:40 PM UPDATE

Republican: 4,149,144  (+191,876)
Democratic: 3,957,268
NPA/Other: 2,597,260

TOTAL: 10,703,672

*Includes ALL mail + in-person early
*Missing E-day votes: DeSoto, Hardee, Jefferson, Monroe, Seminole, Union
*only 2pm update from miami dade
Nate Silver
@NateSilver538
·
31m
Earlier I estimated that GOP +3.5% was roughly the breakeven point (i.e. Trump favored if above that number, otherwise Biden) based on what most polls show is an edge for Biden among independents, but that's a fairly rough estimate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on November 03, 2020, 07:46:37 pm
Not sure what Silver is looking at.. but with 78% reported trump is up 50.7 to 48.5. thats not a margin biden can overcome imo.

Its about over, 4 more years of trump... no blue wave.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 07:49:05 pm
Georgia also looking really good for Trump. NC and OH iffy so far but still half to be counted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2020, 07:54:21 pm
Florida only matters is so far as a Trump loss there end the night early. Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Arizona. Maybe Ohio or NC.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on November 03, 2020, 07:56:09 pm
Dude... its over. 4 more years of **** show. i really need to re-evaluate my life and view points.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 08:00:18 pm
Ohio and Pennsylvania are a lot alike, and Biden is overperforming in Ohio so far. Even if he loses Ohio, it's a good sign for Biden if Ohio is closer than expected. If Biden wins Pennsylvania, he probably wins the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2020, 08:04:26 pm
Dude... its over. 4 more years of **** show. i really need to re-evaluate my life and view points.

Go play with 538 electoral college map. Florida never mattered.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 08:09:15 pm
Virginia and Ohio are weird. Both are doing the opposite of what was expected. Fox called VA immediately after polls closed.  Now even CNN is saying it's trending to Trump. OH is starting to move to Trump but slowly,  with 45% still to be counted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2020, 08:18:58 pm
Look at where the votes are coming from in Virginia, it isn’t the cities.

In Ohio Biden is out-performing Clinton by a lot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 08:21:37 pm
Look at where the votes are coming from in Virginia, it isn’t the cities.

Same goes for Georgia. No metro Atlanta county is over 15% yet but about 40% of the vote in the state has been reported.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 08:24:51 pm
OH went from Biden up 12 to 4 in about 15 minutes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 08:26:00 pm
GA is not flipping.  Biden didn't get a big enough EV to overcome election day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 08:27:16 pm
Look at where the votes are coming from in Virginia, it isn’t the cities.

In Ohio Biden is out-performing Clinton by a lot.
So far,  but VBM was counted first.  ED voting is coming in slower and heavily tilted to Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 08:27:53 pm
As I've said all along, I'm not expecting Georgia to flip. But there's no way to tell what's going on here when Fulton, DeKalb, Gwinnett, and Cobb have barely counted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 08:32:55 pm
NY Times now saying 91% Trump wins NC. WI and MI also looking solid. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 03, 2020, 08:33:47 pm
As I've said all along, I'm not expecting Georgia to flip. But there's no way to tell what's going on here when Fulton, DeKalb, Gwinnett, and Cobb have barely counted.
Didn't realize you are from GA. Love my visits there. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 09:18:06 pm
In Senate races, John Hickenlooper has won in Colorado.

But the unqualified football coach has beat the very qualified lawyer who put away the 16th Street bombers in Alabama. I'm so embarrassed that I was born in that state.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 09:45:42 pm
Senate runoff in the Georgia special election will be Warnock vs. Loeffler unless the Atlanta area votes eventually come in really, really heavily for Warnock.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2020, 10:26:33 pm
Fox just called Arizona for Biden.
Biden is up 8% in NE-2 with 59% reporting.
Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania won’t have anything for days.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 10:42:04 pm
Fox just called Arizona for Biden.
Biden is up 8% in NE-2 with 59% reporting.
Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania won’t have anything for days.

That's good news from Arizona. Best news of the night so far.

538's election day primer article says that Wisconsin is counting votes all night, and Milwaukee will be the last to count their votes by 7 am tomorrow. I think we'll still be waiting for PA and MI for a few days, but WI should be in by tomorrow morning.

Even though Georgia looks like a loss right now, it's going to take a while here too. A water pipe broke today at State Farm Arena where they were counting Fulton County votes, and you can't call Georgia without Atlanta's county.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 10:43:47 pm
Also, the electoral college is such a stupid way to elect the president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2020, 11:46:39 pm
The New York Times (almost always inaccurate) needle forecast suddenly has Georgia as a 67% favorite for Biden. Still cautiously optimistic about my state's outcome.

North Carolina has also tightened a little in their forecast, FWIW.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2020, 11:52:55 pm
Biden is up 10% in NE-2. Biden is going to have 270 by tomorrow morning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 12:14:47 am
CNN is still not calling Arizona, FWIW.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 04, 2020, 12:33:08 am
AZ is too tight to call.  Still a large number of Election day votes to go which are breaking 2:1 for Trump. Might lose but could still win.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 01:31:12 am
Biden makes his speech and says all votes should be counted. Trump makes his speech and declares victory when it's obvious this election could still go either way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 01:34:28 am
It's just so depressing that half this country still supports this idiot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 04, 2020, 01:34:52 am
Arizona looks solid for Biden, though only Fox has called it for him. If Biden does win Arizona, Trump would have to win 2 of MI,WI & Pa, which I do not believe he can do.


We'll see about NC (where some mail in ballots won't be counted until after tonight) and GA, which is a long shot, but not yet impossible.



It's a disappointing night because I wanted a demonstrable repudiation of Trump, which is not happening. But I believe Biden will become President, and there is still a pretty good chance the Dems will have a slim control of the Senate. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 01:36:07 am
Even this **** thinks Trump's speech was anti-democratic:

Ben Shapiro @benshapiro
No, Trump has not already won the election, and it is deeply irresponsible for him to say he has.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 04, 2020, 02:37:15 am
WI call may yet come tonight.  Word is in about 30 min.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 04, 2020, 02:49:49 am
The house could come down to the wire.  If all the current leads stay the same the Republicans would take the house by 1 seat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 04, 2020, 04:11:12 am
Biden has taken the lead in Wisconsin.  Only Green Bay hasn't reported yet, and they went for Clinton last time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 04, 2020, 06:52:46 am
MI has narrowed as well. It will all come down to MI at this point. If Much of Detroit is still out I think Biden is president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 04, 2020, 07:10:51 am
Isn't Nevada still in play?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 04, 2020, 07:16:57 am
It's possible that the Libertarian candidate in Wisconsin (who has received over 1% of the vote) will determine who becomes President. Strange.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 04, 2020, 07:19:49 am
Nevada still is,  but even with the small margin the votes to be counted favor Biden. Same with MI. Most of the remaining votes are in Detroit which had been 18 to 1 Biden so it looks like he won. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 04, 2020, 07:26:24 am
Senate has 47 each with  the undecided leaning red.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 04, 2020, 08:40:18 am
2 hr 21 min ago
Chris Christie says Trump "undercut his own credibility" when he prematurely declared victory
From CNN’s Betsy Klein

What credibility?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 04, 2020, 08:57:53 am
To make it easy to follow - assuming Trump wins Georgia and North Carolina AND Pennsylvania, he only has 264 votes. He MUST also win Wisconsin, Nevada or Michigan in order to be reelected. He is currently losing in all three states.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 04, 2020, 09:01:30 am
Someone on twitter said the AP has pulled back their call of AZ because Trump is winning ED votes 60-40 with about 500k left. Could just be misinformation, can't verify elsewhere. Anyone see this?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on November 04, 2020, 09:46:04 am
I haven't heard that anywhere, and can't find it on the web.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 04, 2020, 10:13:31 am
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/04/least-400-k-ballots-left-count-arizona-republic-estimates-and-number-certainly-higher/6157997002/

It sounds like at least 200,000+ where early ballots.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 04, 2020, 11:03:09 am
AP explains AZ call.

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-arizona-john-mccain-barry-goldwater-bb16f91b04456b2513f40436248eb62d
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 04, 2020, 11:30:22 am
If so then Trump isn't winning AZ.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 04, 2020, 11:35:44 am
As of 23 minutes ago

In the national popular vote, with an estimated nearly 25 million votes still to be counted, Biden had 67.7 million votes or 50 percent to Trump's 65.5 million or 48.4 percent. Another 2.2 million voted for third-party or write-in candidates.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 04, 2020, 02:04:55 pm
Nevada and Michigan can give it to Biden.  Senate appears to remain red.  Pennsylvania appears to go for Trump. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 04, 2020, 03:41:27 pm
Nate Silver thinks call on AZ might be premature. A ton of mail ballots to be released around 9:00 pm Eastern tonight.

He says: “two other news organizations, the Associated Press and Fox News, have called the state for Biden. I’d assume they’ve put more work into looking into this than I have, so that shifts my priors a bit, but you never know and you will get incorrect calls occasionally. Overall, I’d say this is Likely Biden but I don’t think the state should have been called yet.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 03:51:13 pm
CNN has projected Michigan for Biden. He's up to 253 Electoral votes.

Georgia is still interesting. Biden has cut his deficit from 2.2% this morning to 1.4% now, and the vote needle has only moved from 91% to 94% of the vote counted. I'm not sure what's left at this point to count, but I've read all day that there was a lot of early vote/absentee ballots from metro Atlanta (including Fulton and DeKalb counties, which have gone 72% and 83% for Biden overall so far) and Savannah. I think there probably aren't enough votes left to close the gap all the way, but the rest of the vote should be very blue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 04, 2020, 03:51:18 pm
I keep seeing different numbers for what is outstanding in AZ. I've seen as high as 500k still out and as little as 200k. Then there are differing accounts of where they are from and whether they are VBM, or EV drop offs, or even late early voting, which is now my official favorite new saying, (hopefully not replacing "hanging chads").

Method, as to our bet, I would say you have an inside track right now but who the heck knows at this point where this goes in the coming days?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 04:24:41 pm
Fox News now has Biden 6 Electoral votes away. No one has called Nevada yet, but that would put him at 270.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 04:42:14 pm
Trump was up something like 14-15 points last night in Pennsylvania. He's now down to just under 5%, and there is still 15% of the vote to count (most of it early votes from the Philadelphia area).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 04, 2020, 04:57:05 pm
Nate Cohn and Ryan Matsumoto both seem certain PA will flip, and Silver has it as lean Biden. GA is probably a tossup.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 04, 2020, 05:07:04 pm
It would definitely be better for the country if Biden were to win by substantially more than 1 electoral vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 05:07:51 pm
Another big thing in Georgia—it seems like there is enough blue vote left to get David Purdue under 50% in his Senate race. That means he and Ossoff would have a runoff in January.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 04, 2020, 05:13:32 pm
Another big thing in Georgia—it seems like there is enough blue vote left to get David Purdue under 50% in his Senate race. That means he and Ossoff would have a runoff in January.

GA Dems really need to come through in those run-offs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 05:24:06 pm
Warnock was polling pretty far ahead of both Loeffler and Collins head-to-head in pre-election polls. Both of the Republicans were trying to out-Trump each other and they turned a lot of people off. Loeffler even embraced the QAnon house candidate in Rome. I think he has some chance, especially if Trump loses, pouts, and causes chaos.

I’m less sure that Ossoff would have a chance, but he’s losing today so they might as well try again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 04, 2020, 05:29:44 pm
It would definitely be better for the country if Biden were to win by substantially more than 1 electoral vote.

The lack of a complete repudiation of Trump is really disappointing.  But, I guess it’s just more evidence that Trump is a symptom, a mirror of a bigger cultural problem that is not going away.  That said, I’m glad he’s going to lose and I hope the next couple years are very bad for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 04, 2020, 05:32:30 pm
James Carville on disputed ballots: "Trump reminds me of a flea-bitten dog bayin' at the moon".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 04, 2020, 05:45:40 pm
The only fraud I've heard of so far: a guy in Michigan was caught trying to cast a Trump ballot for his deceased mother.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 04, 2020, 05:52:50 pm
The only fraud I've heard of so far: a guy in Michigan was caught trying to cast a Trump ballot for his deceased mother.

Voting fraud is such a non issue. Vote suppression is a massive issue. Weird that the Republicans care about one but not the other.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 04, 2020, 06:09:26 pm
Another big thing in Georgia—it seems like there is enough blue vote left to get David Purdue under 50% in his Senate race. That means he and Ossoff would have a runoff in January.

Yes, that would be huge.  That would stake control of the Senate on those two GA races, and I think Warnock would be favored over idiot Loeffler.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 06:20:33 pm
Trump has filed a lawsuit attempting to stop counting in Georgia. He'd done the same earlier today in Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 04, 2020, 06:28:44 pm
I keep seeing different numbers for what is outstanding in AZ. I've seen as high as 500k still out and as little as 200k. Then there are differing accounts of where they are from and whether they are VBM, or EV drop offs, or even late early voting, which is now my official favorite new saying, (hopefully not replacing "hanging chads").

Method, as to our bet, I would say you have an inside track right now but who the heck knows at this point where this goes in the coming days?
Robb, better look back on that bet.  It was that Trump would win California. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 04, 2020, 06:35:52 pm
The Constitution says each state sets its own deadline and doesn't have to certify its winner until December 8th.  These suits by Trump are just nuisance crap.  It's what he's done his whole life.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 06:42:09 pm
The Constitution says each state sets its own deadline and doesn't have to certify its winner until December 8th.  These suits by Trump are just nuisance crap.  It's what he's done his whole life.

Yeah, he's doing it just so he can claim voter fraud for the rest of his life. He just can't accept that he's probably going to lose fair and square.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 04, 2020, 07:42:34 pm
Has anyone looked at what GOP senators have done vs what Trump has done?  In Nebraska Sass is running about 10% above Trump.  Perdue seems to be polling ahead of Trump.  There may have been a fair number of people that wanted Trump gone, but didn’t really want to hand Congress over to the Democrats.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 07:52:57 pm
Nate Silver's math says Biden needs to take about 66% of the remaining votes in Georgia to win. Half the remaining votes are coming from the Atlanta area (and roughly half of those from Fulton and DeKalb, which will be 80%+ for Biden), and there are still significant votes available in blue areas around Savannah, Columbus, Augusta, and Macon. This might happen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 04, 2020, 07:57:48 pm
Wilmington, DE is now being treated as National Defense Airspace.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 04, 2020, 08:01:03 pm
Nate Silver's math says Biden needs to take about 66% of the remaining votes in Georgia to win. Half the remaining votes are coming from the Atlanta area (and roughly half of those from Fulton and DeKalb, which will be 80%+ for Biden), and there are still significant votes available in blue areas around Savannah, Columbus, Augusta, and Macon. This might happen.

Got to get that Senate race under 50%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 04, 2020, 09:03:21 pm
NATE SILVER
NOV. 4, 9:33 PM
I don’t know, I guess I’d say that Biden will win Arizona if you forced me to pick, but I sure as heck don’t think the state should have been called by anyone, and I think the calls that were previously made should be retracted now
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 09:12:19 pm
Biden needs to win a little over 60% of the vote the rest of the way in Pennsylvania according to CNN. He's been winning about 78% of the vote in all the numbers reported today. It's only a matter of time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 04, 2020, 09:45:34 pm
PA, AZ, and NV are all locks and GA now looks at least 50-50.  It's just a matter of when the networks make it official.

All eyes on GA for that double-runoff.  Gonna be intense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 10:01:50 pm
I don't think AZ and NV are locks, but PA really looks like it's heading in a direction where it'll be a bigger Biden win than Michigan or Wisconsin.

If the New York Times tracker in Georgia is right, a lot of remaining DeKalb County votes just came off the table and they didn't move the needle as much as hoped. But I guess a few rural counties could've been included in that update too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 04, 2020, 10:14:04 pm
If PA had counted their votes like OH, this would have been over last night and it would not feel so close.  These states definitely need to fix the rules about how they handle early/mail vote counting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 04, 2020, 10:39:21 pm
Brendan Keefe (@BrendanKeefe) Tweeted:
Another big Fulton County vote count update:
27.8K votes just got counted
Trump: 5,683
Biden: 22,118
That's a net gain of 16,435 for Biden
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 04, 2020, 10:44:39 pm
Brendan Keefe (@BrendanKeefe) Tweeted:
Another big Fulton County vote count update:
27.8K votes just got counted
Trump: 5,683
Biden: 22,118
That's a net gain of 16,435 for Biden

That probably finishes off the last votes from the city of Atlanta, but there are still metro votes out there. 80% is a good margin, Fulton has been going about 72% to Biden before this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 04, 2020, 10:53:39 pm
Senate races left to be determined seem to be going red.  Not sure run-offs in Georgia will change much.   Alaska has not been called for Trump, nor the Senate race there.  Not sure why.  Both should be a slaughter rule.  That's 49 red.  Looks like NC will stay red.  Perdue in GA is red.  Even if GA2 run-off goes blue, Red will have 51.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 12:51:41 am
Trump is down to a half point lead in Georgia with mostly blue votes left to count, and Perdue is at 50.1%. So close to forcing that runoff for control of the Senate...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 05, 2020, 07:40:44 am
AZ is so close it's crazy. No way anyone should have called it with people still in line Tuesday night.  The remaining votes are enough if they are same day votes or late drop offs. Those have been going to Trump at nearly 60-40%. Even in blue counties. I think the phrase toss-up is overused. But in this case it couldn't be more accurate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 07:41:05 am
In the states still in play, the margin is so slim, Trump will demand a recount.  Or Biden will if he loses them.   With all of his shenanigans still in play, we can only look forward to Dec. 8.  Here's a "nice" article to begin our day:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/large-portion-electorate-chose-sociopath/616994/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 07:42:30 am
"The terrible thing about free choice in a democracy is that sometimes people make the wrong choice."--Major Keira, Deep Space Nine.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 05, 2020, 08:25:48 am
Is it clear that Perdue will exceed 50%?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 05, 2020, 09:19:08 am
Is it clear that Perdue will exceed 50%?

No.  He's now down to 50% with a lot of blue votes yet to be counted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 05, 2020, 09:24:49 am
This has been the most dramatic roller coaster election count of my life.  Tuesday night it appeared that Trump was going to win easily, including victories in WI, MI & PA.  Now, it seems fairly likely that Biden will not only win, but could flip as many as 5 states Trump carried four years ago (AZ, WI, MI, PA and GA), and that's assuming he won't eventually flip NC. It is even conceivable (though not likely) that the Dems hopes for capturing the Senate may not be quite dead ("only mostly dead" in the words of Miracle Max).

Too early to count chickens, particularly since AZ may be at risk for Biden. But holy mackerel!

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 09:26:44 am
If Trump loses the Presidency, hopefully, I wouldn't bet against Trumpers to turn out in force in those run-offs.   In Loeffler's case, her % and Collins' % would overwhelm the current Democrat.  Loeffler, icK.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 09:51:54 am
If Trump loses the Presidency, hopefully, I wouldn't bet against Trumpers to turn out in force in those run-offs.   In Loeffler's case, her % and Collins' % would overwhelm the current Democrat.  Loeffler, icK.   

That could go the other way too, though. A large number of Trump voters are people who never really voted before, but got motivated by Trump. If Trump is pouting, it's possible those Trumpers just stay home.

I also wonder if strong Collins supporters might stay home. The campaign between Loeffler and Collins was pretty bitter, so I could imagine there being a lack of enthusiasm to turn around and vote for her. I could also see some of them going to Warnock because he has come across as very likeable and moderate in his campaign.

Polls have been mixed overall, but they've been strong in Georgia (within a point or two in the presidential and Ossoff/Perdue races).  So it's probably relevant that Warnock was running several points ahead in head-to-head polls with Loeffler before the election. Of course, the runoff is two months from now, so a lot can change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 05, 2020, 10:07:23 am
I'm hoping, for the sake of this country, that whoever wins did so legitimately. Fraud has been charged many times before going back to Daley finding a bunch of dead votes to put Kennedy over the top in IL in 1960. To be clear, a charge with no proof, but still made to this day. With elections with wide margins a few cases of fraud have no effect. In this case, with no less than 6 states swinging by razor thin margins, a few thousand votes here and there will literally decide the future of the nation. I just pray that every legitimate vote is counted, no more, no less. I know whichever side loses, and it may well be Republicans, will need to be assured the vote was legitimate.

A concern to me was the decision in many inner city precincts to boot out Republican poll watchers. Another concern is the drop of more than 100k ballots in Milwaukee and Detroit of more than 100k votes at 4 am, all for Biden in Detroit. 137k votes without a single Trump voter? He took 12% of the black vote. Not one for Trump among that large of a drop? Maybe this was a digital voter entry issue. Maybe it is legit. But if you want the country, not just Democrats, to accept a Biden administration as legit, these "anomalies" will need explaining. Somehow Biden did better in the rust belt than Obama. Perhaps you believe Trump hate is to blame. Perhaps it is.

If there was any cheating by Republicans, throwing away D ballots, giving sharpie pens out that you know won't be counted by the machines in heavy D districts, 100k ballot drops all going for Trump, I would imagine you would at least want to know how that is possible. Some of you would assume the worst. I actually hope the opposite, that there is a legit reason for these and it will be explained. I love my country more than one party, or the policies it espouses. A fraudulent election will forever erode the confidence we citizens have in our government. More than any result this week or next, I pray that does not happen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 05, 2020, 10:08:50 am
Never underestimate the ability of people to let you down. Almost 70 million aligned themselves with a white supremacist; and some want to talk about healing the divide? Do republicans ever talk about healing divisions? Enough of that crap. No more kumbaya.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 05, 2020, 11:07:40 am
Trump is not a white supremist, or if he is, he's really bad at it. His policies toward minority communities have been better than Obamas with greater impact. Criminal justice reform, opportunity zones, funding black colleges, the new platinum plan IceT has endorsed to help inner cities rise to wealth. Those aren't the actions of a white supremist. Hell, he was given an award by the NAACP decades ago for his charity and work for minorities in NY. He only became a racist when he ran as a Republican.

And I'm not talking about healing divisions btw, this board alone shows that such things are impossible. I believe we are past that point in our country's inevitable decline. I am talking about confidence in our freaking elections. You know; about the only thing that separates us from the banana republics of third world countries. But perhaps it's okay to cheat if helps your side? Is that where we are? Is the first thing that popped into your mind just now that Trump cheated so we should be able to as well? Ask yourself this, if there was rampant cheating for Biden would you care? Would you want it disqualified even if it hurt his chances? That is how I feel about my "team." If you think anything is okay as long as Trump is defeated then we are closer to destruction than I imagined. As a believer in the bible, all I can say is that there will come a point where God will begin preaching his own sermons to the nations directly. If this level of evil is true and condoned by half the country, then it may be closer than you think. If it isn't true, and I hope it isn't, then we need answers so the millions of voters who are feeling disenfranchised know that they weren't.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 05, 2020, 11:15:00 am
I don’t care what quality of racist you judge the current president to be. He’s a failure at it like everything else. He only became a racist recently? WTF? But I’ll play along, let’s say it is true; does that make him an opportunistic racist? Neat. The current president is a POS. Anyone who pretends to be religious but supports this guy ... good luck with your god on that level of hypocrisy. Hate towards fellow man? Check. Adultery? Check. Liar? Check. Covetous? Check. Glutton? Check. Vain? Check. Going to hell? I’ll leave that up to your god and your own conscious. The way I see it: Religious folk are selling their souls to end abortion. Enjoy your deal with the devil.

The amount of mental gymnastic bullshit people have to say to feel OK about voting for this guy is another sign that anyone could have been an Italian fasci or a nazis.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 11:15:42 am
We're now barely into runoff territory.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EmEz332XUAA1c2G?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 05, 2020, 11:16:15 am
You care about non-existent vote fraud but you don’t care about disenfranchising a certain type of voter and suppressing their vote. You are a piece of garbage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 05, 2020, 11:31:00 am
Personally, I like br.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 05, 2020, 11:44:13 am
A concern to me was the decision in many inner city precincts to boot out Republican poll watchers. Another concern is the drop of more than 100k ballots in Milwaukee and Detroit of more than 100k votes at 4 am, all for Biden in Detroit. 137k votes without a single Trump voter? He took 12% of the black vote. Not one for Trump among that large of a drop? Maybe this was a digital voter entry issue. Maybe it is legit. But if you want the country, not just Democrats, to accept a Biden administration as legit, these "anomalies" will need explaining. Somehow Biden did better in the rust belt than Obama. Perhaps you believe Trump hate is to blame. Perhaps it is.

If you really cared, you would find the answers to these concerns of yours quite easily. And, the answers show no fraud. It’s not real.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 12:05:05 pm
I don't understand why they aren't calling Alaska.  Both the Senate and Presidency.  It's meaningless EC, but it's another red Senate seat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 12:41:13 pm
Personally, I like br.
  He has slipped in credibility lately, P2.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 05, 2020, 12:58:27 pm
Here’s a rare case of voting fraud. What’s not so rare is that it’s a Republican that got caught.

@CordeliaSkyNews: Update on the woman featured in Trump press conf in #Nevada. Clark County Registrar says contrary to her claims, the woman had actually already voted and then tried to vote again. https://twitter.com/josh_wingrove/status/1324416615526637569
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 01:03:32 pm
Donald, there's something a former Republican President wants to tell you:  You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 05, 2020, 01:24:12 pm
Now the Trump family is calling on R state legislators to appoint electors.

Full-blown dictator stuff at this point.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 05, 2020, 01:30:13 pm
Now the Trump family is calling on R state legislators to appoint electors.

Full-blown dictator stuff at this point.

I'm shocked, shocked, to discover there are dishonest, authoritarian actions being proposed in Trump land.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 05, 2020, 01:45:29 pm
But Trumpism is a totally rational, normal, appropriate brand of politics.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 02:37:13 pm
Remaining Georgia ballots by county:

Chatham 17,157
Fulton 7,305
Clayton 6,026
Gwinnett 4,800
Forsyth 4,713
Harris 3641
Laurens 1797
Cobb 700
Floyd 682
Taylor 456

Chatham, Fulton, Clayton, Gwinnett, and Cobb will go blue (Fulton and Clayton could go 80% and 90% for Biden, respectively). Forsyth, Laurens, and Taylor are red, but we know mail ballots have been coming in a lot more blue than overall vote totals. These are likely to be pretty neutral in their overall impact. So Trump only has about 4,200 ballots in Harris and Floyd counties where he's likely to build any more cushion (compared about 33,000 that will be very good to great for Biden).

There are also up to 8,900 military absentee ballots that can still be accepted until tomorrow, so we're not likely to get an official call on Georgia today.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 05, 2020, 03:02:19 pm
Quote
A large number of Trump voters are people who never really voted before, but got motivated by Trump. If Trump is pouting, it's possible those Trumpers just stay home.

Yeah, this will make a runoff in Georgia lots more interesting.  Assuming he's out, Trump won't give two **** about a Senate runoff because it won't be about him.  Absent the imbecelic blowhard-in-chief, it could be difficult to motivate Trump voters.  The other side will be plenty fired up, though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 05, 2020, 03:11:30 pm
Just picture Moscow Mitch having to go to Trump and ask him to please assist the runoff campaigns in Georgia while Trump is holed up in the Oval Office trying to pardon himself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 05, 2020, 03:39:37 pm
Let’s just call a spade a spade.

Key components of fascism:
1. Cult of personality
2. Demonization of the Left
3. Fear of white population decline
4. Anti-feminist
5. Hyper nationalism

Any of this sound familiar?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 03:48:09 pm
Yeah, this will make a runoff in Georgia lots more interesting.  Assuming he's out, Trump won't give two **** about a Senate runoff because it won't be about him.  Absent the imbecelic blowhard-in-chief, it could be difficult to motivate Trump voters.  The other side will be plenty fired up, though.

He might even work against them if he feels like Loeffler and Purdue have not supported his conspiracy theories enough. Eric Trump seems to be threatening that.

Eric Trump @EricTrump
Where is the GOP?! Our voters will never forget...


If Trump tells his followers that Perdue didn't fight hard enough for him, that might be enough for Ossoff to win.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 04:32:56 pm
Seems like Eric is saying the GOP and "our voters" are not the same.  I agree with him.  Maybe a lot of the GOP was voting Biden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 05, 2020, 04:52:55 pm
Recounts are not the problem. GA is the only state that might be close enough for a recount to possibly matter - Biden’s margin in the other three will be too large.  The problem is constant delegitimization of the election by Trump’s false claims of fraud, and in practical terms his solicitation of rogue electors slates and a Supreme Court intervention.  None of that can be considered impossible, though obviously the bigger the margin in the EC the harder that BS will be to pull off.  306-232 is the most likely outcome, and that would be very helpful.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 05, 2020, 05:15:07 pm
I read where if Trump refuses to leave the White House by inauguration day the secret service will just go in there and throw his ass out in the yard.

That might very well cause a civil war but thats no bullshit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 05:17:33 pm
Both Biden and Trump are within range of each other in a lot of states that each can ask for recounts.   This is going to be unsettled until Dec 8.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 05, 2020, 05:29:10 pm
Both Biden and Trump are within range of each other in a lot of states that each can ask for recounts.   This is going to be unsettled until Dec 8.

Once PA is done, Biden wins and the rest is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 05:34:51 pm
If the repudiation had been overwhelming, I'd think that was true, Jack, but with so many states within 1%, I think this will drag.  It's Trump's personality.  Biden will have to counter in states he barely lost in order to be safe.  At noon George Stephanoplis reported that some aides in the WH are looking for someone who can talk to Trump and explain that it's over.  One suggestion was Hannity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 05, 2020, 05:39:40 pm
Obviously, the people he should take out his frustrations on are the rest of the GOP.  Clearly they didn't do enough.

Seeing as how the sycophants in the GOP leadership were acquiescent to him in order to accomplish their goals, few things would make me happier (and be more karmic) than a protracted, ugly fight between them.  Maybe Trump fleeing to Russia to avoid prison.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 05:43:32 pm
Biden needs a little over the 60% of the remaining vote in Pennsylvania to win there. This afternoon, he’s been winning with two thirds of the remaining vote in rural red counties. It could be called for Biden now, it’ll be interesting to see how quickly the networks project it after Biden goes ahead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 05, 2020, 05:47:43 pm
Nate Silver pointed out that basically Nevada is call-able now, but it would create a tricky situation for Fox to do so since they haven't un-called Arizona, and that would put Biden at 270.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 05, 2020, 06:05:06 pm
Trump's lead in Georgia is down to 3,635 after some Chatam County votes have been counted.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 05, 2020, 06:08:26 pm
If the repudiation had been overwhelming, I'd think that was true, Jack, but with so many states within 1%, I think this will drag.  It's Trump's personality.  Biden will have to counter in states he barely lost in order to be safe.  At noon George Stephanoplis reported that some aides in the WH are looking for someone who can talk to Trump and explain that it's over.  One suggestion was Hannity.

I’m sure trump will be interested in holding this up as long as he can but paying for recounts may be out of his reach. They were cash strapped weeks ago and I doubt their position is any better now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 06:10:22 pm
good point
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 06:13:08 pm
Trump is now claiming the media conspired to present fake polls showing him losing by a lot to suppress his voters.  His claim that he will win if only legal votes are counted once again ignores the Constitution which says that each sovereign state decides what votes are legal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 05, 2020, 06:14:43 pm
One of the CNN talking heads just said that at some point Mitch McConnell might step in and tell Trump to give up the ghost.  I'm guessing that would not happen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 06:15:03 pm
Trump's lead in Georgia is down to 3,635 after some Chatam County votes have been counted.   

Those were supposedly all the remaining Chatham County votes (17,000 of them) according to some guy with a check mark on Twitter. There are somewhere around 20,000 votes left. I think there are some left in Clayton County, which has gone 85% to Biden so far. I haven't seen anything about Gwinnett's 4,800 remaining votes being counted since the Secretary of State office's press conference this afternoon. 

If those Gwinnett votes are still out there and 5% of Clayton County's votes are too (that's what NYT's map shows), Biden is likely to take the lead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 05, 2020, 06:25:44 pm
Forsyth County in Georgia just reduced Trump's lead from 3,635 to 3,486
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 06:30:36 pm
Nate Silver retweeted a guy on Twitter who said there should be about 7,000 Clayton County votes left. If that's true and Biden gets just 80% of that vote, he'd still be ahead by several hundred votes.

Biden needs a little cushion with the overseas/military absentee ballots coming in tomorrow just to feel safe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 05, 2020, 06:30:51 pm
the thing about Trump is that he’s actually dumb enough to think that he won GA and PA because he was leading on Tuesday night.  He’s definitely the dumbest president we’ve ever had or will have.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 07:05:02 pm
One great thing about Clayton County being such a key in Georgia right now...Clayton County is partially in civil rights hero John Lewis' former congressional district.

Trump of course still hasn't gotten over the fact that Lewis didn't attend his inauguration. So it would be nice if they put Biden over the hump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 08:17:50 pm
Biden just cut more than 1,000 votes off his deficit on a group of only 1,337 ballots from Clayton County. So that's the kind of margin he'll be able to run up on the remaining 4,400ish ballots from that county.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 05, 2020, 08:48:17 pm
I watched Hannity for about 30 seconds. He’s full in on the Democrats are stealing the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 08:51:25 pm
I've already seen this Warnock commercial half a dozen times in the last few hours watching CNN. I think I'm going to be seeing a lot of Senate ads between now and January 5.

https://twitter.com/ReverendWarnock/status/1324321816102506497
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 05, 2020, 08:54:26 pm
I watched Hannity for about 30 seconds. He’s full in on the Democrats are stealing the election.

Lindsey Graham just suggested that the PA legislature ignore the outcome and appoint their own electors. So, a sitting US Senator actually proposing election theft.  Not great.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 05, 2020, 09:05:38 pm
That’s the next phase. This will not end any time soon. The lawsuits aren’t meant to do anything but build a story.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 09:47:08 pm
Who will show Biden with a lead first, Georgia or Pennsylvania? Georgia is closer (1,775 vs. 26,319) and Clayton plans to have all their votes in the next couple of hours, but Pennsylvania is releasing votes a lot more frequently and is dropping thousands of votes at a time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 05, 2020, 09:55:58 pm
Who will show Biden with a lead first, Georgia or Pennsylvania? Georgia is closer (1,775 vs. 26,319) and Clayton plans to have all their votes in the next couple of hours, but Pennsylvania is releasing votes a lot more frequently and is dropping thousands of votes at a time.

I’d go with GA.  I bet this next drop does it and it will be in the next hour or so.

@carlzimmer: Now @SteveKornacki is estimating Biden passes Trump in Pennsylvania around 1-3 am ET
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2020, 10:27:19 pm
Three observations of CNN's election coverage:

- They've been told they have to call Pennsylvania a commonwealth, not a state.
- Nevada's middle syllable rhymes with "add", not "ah".
- Rick Santorum is wearing a suit with Converse high tops.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 10:55:12 pm
Russian view

https://twitter.com/Kasparov63/status/1324023417755049995?s=20
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 11:17:21 pm
Been thinkin.  You know, it might be best for the final tallies be held off for at least a month.  Do we want to leave this infantile sociopath in the Oval Office for two months, angry and full of bile?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 05, 2020, 11:34:16 pm
The next POTUS might be Mike Pence.  Listening to Mary Trump tonight it sounded like her uncle Donald might not survive mentally until January 20.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 11:46:08 pm
The next POTUS might be Mike Pence.  Listening to Mary Trump tonight it sounded like her uncle Donald might not survive mentally until January 20.
Nearly 70 million voters didn't listen to Mary Trump BEFORE they voted, so I doubt they will now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 05, 2020, 11:53:17 pm
Curt, I'm talking about the possible need for the 25th amendment between now and then.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 05, 2020, 11:57:39 pm
Curt, I'm talking about the possible need for the 25th amendment between now and then.
Understand. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 06, 2020, 12:10:58 am
Quote
Lindsey Graham just suggested that the PA legislature ignore the outcome and appoint their own electors. So, a sitting US Senator actually proposing election theft.

That footage should be retained and brought out during the campaign for whatever he runs for next.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2020, 12:15:32 am
Both Biden and Trump are within range of each other in a lot of states that each can ask for recounts.   This is going to be unsettled until Dec 8.

GA is the only one of those states where it will be close enough to matter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2020, 12:20:18 am
One great thing about Clayton County being such a key in Georgia right now...Clayton County is partially in civil rights hero John Lewis' former congressional district.

Trump of course still hasn't gotten over the fact that Lewis didn't attend his inauguration. So it would be nice if they put Biden over the hump.

John Lewis' home, the birthplace of liberty, John McCain's home and Sheldon Adelson's home.  Karma is a bltch, bltch.

GA should be around 4K or so for Biden based on where the outstanding vote is. Military ballots is only what arrived late, the rest are already included.  There are also provisionals, which will favor the Ds.  A 4K vote lead is not being erased, though once it goes to a recount anything is possible with Kemp in charge.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2020, 12:23:12 am
Totally agree


br - In one of the GA senate races Democrat Raphael Warnock received 32.8% of the vote with Republicans Kelly Loeffler at 26% and Doug Collins at 20%.  Does the Republican total of 46% give Loeffler a big edge in the runoff?

The total of all the D candidates basically equalled Loeffler and Collins, and Warnock polls well ahead of both.  Anything can happen but I'd expect Ossoff to have the harder road.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2020, 12:46:51 am
Who will show Biden with a lead first, Georgia or Pennsylvania? Georgia is closer (1,775 vs. 26,319) and Clayton plans to have all their votes in the next couple of hours, but Pennsylvania is releasing votes a lot more frequently and is dropping thousands of votes at a time.

Even though PA will be more unambiguously determinative, I'm rooting for Clayton County. To have John Lewis' congressional district put Biden over the top to become President would be perfect.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 06, 2020, 12:50:09 am
The total of all the D candidates basically equalled Loeffler and Collins, and Warnock polls well ahead of both.  Anything can happen but I'd expect Ossoff to have the harder road.

I agree with this. Warnock is an out-of-nowhere great candidate. People just like him because he's not a politician, and he seems to be a really good guy. Everyone likes him. I also think some Collins voters are going to be reluctant to show up for Loeffler after their attacks on each other during the race. Usually, I'd think a runoff like this would automatically go Republican, but I'd put money on Warnock in this race.

I also expect Ossoff to lose. He's been hyped as a big deal for 5 years now, but he's boring. I hope I'm wrong...but Ossoff vs. Perdue is a typical politician vs. an incumbent typical politician. Incumbents typically win those races.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 06, 2020, 12:52:28 am
From the Times: 
Quote
Hours after President Trump’s son took to Twitter to complain that none of the Republicans with aspirations to run for president in 2024 were publicly siding with his father, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina defended Mr. Trump’s baseless claims of widespread voter fraud.

Appearing on Fox News, Mr. Graham, who is one of the president’s most loyal allies on Capitol Hill, did not offer any evidence to support the spurious claims of the White House. While he objected to the vote counting in Pennsylvania, he said he supported the process in Arizona.

“I trust Arizona, I don’t trust Philadelphia,” he said.

Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas followed his Republican colleague on the network and accused Democrats of trying to steal the election. He also offered no evidence to back his assertion.

Running out of words.  Appalling doesn't quite do it anymore.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 06, 2020, 01:04:38 am
 
Running out of words.  Appalling doesn't quite do it anymore.

Ted Cruz is still defending Donald Trump because he's scared of losing support of his base. Trump accused Cruz's father of conspiring to assassinate JFK, and also insulted his wife's physical appearance. Cruz might be the weakest, most cowardly Senator in US history.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 06, 2020, 01:51:45 am
More Clayton County votes come in, Trump's lead is down to 665. It was 372,000 at midnight on election night.

I was really hoping to stay up until Georgia flipped to Biden, but it's almost 3 a.m. and I have to work tomorrow. I hope Clayton will hold off on calling any more votes until about 9:00 tomorrow morning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 06, 2020, 07:50:56 am
New Pennsylvania numbers - Biden now leads by 5,587
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2020, 07:59:28 am
(https://media.giphy.com/media/3oKIPf3C7HqqYBVcCk/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 06, 2020, 08:02:17 am
Dedicated to Donald Trump

https://youtu.be/h9JArvEJ64M
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 06, 2020, 08:09:48 am

Decision Desk HQ
@DecisionDeskHQ
·
18m
Decision Desk HQ projects that
@JoeBiden
 has won Pennsylvania and its 20 electoral college votes for a total of 273.

Joe Biden has been elected the 46th President of the United States of America.

Race called at 11-06 08:50 AM EST
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 06, 2020, 08:13:31 am
Though it won't be necessary for Biden's election, his winning of Georgia is a good thing for the country.  We're healthier politically when parties are not divided so extremely by demographics and geographics.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2020, 08:18:13 am
(https://media.giphy.com/media/EPPvrXLVm6Axy/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2020, 09:38:10 am
The saddest thing about Trump's lies is that HE believes them, and because HE believes them, all these troglodyte followers believe them.  How do we prevent a total sociopath from becoming President again?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2020, 09:42:04 am

I suppose just about everybody who is reading this now knows that Joe Biden has now taken the lead in GA and PA, on top of having leads in AZ and NV (and WI and MI of course). Joe Biden WILL be our next president and will probably have 306 Electoral Votes.  He has smashed through Barack Obama's all-time national record of presidential votes.

When the campaign began, Biden was not my first choice, or even my second choice.  But at some point during the campaign I came to believe that he was the one we need for the time in which we live. Not just in terms of winnability, but in terms of governing as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2020, 09:43:28 am
Ron is whispering again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 06, 2020, 10:20:31 am
The remaining votes in Georgia are almost all Gwinnett County, and that should add a net of about 1,000 votes to Biden's lead before the military/overseas/provisional ballots come in. I think the lead is probably going to hold.

Some votes just came in from Arizona that closed the gap, but Nate Silver tweeted that Trump needed to close the gap more. He thinks Arizona is now pretty certain to stick with Biden now.

So unless something crazy happens in Alaska, it looks like Trump is going to lose in the Electoral College by the exact same margin he won by in 2016. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 06, 2020, 10:47:44 am
The saddest thing about Trump's lies is that HE believes them, and because HE believes them, all these troglodyte followers believe them.  How do we prevent a total sociopath from becoming President again?

Good question.    Had the pandemic not happened, Trump had a good chance of being reelected.  I firmly believe his complete bungling of it was a fatal error.

The internet is also a factor.  Way too many people think they are well-informed because they have a Facebook or Twitter account.  That number is only going to grow as more newspapers disappear.  My close to bankruptcy morning paper subscription rate is ridiculous.  They do not let you opt out of the $5.00 extra word game and puzzle sections they keep including.  If you miss a delivery, too bad, you can read the paper online.  My credit card was just charged and put me paid in advance through April, 2021.  I hope they give a refund of that amount when they finally have to pull the plug but I doubt if I’ll see one.

And then there is Fox News.

We are getting what we deserve is not far from the truth. 

A week or so ago, I made a post regarding public financing of campaigns for the senate, house, and the presidency.  That would be a start towards ending politicians voting only  for what is good for their reelection.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 06, 2020, 12:10:42 pm
I can honestly say this country terribly needed change.

Im glad we got it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 06, 2020, 12:35:41 pm
The saddest thing about Trump's lies is that HE believes them, and because HE believes them, all these troglodyte followers believe them.  How do we prevent a total sociopath from becoming President again?

I'd start by reforming all the govt systems that allow a racist minority to hold majority power in the Senate and White House. Buttigieg has the right idea.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 06, 2020, 12:54:25 pm
I'd start by reforming all the govt systems that allow a racist minority to hold majority power in the Senate and White House. Buttigieg has the right idea.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/features/producers-picks/socialism-and-defund-the-police-are-losing-slogans-says-virginia-democrat/65-b8f93666-81a4-4ec8-bf46-a1f86477e16f

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 06, 2020, 01:10:07 pm
"Defund the police" is a terrible slogan. But it's not the argument being made. Sure, better messaging would help, but let's be real: people with Confederate, Trump, and Blue Line flags waiving from the back of their truck-nuts-equipped pickup aren't here for a nuanced debate about the administration of public funds as it relates to police and community reform.

And "socialism" is not actually a thing that D's are talking about. You know that.

Either way, we've had significant majority votes AGAINST the pathological narcissist 2 times in the last 4 years, but who is in the White House right now?

This is a systemic failure, and the system is what needs reform. Pointing fingers at the Republican-trope-version of Dem strategies misses the whole point.




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2020, 01:17:05 pm
So, tico, since the Senate is by popular vote and not some electoral system, are you suggesting not allowing anyone you suspect of being a troglodyte to vote?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 06, 2020, 01:40:53 pm
Hardly, Curt. You know better than that. 

And while the Senate is by popular vote, it is extraordinarily undemocratic. There is absolutely no reason a rural voter from WY should have 40 times (!!!) the power of a resident of Brooklyn as it relates to the Senate.

Again, the kinds of reforms Buttigieg has proposed are what we need to consider.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2020, 01:50:43 pm
So why did the founders set it up that way if it makes no sense?  I guess the sovereignty of the states really means nothing, especially if the rules don't work for you.   In many ways, some on the left are just like Trump.  Gloat when the rules work in your favor b itch when they don't.  Seriously.  That's how I see things.  Both sides want to run to the courts or start looking for loopholes as soon as things don't go their way.  Trump is crying now about "legal" ballots and stopping counts and legal actions.  Why?  Because the big baby didn't get his way.  Gorbachev was right.  Split the US into 3 pieces.  East West Central.  The lines are already drawn.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 06, 2020, 02:10:03 pm
The founders were hardly infallible. And, I doubt they saw this country becoming what it has become.  The idea that the small states have an outsized voice in both the Senate and the presidential election seems very out of date and due for a change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2020, 02:15:33 pm
To a degree, I agree, Jack.   The Founders certainly didn't foresee  a Presidency becoming near as powerful as it has become since WWII.   The courts have become overly powerful too.  Again, if we obeyed the rules as they were established and have been legally amended along the way, this system would work.   It's like a fantasy league of any kind.  They usually develop problems when players begin looking how to game the rules.  I lived through a time when Democrats were demonized.  Now it's the Republican turn due to bad choices they have made. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 06, 2020, 02:19:33 pm
The problem with the senate is made worse by state legislators using computers to turn states into mini versions of the senate; ie the minority makes the rules. We are a people run by the minority in most government aspects. How the $&$) is this OK?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 06, 2020, 02:35:47 pm
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our election system, but in ourselves.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 06, 2020, 02:49:54 pm
So why did the founders set it up that way if it makes no sense?  I guess the sovereignty of the states really means nothing, especially if the rules don't work for you.   In many ways, some on the left are just like Trump.  Gloat when the rules work in your favor b itch when they don't.  Seriously.  That's how I see things.  Both sides want to run to the courts or start looking for loopholes as soon as things don't go their way.  Trump is crying now about "legal" ballots and stopping counts and legal actions.  Why?  Because the big baby didn't get his way.  Gorbachev was right.  Split the US into 3 pieces.  East West Central.  The lines are already drawn.

The founders didn't set it up "this way," neither were they clairvoyant nor perfect.

WY wasn't discovered, let alone a state. The country didn't have +300M people. The population discrepancies between states was nowhere close to what we see today. Black people and women just couldn't vote. The notion that a system of governance created some 250 years ago would be perfectly relevant today makes no sense. Of course changes will be needed over time. We're seeing that now.

Do you want doctors to practice medicine like it's the 18th century? Should we revert to the scientific insights of the 1700's? Would it be better to revert to the social hierarchies of the founders? No, of course not.

I have no idea where the "states sovereignty means nothing" argument is coming from. And I'm hardly raising my voice on the issues because the rules "don't work for me." They've worked very well for me. The problem is they don't work well for others, and they haven't for some time. I'm neither gloating nor b!tching about winning or losing, either.

You asked how do we keep a Trump from being elected again. I said the solution is to rebalance egregious minority-rule powers that go far beyond what representative govt looks like, and that the ideas of a white, veteran, midwestern man are a good place to start.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 06, 2020, 02:55:34 pm
Said more succinctly: the founders created a system of gov't that disenfranchised entire races and genders. Their ideas are worth questioning, especially given what we've witnessed these last 4 years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2020, 03:24:41 pm
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our election system, but in ourselves.

I vigorously disagree, Play. While the fault may be, in part, ourselves, when two out of the last 5 elections prior to this year resulted in someone who won the most votes lost, something is wrong. Particularly, when the last time the person elected had well over 3 million fewer votes. It could have been even worse this election. That is a structural defect.

Similarly, with the current makeup of the country (as opposed to the tiny nation with no enormous disparities in the populations of the states at that time) the fact that the nature of the Senate makes a mockery of the one man, one vote principle. It's absurd that a single voter in one state has the equivalent effect of 40 (or whatever the exact calculation is) voters in California or NY or Illinois etc.  That too is a structural problem.

Similarly, laws that are clearly intended to suppress votes of a portion of the population is a structural problem.

There are other examples as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2020, 03:52:53 pm
Here is an excerpt from an article that says what I was trying to say, but more eloquently and with more authority:

“We look at a map of so-called red and blue states and treat that map as land and not people,” said Carol Anderson, a professor of African-American studies at Emory University who researches voter suppression. “Why, when somebody has won millions more votes than their opponent, are we still deliberating over 10,000 votes here, 5,000 votes there?”

Mr. Biden’s current popular vote lead is larger than the individual populations of more than 20 states. It is also more than a million votes larger than Hillary Clinton’s already large popular vote advantage four years ago. Mrs. Clinton beat Mr. Trump in the popular vote by nearly 2.9 million votes, or 2.1 percentage points; Mr. Biden is currently ahead by 2.8 points.

John Koza, chairman of National Popular Vote Inc., which lobbies states to pledge their electors to the winner of the national popular vote, said his group would intensify efforts next year in Arizona, Minnesota, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, among others.

"There are similar structural issues in the Senate, where the current Democratic minority was elected with more votes than the Republican majority and where by 2040, based on population projections, about 70 percent of Americans will be represented by 30 percent of senators.

“It’s not that the states that are represented by the 30 percent are all red, but what we do know is that the states that are going to have 70 senators are in no way representative of the diversity in the country,” said Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

“The more this happens, the more you get the sense that voters don’t have a say in the choice of their leaders,” he said. “And you cannot have a democracy over a period of time that survives if a majority of people believe that their franchise is meaningless.”

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/11/06/us/election-results#the-electoral-college-race-is-down-to-the-wire-the-popular-vote-isnt-biden-leads-by-4-million
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 06, 2020, 03:57:22 pm
Here is an excerpt from an article that says what I was trying to say, but more eloquently and with more authority:

“We look at a map of so-called red and blue states and treat that map as land and not people,” said Carol Anderson, a professor of African-American studies at Emory University who researches voter suppression. “Why, when somebody has won millions more votes than their opponent, are we still deliberating over 10,000 votes here, 5,000 votes there?”

Mr. Biden’s current popular vote lead is larger than the individual populations of more than 20 states. It is also more than a million votes larger than Hillary Clinton’s already large popular vote advantage four years ago. Mrs. Clinton beat Mr. Trump in the popular vote by nearly 2.9 million votes, or 2.1 percentage points; Mr. Biden is currently ahead by 2.8 points.

John Koza, chairman of National Popular Vote Inc., which lobbies states to pledge their electors to the winner of the national popular vote, said his group would intensify efforts next year in Arizona, Minnesota, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, among others.

"There are similar structural issues in the Senate, where the current Democratic minority was elected with more votes than the Republican majority and where by 2040, based on population projections, about 70 percent of Americans will be represented by 30 percent of senators.

“It’s not that the states that are represented by the 30 percent are all red, but what we do know is that the states that are going to have 70 senators are in no way representative of the diversity in the country,” said Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

“The more this happens, the more you get the sense that voters don’t have a say in the choice of their leaders,” he said. “And you cannot have a democracy over a period of time that survives if a majority of people believe that their franchise is meaningless.”

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/11/06/us/election-results#the-electoral-college-race-is-down-to-the-wire-the-popular-vote-isnt-biden-leads-by-4-million

I wish we could post tweets.  But, the GIF in this one illustrates the idea that people vote, not land perfectly.

https://twitter.com/BettinaForget/status/1324139878666391555?s=20
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 06, 2020, 04:16:48 pm
And I disagree with you, Ron.  48% of the American electorate supports reelecting Trump.  What is wrong goes way beyond the Electoral College.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 06, 2020, 04:25:44 pm
I wish we could post tweets.  But, the GIF in this one illustrates the idea that people vote, not land perfectly.

https://twitter.com/BettinaForget/status/1324139878666391555?s=20

Don't bother to start the video, just look at the map.

https://youtu.be/joubpOtGegQ
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 06, 2020, 04:45:13 pm
I'm glad Dr. Deborah Birx (the scarf lady) has finally joined Dr. Fauci and has begun to assert herself by not echoing Trump's Covid-19 statements.

At one of the early Covid-19 task force sessions, she said 19 of the 50 states had a very low infection rate so meant almost 20% of the country.  What she obviously glossed over was how low the population is in those 19 states.


I have a neighbor who flatout refuses to look any further than an original statement. Anything else is fake news.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2020, 04:46:15 pm
And I disagree with you, Ron.  48% of the American electorate supports reelecting Trump.  What is wrong goes way beyond the Electoral College.

Play, perhaps you missed the initial part of my post, in which I acknowledged something is wrong with us. Both things can be true at the same time: something is wrong with our populace and something is also wrong with a structure that provides an outlandish amount of control to a minority.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dihard on November 06, 2020, 04:51:43 pm
You guys are helping me through this madness. Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2020, 05:12:14 pm
tico and Jack and others, I understand your frustrations, but I disagree with you.  The biggest problem is education.   I'll explain more later...kinda pressed for time right now.

Why are there high school kids, prison guards, college frats doing Nazi salutes?  They're ignorant.  Why are more and more of the same denying the Holocaust?  Why isn't Black Lives Matter, Black Lives Matter AGAIN.  It's forgotten the costliest war we ever fought was because people thought Black Lives Mattered.   Then we dropped the ball and left our Black citizens at the mercy of bigots.   Why isn't there an honest discussion of why police officers fear Black men?  In the 1800's there was no further compromise to be made regarding slavery; today abortion is in the same position.  Both sides expect the other to make concessions when the issue can't be compromised by either.  And I don't think that Wyoming having 2 Senators is as much a problem as  is that urban dwellers do not understand the values and life or the rural and the reverse is also true.  I'll expand on some of these ideas later.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 06, 2020, 05:50:36 pm
"Defund the police" is a terrible slogan. But it's not the argument being made. Sure, better messaging would help, but let's be real: people with Confederate, Trump, and Blue Line flags waiving from the back of their truck-nuts-equipped pickup aren't here for a nuanced debate about the administration of public funds as it relates to police and community reform.

And "socialism" is not actually a thing that D's are talking about. You know that.

Either way, we've had significant majority votes AGAINST the pathological narcissist 2 times in the last 4 years, but who is in the White House right now?

This is a systemic failure, and the system is what needs reform. Pointing fingers at the Republican-trope-version of Dem strategies misses the whole point.






The rural/urban, large/small state was very much a thing when the country was founded. The founders choose a form of government that limited the power of the majority.

The Democrats need to figure out a better message to reach less populated areas of the country and going further to left won’t work. Moving to middle and coming up solutions to problems will change far more minds. Neither side has been interested in that for a long time and that is why the government/country is dysfunctional.

Minds can be changed, people can change. Doing what you are proposing is just going to make things worse. It reminds me a lot of arguments conservatives made in the 90’s. It didn’t work out well for Republicans it won’t work out well for Democrats.  Hopefully Biden will be able to bring back the middle as a viable option.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2020, 06:08:41 pm
So why did the founders set it up that way if it makes no sense?  I guess the sovereignty of the states really means nothing, especially if the rules don't work for you.   In many ways, some on the left are just like Trump.  Gloat when the rules work in your favor b itch when they don't.  Seriously.  That's how I see things.  Both sides want to run to the courts or start looking for loopholes as soon as things don't go their way.  Trump is crying now about "legal" ballots and stopping counts and legal actions.  Why?  Because the big baby didn't get his way.  Gorbachev was right.  Split the US into 3 pieces.  East West Central.  The lines are already drawn.

The founders also set it up so that's slavery was legal, slaves were 3/5 of a person, and women couldn't vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2020, 06:11:01 pm
When it comes to the (false) choice between being "progressive" and trying to learn to communicate with relative "conservative" voters, even some Trump supporters, I find myself thinking of Sherrod Brown.  He is one of the more "progressive" members of the Senate. He's something of a darling of a fair number of progressive activists. Trump received 53.4% of the Ohio vote this year and in 2018, Sherrod Brown received 53.4% of the vote in the Ohio Senate election.  Brown has been a major voice arguing that Dems need to find better ways of reaching out to, listening to, and communicating with blue collar type white Dems.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 06, 2020, 06:35:57 pm
And while the Senate is by popular vote, it is extraordinarily undemocratic. There is absolutely no reason a rural voter from WY should have 40 times (!!!) the power of a resident of Brooklyn as it relates to the Senate.

And, by extension, there is no reason why the larger number of low population states should give be able to the control of the senate to the Republicans over the much larger number of Democrats in the rest of the states.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 06, 2020, 07:12:54 pm
And, by extension, there is no reason why the larger number of low population states should give be able to the control of the senate to the Republicans over the much larger number of Democrats in the rest of the states.

That is the design of the Senate. What you would be arguing for is a unicameral legislature.

The electoral college was been what has kept the nation a two party system. Without the need for 270 votes there is nothing keeping Bernie Sanders for running for President in his own political party or the conservative analog running in their own party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 06, 2020, 08:42:39 pm
Biden just got a net gain of more than 5,000 votes from Pennsylvania and is now up over 27,000 votes. I'm surprised this hasn't been called yet by any of the networks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 06, 2020, 08:51:21 pm
Biden just got a net gain of more than 5,000 votes from Pennsylvania and is now up over 27,000 votes. I'm surprised this hasn't been called yet by any of the networks.

It’s absurd. They are holding off because Trump is such a pathetic loser and they are still being held hostage by him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 06, 2020, 09:20:44 pm
AP has officially projected that there will be an Ossoff/Perdue runoff.

Another good sign for the direction of Georgia politics: Carolyn Bourdeaux was projected to win the House seat from my district (GA-7) today too. The writing has been on the wall in this district for a while, though...incumbent Rob Woodall announced he was retiring in Februrary 2019, just three months after he'd barely survived the midterms.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 06, 2020, 09:32:19 pm
From what I gather, there are about 100,000 provisional ballots in Pennsylvania yet to be counted and there is uncertainty as to whether they might be strongly pro-Trump (unlike their usual pro-Democratic leaning).  It seems extremely unlikely, but I don't blame the networks for being cautious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 06, 2020, 09:37:23 pm
A concern to me was the decision in many inner city precincts to boot out Republican poll watchers. Another concern is the drop of more than 100k ballots in Milwaukee and Detroit of more than 100k votes at 4 am, all for Biden in Detroit. 137k votes without a single Trump voter? He took 12% of the black vote. Not one for Trump among that large of a drop? Maybe this was a digital voter entry issue. Maybe it is legit. But if you want the country, not just Democrats, to accept a Biden administration as legit, these "anomalies" will need explaining. Somehow Biden did better in the rust belt than Obama. Perhaps you believe Trump hate is to blame. Perhaps it is.

If there was any cheating by Republicans, throwing away D ballots, giving sharpie pens out that you know won't be counted by the machines in heavy D districts, 100k ballot drops all going for Trump, I would imagine you would at least want to know how that is possible. Some of you would assume the worst. I actually hope the opposite, that there is a legit reason for these and it will be explained. I love my country more than one party, or the policies it espouses. A fraudulent election will forever erode the confidence we citizens have in our government. More than any result this week or next, I pray that does not happen.

I wonder if Robb still thinks this is all true?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 06, 2020, 09:40:50 pm
Another 1,700 added to the margin in Pittsburgh.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 06, 2020, 09:41:16 pm
That is the design of the Senate. What you would be arguing for is a unicameral legislature.

There’s a fair bit of daylight between reforming the current system and unicameral legislature. That’s a false dichotomy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 06, 2020, 09:44:30 pm
Another 1,700 added to the margin in Pittsburgh.

0.5% lead for Biden. This is not a lead that he’s going to lose. You can hear the guys on CNN and MSNBC practically begging their data guys to just call this and end this charade.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 06, 2020, 09:51:36 pm
I’m all for a general conversation about “winning hearts and minds”. But in order to have credibility, that convo needs to start from a place of acknowledging that our govt systems are, at this point, a tool of white minority rule.

Given that the founders thought if you didn’t have a pen!s or if your skin was too dark, your voice did not matter in the public square, we’re going to need *much* better reasons than “but the founders” to justify a system that continues to suppress the voice of minorities.

I have no regard for traditions and institutions that perpetuate white supremacy. They are *not* sacred. They are profane.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2020, 10:00:35 pm
I’m all for a general conversation about “winning hearts and minds”. But in order to have credibility, that convo needs to start from a place of acknowledging that our govt systems are, at this point, a tool of white minority rule.

Given that the founders thought if you didn’t have a pen!s or if your skin was too dark, your voice did not matter in the public square, we’re going to need *much* better reasons than “but the founders” to justify a system that continues to suppress the voice of minorities.

I have no regard for traditions and institutions that perpetuate white supremacy. They are *not* sacred. They are profane.
  the biggest issue with your rants is that the Founders DID allow for Amendments which have spoken and continue to speak to the gender and race issues.  They knew that change was inevitable and put the machinery in place to make those changes.   Your obsession with the Original Constitution and Bill of Rights weakens your argument.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 06, 2020, 10:21:16 pm
Mark Meadows has COVID. We've set new records for new cases at least a couple times this week. I guess Trump was wrong all those times he told his followers that the virus would magically go away on November 4.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2020, 10:26:08 pm
From what I gather, there are about 100,000 provisional ballots in Pennsylvania yet to be counted and there is uncertainty as to whether they might be strongly pro-Trump (unlike their usual pro-Democratic leaning).  It seems extremely unlikely, but I don't blame the networks for being cautious.

There's no uncertainty.  None.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 06, 2020, 10:26:18 pm
It is so much worse than it was in the spring yet we seem to have no interest in doing anything about it.  I can’t wait to see my mom’s reaction when I tell her we are not doing thanksgiving this year.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 06, 2020, 10:43:27 pm
  the biggest issue with your rants is that the Founders DID allow for Amendments which have spoken and continue to speak to the gender and race issues.  They knew that change was inevitable and put the machinery in place to make those changes.   Your obsession with the Original Constitution and Bill of Rights weakens your argument.

Wait a minute. I’m arguing that we need institutional change, and up until now, the most consistent counterargument has been “but the founders.” But now I’m the one obsessed with the original constitution?

I’m well aware of how amendments, etc., work. I thought we were having a discussion about principles and values, not the mechanics of law making. Did I miss something?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2020, 11:15:23 pm
For now, the popular vote compact is the best way forward.  It's not all that far from the threshold it needs to reach.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2020, 11:31:18 pm
Yes, the only thing about the Founders that concerns me is why they set up the checks and balances of the House and Senate and, I suppose, the electoral college.   Gender and race issues have to be taken in historical context.  To the argument that the Founders were bigots because they counted slaves as only a fraction of a person ignores the whole idea of what was the goal.  The goal was to get the Southern states to come to the table and sign.  Read the Preamble.  What was the purpose of the document?  And I do believe that the framers knew they weren't perfect and that's why they left this gaping hole for Amendments.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2020, 11:43:42 pm
Noted lefty rag the Murdoch-owned WSJ calls on Agent Orange to quit:


Quote
Joanne Lipman
@joannelipman
 · 8m
Whoa. New from @wsj editorial page(!): “Mr. Trump’s legacy will be diminished greatly if his final act is a bitter refusal to accept a legitimate defeat.” https://wsj.com/articles/the-presidential-endgame-11604706255?st=12opab285awkvc4&reflink=share_mobilewebshare
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 07, 2020, 08:31:42 am
For now, the popular vote compact is the best way forward.  It's not all that far from the threshold it needs to reach.

It would be nice if that could work. But, the compact clause in the constitution may make it either illegal or would require congressional consent. Seems like the Supreme Court, as currently constituted, would be a massive roadblock to this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 07, 2020, 09:32:56 am
Nate Silver says that AP will not call a race until it is clear that the final vote margin will be greater than what would trigger a recount.  In Pennsylvania, that would be an 0.5% margin.  I don't understand using that criterion since they will call a state if the final vote count is within the margin for a recount.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 07, 2020, 10:24:59 am
CNN projects that Biden wins Pennsylvania, Biden has won!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 10:25:17 am
CNN projects Biden's win in Pennsylvania wins the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 10:26:17 am
This 1929 song used by FDR in 1932 and seems appropriate for today

https://youtu.be/Zvk_uLnv4uo   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 07, 2020, 11:18:44 am
AP and Fox News have both called Nevada for Biden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 07, 2020, 11:38:58 am
Trump was golfing when everyone started projecting Biden to be the winner. I wonder if anyone has had the courage to tell him yet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 07, 2020, 11:55:58 am
That's no coincidence.  The staff knew the rough timing of this and made sure he was well away from the cheering crowds.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 07, 2020, 12:01:04 pm
Pack your sh@&, you whiny little bi@$$.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 07, 2020, 12:06:03 pm
Wouldn't it be nice to see a conventional concession speech by Trump?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 07, 2020, 12:12:04 pm
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1324908316548493313.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 12:18:34 pm
Wouldn't it be nice to see a conventional concession speech by Trump?
  It would make me believe in pod people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 12:24:52 pm
Trump won't concede.  It's not in his DNA.  This has not ever been about Making America Great Again or the Republican Party but Trump's ego.  Me, me, me.  Here's a horrible thought: this jackass could run again in 4 years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 12:36:47 pm
Trump was golfing when everyone started projecting Biden to be the winner. I wonder if anyone has had the courage to tell him yet.
  Hope they told him as he was putting.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 12:40:00 pm
  Hope they told him as he was putting.
He gives himself any putt under six feet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 07, 2020, 12:46:26 pm
He gives himself any putt under six feet.

And his "6 feet" is different from everybody else's.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 07, 2020, 12:53:13 pm
Im glad its over and I think the right man won.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 01:06:10 pm
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/c980a08cabba3294d5fcee72a233ed05c09a484d/0_0_4930_3055/master/4930.jpg?width=940&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=ff25288e75f989a5e66e4f104f2cc2b9)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 07, 2020, 01:41:28 pm
A man wearing a Puerto Rican flag returns Trump's favor:

https://twitter.com/schmidtsam7/status/1325148092228804614
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 01:54:12 pm
Heard that some Trumpers are calling for Biden's impeachment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 07, 2020, 02:07:49 pm
Heard that some Trumpers are calling for Biden's impeachment.

Not surprised. I’m sure some of them will draw up articles on Jan 2nd.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 02:12:25 pm
Jan 21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 07, 2020, 02:14:42 pm
Jan 21

The new Congress opens on Jan 3rd so that’s when I’d expect the articles.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 02:22:41 pm
Ah.  I thought they'd wait until after inauguration
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 07, 2020, 03:47:21 pm
Fox News is being quite responsible in its coverage of the election.  It's disorienting. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 03:53:15 pm
https://youtu.be/jIwLrM1U3Jo
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 07, 2020, 03:58:45 pm
Fox News is being quite responsible in its coverage of the election.  It's disorienting.

I’m sure the Fox personalities - Hannity, Carlson, Ingram, Dobbs, etc - will correct this when they get the chance.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 04:27:10 pm
How do you post a jpeg again?  I've forgotten.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 04:54:54 pm
Has Trump blamed Pence yet?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 05:47:50 pm
How do you post a jpeg again?  I've forgotten.

Put the URL after the first of the double quotes

<IMG src="">

<IMG src=":small">

<IMG src=":medium">
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 07, 2020, 06:27:34 pm
And his "6 feet" is different from everybody else's.

So is his six inches.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 06:36:02 pm
Still well worth the investment
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41EfgKXZ+PL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

https://www.amazon.com/Commander-Cheat-Golf-Explains-Trump/dp/031652803X/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=commander+in+cheat&qid=1604795647&s=books&sr=1-1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 07, 2020, 09:21:34 pm
https://twitter.com/baseballot/status/1325268090859515905?s=21
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 07, 2020, 09:27:13 pm

Updated version of an old meme.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EmRMn8JXYAEvvsL?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 10:10:35 pm
Put the URL after the first of the double quotes

<IMG src="">

<IMG src=":small">

<IMG src=":medium">
  Thanks, Bennett.  Still can't get it to post.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 11:02:23 pm
Bennett, I just sent you what I've been trying to post.  Maybe you'll have more luck with it than me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 11:22:59 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EmPmBleXIAAZaW0.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2020, 11:44:56 pm
Great.  Thank you much, Bennett.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 11:47:27 pm
Letter to the editor

Mr. President: Inquiring minds want to know — if we Democrats/liberals/socialist elves are trying to steal this election by fraudulently filling out hundreds/thousands/millions of illegal ballots, why wouldn’t we also be voting down-ballot for Democratic senators and representatives?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 08, 2020, 01:23:31 am
If anything sums up the Trump presidency and campaign, it's this.  Their big Rudy "Fraud!" news conference in Philly was set up by a staffer who confused Four Seasons Landscaping with the Four Seasons Hotel.  As a result Giuliani spoke in a storefront sandwiched between a dildo shop and a crematorium. 

This has been a shitshow, and you can bet it's going to be one for the next 10 weeks.  But thank goodness these cretins are as stupid and incompetent as they are - as much as we've paid for their stupidity and incompetence, if they weren't they might have been able to cling to power.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 08, 2020, 08:48:09 am
If anything sums up the Trump presidency and campaign, it's this.  Their big Rudy "Fraud!" news conference in Philly was set up by a staffer who confused Four Seasons Landscaping with the Four Seasons Hotel.  As a result Giuliani spoke in a storefront sandwiched between a dildo shop and a crematorium. 

This has been a shitshow, and you can bet it's going to be one for the next 10 weeks.  But thank goodness these cretins are as stupid and incompetent as they are - as much as we've paid for their stupidity and incompetence, if they weren't they might have been able to cling to power.

Don’t forget how lazy they are.  All they had to do was put in a little work - either actual governing or campaigning- and they would have won this thing.  But, since Trump is a very insecure dumb person, he surrounds himself with dumber people and you end up with this outcome and the ultimate capper in Four Season Total Landscaping. It’s really a perfect end.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 08, 2020, 08:56:24 am
Live your life in such a way that the whole world doesn't dance when you lose your job.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 08, 2020, 08:28:04 pm
Scroll through the soon-to-be ex-president's Twitter timeline and look how many tweets are getting red flagged and marked as misinformation.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

After he's out of office, how long will it take him to get permanently banned from Twitter? Two days? Three?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2020, 07:58:25 am
Michael Cohen says Donald Trump will flee to Mar-a-lago and never return to the White House

Quote
Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen said the president would likely flee the White House for Mar-a-Lago at Christmas and not return for Joe Biden's inauguration in January.

Speaking on MSNBC, Michael Cohen said the president would probably fight the election result until January and beyond from the comfort of his Florida escape.

“I would not be shocked if there is no concession speech at all. My theory is that at Christmas time he goes to Mar-a-Lago. I think he will stay there through the inauguration. I would not be shocked if he will not show up to the inauguration either,” Mr Cohen said.
“He cannot let the camera look at him and basically pull down the curtain and see the wizard standing beside.


He is just a loser and it is killing him and, right now, what is going on in the White House is nothing but finger-pointing.”

I heard that he will go to Florida at Thanksgiving, not Christmas.  It’s too bad Cohen doesn’t speculate on how much work will get done between Thanksgiving and January 20.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 09, 2020, 08:22:59 am
Michael Cohen says Donald Trump will flee to Mar-a-lago and never return to the White House

I heard that he will go to Florida at Thanksgiving, not Christmas.  It’s too bad Cohen doesn’t speculate on how much work will get done between Thanksgiving and January 20.

His concession is irrelevant. What is not, though, is the GSA’s refusal to admit what is happening and refusal to start the transition.  These people are unbelievable and are really willing to burn it all down if they don’t get their way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 09, 2020, 08:23:24 am
Pfizer’s vaccine is 90% effective in early phase 3 data, which is huge. They are saying they’ll have enough for about 25 million people in 2020 and 600 million people in 2021. The other vaccines need to come through as well, but this is a great start.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 09, 2020, 08:25:11 am
Pfizer’s vaccine is 90% effective in early phase 3 data, which is huge. They are saying they’ll have enough for about 25 million people in 2020 and 600 million people in 2021. The other vaccines need to come through as well, but this is a great start.

This is one of the vaccines that have to be held at an extremely cold temp, right? I wonder if the supply chain is ready for that?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2020, 08:35:59 am
Pfizer’s vaccine is 90% effective in early phase 3 data, which is huge. They are saying they’ll have enough for about 25 million people in 2020 and 600 million people in 2021. The other vaccines need to come through as well, but this is a great start.
That news has caused the Dow Jones to surge nearly 1,500 points.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2020, 09:00:19 am
That news has caused the Dow Jones to surge nearly 1,500 points.
How hard is it to make money in the stock market?

Pfizer (PFE) opened at $42.86 and now sits at $39.46
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 09, 2020, 09:30:39 am
This is one of the vaccines that have to be held at an extremely cold temp, right? I wonder if the supply chain is ready for that?

Norman Ornstein
@NormOrnstein

As Michael Osterholm has emphasized, the Pfizer vaccine has to be kept at -80 Centigrade. Very hard to do if we are giving two doses to 300 million people. Keep eyes out for other vaccines that don’t require this level of refrigeration.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 09, 2020, 10:00:17 am
It has to be kept at -112 Fahrenheit?  Yikes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 09, 2020, 10:02:46 am
Oh, sure, one week after the election, NOW there's a vaccine.  Yeah, right.  Total media big pharma conspiracy.  Hunter Biden must be on Pfizer's board.  What the hell.

That's what I'd be spouting if I was a Trumper.

Honestly, I wish Biden would keep a few things closer to his vest.  Stop giving Trump and Trumpers ammo.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 09, 2020, 10:03:50 am
It has to be kept at -112 Fahrenheit?  Yikes.

And after the shot, you have to sit in a freezer for two days.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2020, 10:12:21 am
Pfizer was not part of Warp Speed and has received no Corona Task Force payments.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 09, 2020, 10:14:51 am
Pfizer was not part of Warp Speed and has received no Corona Task Force payments.

And, yet, Mike Pence just tried to take credit for this on behalf of the admin.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 09, 2020, 10:19:39 am
The Trumpers around here aint happy about the vaccine.

Something about it having monkey dna in it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 09, 2020, 10:24:35 am
The Trumpers around here aint happy about the vaccine.

Something about it having monkey dna in it.

I suspect those dopes are generally anti-science of any sort. Those people are still litigating the Scopes Monkey Trial.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 09, 2020, 10:24:43 am
They used DNA from Tennessee?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 09, 2020, 10:44:42 am
I wonder if Robb will be touting this Gallup poll?

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EmZGu3VWEAA9Z6-.png?format=png&name=large)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 09, 2020, 11:57:04 am
This is one of the vaccines that have to be held at an extremely cold temp, right? I wonder if the supply chain is ready for that?

Find 60 Minutes from yesterday. They had a segment about the supply chain.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 09, 2020, 11:59:49 am
The Nats have accepted the results of the election.

https://thehill.com/homenews/525068-nationals-invite-biden-to-throw-out-first-pitch-on-opening-day
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 09, 2020, 02:17:08 pm
This is one of the vaccines that have to be held at an extremely cold temp, right? I wonder if the supply chain is ready for that?

It is the one that needs to be stored at the coldest temps.  -94 degrees F vs Moderna which is -4F.  They are looking at trying to improve the storage temps for both of them, but the -4 wouldn't be impossible to deal with.  Our frozen vaccines are currently be stored at -10 F.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 09, 2020, 03:57:37 pm
Even Fox News has seen enough of the administration's lies.

Zeke Miller @ZekeJMiller
Fox breaks away after taking about a minute of Kayleigh McEnany's statement. Cavuto said unless she can provide some data to back it up, he can't in good conscience continue showing it
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 09, 2020, 05:02:46 pm
Can Trump fire Caputo?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2020, 05:10:17 pm
Can Trump fire Caputo?
He just fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2020, 05:14:06 pm
The U.S. just crossed the 10,000,000 Covid-19 case threshold.

The first million took 98 days.  The last million just 10 days.

It now looks like Trump's election night party was another super-spreader event.

My supplementary freezer is just about full.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 09, 2020, 05:39:43 pm
He just fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper.
  Yeah, the election loss was Esper's fault.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 09, 2020, 05:58:22 pm
Quote
The Congress of the Confederation set March 4, 1789, as the date “for commencing proceedings” of the new government established by the U.S. Constitution. While a particularly bad winter delayed the inauguration of George Washington by eight weeks, subsequent incoming presidents and vice presidents took their oaths of office on March 4. The four-month gap was needed in part because of the time it took to count and report votes and to travel to the nation’s capital.

The first January 20 inauguration was in 1937 when FDR was sworn in for his second term.

I can't imagine Donald Trump being around until March.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 09, 2020, 06:00:31 pm
I can't imagine him being around at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 09, 2020, 06:42:53 pm
He just fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper.

He may be thinking he wants to use a nuke on somebody while he still has the power to do it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 09, 2020, 06:47:55 pm
He may be thinking he wants to use a nuke on somebody while he still has the power to do it.

This MF’er will nuke Philly and people like Robb will celebrate. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 10, 2020, 12:29:27 am
The shlt is about to hit the fan.  The defense secretary has been fired, and they've just started building a defensive barricade around the White House.  People need to start taking this seriously - these are not normal times.

I think there’s a very specific progression to this.  Start with vote suppression and intimidation.  Then lawsuits.  Then rogue electoral slates.  And if none of that works, martial law and termination of democracy.

I’ve been saying all along it’s going to come down to what the generals decide to do when the chips are down.  Nothing I’m seeing now makes me think I was wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 10, 2020, 03:46:18 am
Trump wont leave without a fight.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 10, 2020, 09:32:12 am
Trump wont leave without a fight.

This is clear. It would be a lot harder for him to pull this off if people like Robb who claim to love this country would push back.  But, unfortunately, people like Robb are full of crap and will support and enable the destruction of our system that has worked pretty well for a couple hundred years. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 10, 2020, 12:04:59 pm
Take a breath, guys. Trump is going to do what he's going to do over until Jan 20. It will be poisonous and destructive, and McConnell and the bulk of the Republicans in Congress will aid and abet him. This will be painful to endure. But he will be gone on January 20.

Things will not get rosy after that. But things will get somewhat better.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 10, 2020, 01:10:31 pm
Take a breath, guys. Trump is going to do what he's going to do over until Jan 20. It will be poisonous and destructive, and McConnell and the bulk of the Republicans in Congress will aid and abet him. This will be painful to endure. But he will be gone on January 20.

Things will not get rosy after that. But things will get somewhat better.

This is not so reassuring.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 10, 2020, 02:35:18 pm
This is not so reassuring.

Hey, at this time, it's the best we are going to get.  You know what they say about the arc of history - it bends, it doesn't leap or lurch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 10, 2020, 04:12:57 pm
From someone who understands chain of command and knows a thing or two about authoritarian regimes:

Alexander S. Vindman
@AVindman

In the last 24 hours, the Secretary of Defense (SecDef), the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD-P), and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intell (OUSD-I) have been sacked. Trump loyalist now sit in the 1, 3, and 4 slots at DOD. Kash Patel is DOD Chief of Staff. Why?


I don't want to be alarmist, but... at what point do we need to be alarmed???
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 10, 2020, 04:46:37 pm
From someone who understands chain of command and knows a thing or two about authoritarian regimes:

Alexander S. Vindman
@AVindman

In the last 24 hours, the Secretary of Defense (SecDef), the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD-P), and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intell (OUSD-I) have been sacked. Trump loyalist now sit in the 1, 3, and 4 slots at DOD. Kash Patel is DOD Chief of Staff. Why?


I don't want to be alarmist, but... at what point do we need to be alarmed???

We’re long past it.

The problem is that so many people are burying their heads in the sand, imagining these were normal times.  They’re not.  Trump telegraphs every atrocity, and the ostriches always say it’s all bluster and this too shall pass.  Authoritarians only stop when someone stops them - they never stop because they decided miraculously to do the right thing.  People who know the movement well (like David Frum) have been warning that once the right saw that they couldn’t win elections, they would reject democracy itself (as Mike Lee openly suggested a month or so ago).

However bad you think this is, it’s worse.  It’s not about undermining a Biden administration or firing up the base for runoffs in Georgia.  It’s about holding onto power at any cost, which is what fascists do.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 10, 2020, 05:12:03 pm
So are just assuming that all the generals and soldiers are going to coup because Trump tells them too? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 10, 2020, 05:27:37 pm
So are just assuming that all the generals and soldiers are going to coup because Trump tells them too?

Why not assume that? Chain of command and all that. And, maybe they prefer Trump over Biden.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 10, 2020, 05:40:23 pm
So are just assuming that all the generals and soldiers are going to coup because Trump tells them too? 


(https://media1.tenor.com/images/6ae679ca00a6164dd2c2cead124f0d95/tenor.gif?itemid=12598832)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 10, 2020, 06:11:35 pm
I can’t believe our entire system is as risk and it’s these buffoons that may take it down.  Would have expected it to come from a better challenger.

Ari Berman (@AriBerman) Tweeted:
Key witness for GOP, whose accusations were spread by Lindsey Graham & others, made baseless fraud claim, raised $130,000 from GOP donors, lied under oath & then recanted when he faced real investigators. This summarizes Trump campaign’s entire post-election legal strategy
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 10, 2020, 06:14:21 pm
Look, what we have here that the the typical authoritarian regime does not have are:  (1) a free press,  (2) a strong opposition political party and (3) an independent judiciary.

And, all three held up remarkably well during Trump’s term. Had Trump been re-elected, not sure that would have been true long-term but we avoided that fate.

What is going on now is PR. When the time comes, Trump will be gone from D.C.

Also, there is a difference between (a) the Trump sycophants who are screaming fraud and that Trump actually got the most votes and (b) the Trump sycophants who say let the legal process play out and refuse to yet admit Biden is the clear winner already. Both are reprehensible but the former are not that numerous compared to the latter. Privately, the latter know the result and are not going to be part of some kind of nefarious coup when time comes for Trump to leave. So, settle down.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 10, 2020, 06:35:31 pm
Decapitating the entire Pentagon civilian authority and turning the White House into a fortress is PR.  Right.


(https://media1.tenor.com/images/6ae679ca00a6164dd2c2cead124f0d95/tenor.gif?itemid=12598832)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 10, 2020, 06:36:27 pm
The thing that reassures me is that I have a hard time seeing the same group that pulled off Four Seasons Total Landscaping also pulling off a coup of the US government. The bumbling incompetence has been pretty consistent and should help us all out in the end.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 10, 2020, 06:43:38 pm
Current R's can no longer be trusted to have an appropriate "line" they will not allow Trump to cost. We are loooooooooong past that. Further, many of them seem happy to use Trump as their unwitting "muscle" in an attempt to maintain power as long as possible (McConnell, etc.) In this environment, my concern is that the longer Trump's abuses and lies are validated by R silence, the more likely it is for his cultish base to engage in coordinated violent activity. Just last month, there was a credible threat to a governor's life, and that was simply about state shutdowns. What are "militias" going to do if/when they are fully convinced the election is being stolen from Trump? If that's not cause for an armed uprising to that demographic, I don't know what is.

Further, while I don't believe we'll see full-blown military support of any Trump coup attempt, the truth is there are members of our armed forces who believe his nonsense, too. As Trump has found enablers to serve in so many senior administration roles, who is to say there aren't senior level military officials who believe Trump's lies and see it as their ultimate patriotic duty to "save the republic" by standing up to the D attempt to "steal the election"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 10, 2020, 07:12:56 pm
Trump has shown that he is more than willing to sacrifice American lives in order to preserve his power. This is not hyperbole. Consider the Woodward tapes and the Trump admin response to COVID. How many tens of thousands have literally died for Trump? Is it already fair to count that number in the hundreds of thousands? Will it be hundreds of thousands by the time we finally control the outbreak?

He KNEW COVID was deadly serious. And he intentionally downplayed it in order to buoy the economy and his reelection chances. There is already blood on his hands. What's to say he'll stop at that? What's to keep Trump from firing off a single incendiary tweet calling the "militias" to arms?

These are the things I'm worried about.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 10, 2020, 07:37:33 pm
I tend to lean on these DOD moves are about covering **** up or digging dirt for future use. However, Pompeos statement is terrifying. There is also a call to his followers to go to DC this Saturday.

This could go very wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 10, 2020, 07:48:59 pm

(https://media1.tenor.com/images/6ae679ca00a6164dd2c2cead124f0d95/tenor.gif?itemid=12598832)

While you are taking nihilistic pop shots from Japan, some of us have been actively involved here in the U.S.  working to save our democracy. So maybe, just maybe, you could be a tad more respectful of those with whom you disagree.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2020, 07:50:58 pm
Is the death penalty still available for treason?  I'm mostly opposed to the death penalty, but I can't help but wonder.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 10, 2020, 08:16:22 pm
I’ve seen more speculation that the DOD changes are to get loyalists in to cover something up. I find that a lot more likely, than using the military to change the election results.

I mean can we think about what would be involved in a military coup. You are going to have to arrest every Democrat politician in every state and likely a fair number of Republicans. You are going to have to establish a military presence in every state.  The press and the internet will need to be shut down and this is going to be accomplished in secrecy from the group that brought you a press conference at Four Season Landscaping. I mean come on, they don’t have that competence.

Attempts to cover up stuff?  Yep I can believe that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 10, 2020, 08:51:26 pm
While you are taking nihilistic pop shots from Japan, some of us have been actively involved here in the U.S.  working to save our democracy. So maybe, just maybe, you could be a tad more respectful of those with whom you disagree.

That's so far beneath you that it doesn't even merit a disgusted reply.  Sad more than anything.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 10, 2020, 08:52:25 pm
I’ve seen more speculation that the DOD changes are to get loyalists in to cover something up. I find that a lot more likely, than using the military to change the election results.

I mean can we think about what would be involved in a military coup. You are going to have to arrest every Democrat politician in every state and likely a fair number of Republicans. You are going to have to establish a military presence in every state.  The press and the internet will need to be shut down and this is going to be accomplished in secrecy from the group that brought you a press conference at Four Season Landscaping. I mean come on, they don’t have that competence.

Attempts to cover up stuff?  Yep I can believe that.

You meant Democratic politician, right?

No?  Oh, what a shock.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 10, 2020, 08:52:35 pm
I think they are measuring this weekend’s rally to determine how far they can go. We are in very troubled waters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 10, 2020, 10:32:18 pm
Lately we've had more conspiracy theories posted on here than the Trumpers on their boards.  Jeez, leave it to the Trumpers to dream this stuff up.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 10, 2020, 10:42:28 pm
Yeah, this thread has morphed into the flip side of the Trump crazies.

January 20 will come and you’ll see how a democratic republic transitions power—even with Trump outgoing and his current sycophants. There will be challenges for Biden because of the late cooperation but that will be overcome in relatively short order.

What some of you don’t grasp is what is being said privately by power brokers inside Washington.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 10, 2020, 11:50:28 pm
I'm in favor of anything that plainly demonstrates to everyone what an evil sociopath Trump is, so if it's a ham-handed coup attempt (I mean, there's zero doubt that he would attempt a military takeover if he thought he could get away with it) that would certainly fail spectacularly, so be it.  It would make for good television.  Pretty sure there are still enough grown-ups around to talk him out of it, even if they're currently putting up with him pouting.

My money is on Cohen's theory--he leaves for Mar-A-Lago (for Thanksgiving, maybe) and never comes back.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 11, 2020, 01:08:24 am
I'm in favor of anything that plainly demonstrates to everyone what an evil sociopath Trump is, so if it's a ham-handed coup attempt (I mean, there's zero doubt that he would attempt a military takeover if he thought he could get away with it) that would certainly fail spectacularly, so be it.  It would make for good television.  Pretty sure there are still enough grown-ups around to talk him out of it, even if they're currently putting up with him pouting.

My money is on Cohen's theory--he leaves for Mar-A-Lago (for Thanksgiving, maybe) and never comes back.

The problem is that even a ham-fisted, Four Seasons Landscaping attempted coup would likely claim the lives of innocent people.  It would also encourage further violence on the part of the conspiracy theorists who swallow Trump's fiction like manna from Heaven.

Meanwhile every day this charade is allowed to continue, whatever the endgame is, damages the country.  It erodes faith in the integrity of Biden's victory and thus, in his administration.  As the know-it-alls assure us of how harmless and trivial this all is, the institutions of our democracy and our democracy itself are weakened.  The transition becomes much more difficult at a time when the new president will be inheriting multiple crises which require him to be effective from day one.  And then there's the matter of the national security secrets which Trump will likely be eager to sell to the highest bidder as soon as he lands in Mar-A-Lago to help pay for his legal defense.  And that he'll spend his ex-presidency trying to undermine the Biden presidency.

By trivializing this dangerous and treasonous behavior, we legitimize it and what it represents.  At the very least an attempt is afoot to steal the election in the Electoral College.  At worst something much much brutal and violent.  Whether they succeed or not, every day they're encouraged by trivializing them places the country at greater risk.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 11, 2020, 01:32:14 am
Sorry, what's the alternative you're proposing?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 11, 2020, 03:11:11 am
Take the threat seriously and talk about it openly, increasing the pressure on those who may be considering treasonous acts to preserve power?  As opposed to pretending everything is fine and letting them plan whatever they're planning in peace.

It should be noted that the ones who are laughing off the threat of a coup now - either via the EC or darker means - are the ones who've been assuring us for four years that the system would work, and Trump would be stymied by the circuit breakers in the constitution, or the Republican leaders who would repudiate him when he went too far.  How's that been working out?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 11, 2020, 07:43:05 am
Quote
On Monday night, “The Daily Show” played a montage of Fox News clips from 2018 of Republicans accusing Democrats of not accepting the election results or conceding gracefully, just as the GOP is doing now by refusing to accept Joe Biden as president-elect.

“Democrats are being sore losers,” says Kayleigh McEnany in one clip from two years ago. “They refuse to acknowledge they lost the election, so what do they do? They cry malfeasance, wrongdoing, criminality, fraud…”

https://youtu.be/mpOnt1cByT4
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 11, 2020, 07:46:51 am
Quote
If you read the fine print of these Trump "election defense fund" solicitations, though, "half — or more — of any contribution will be used to retire debt from his re-election campaign," The Wall Street Journal reports. "Other Trump fundraising pitches in recent days ask for help to 'protect the integrity of this election' but lead to a donation page for Mr. Trump's 'Make America Great Again' committee. The fine print on those solicitations says 60 percent of a contribution helps the campaign retire debt and 40 percent goes to the Republican National Committee."

https://news.yahoo.com/trumps-flurry-campaign-defense-fund-094844061.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 11, 2020, 08:26:35 am
I figured someone would do a poll on how Americans view the outcome of the election. This is from a Reuters/Ipsos poll (taken between Sat-Tues).

The Reuters/Ipsos national opinion survey, which ran from Saturday afternoon to Tuesday, found that 79% of U.S. adults believe Biden won the White House. Another 13% said the election has not yet been decided, 3% said Trump won and 5% said they do not know.

The results were somewhat split along party lines: about six in 10 Republicans and almost every Democrat said Biden won.

https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2020-11-10/nearly-80-of-americans-say-biden-won-white-house-ignoring-trumps-refusal-to-concede-reuters-ipsos-poll?src=usn_fb&fbclid=IwAR2GSXSDy_jaB37vQSMjA9CZYa4JhiCv82oSW-1Bnz5qisGQ9N-SaQI4cB8
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 11, 2020, 10:10:03 am
This relates to Reb's reference to what is being said privately.

"But even some of the president’s most publicly pugilistic aides, including White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and informal adviser Corey Lewandowski, have said privately that they are concerned about the lawsuits’ chances for success unless more evidence surfaces, according to people familiar with their views."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-challenges-state-count/2020/11/10/45148fac-2378-11eb-8672-c281c7a2c96e_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2020, 11:14:35 am
Wake me up if there are actual troop movements, until then some people need to get their tinfoil hats out.

If Trump is selling secrets to foreign nations then it is treason and I believe that still carries the death penalty.

Trump is far more interested in scamming the poor souls that voted for him out of money so he can pay for his next venture or pay back any "loans" he gave to the campaign.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 11, 2020, 12:21:30 pm
Wake me up if there are actual troop movements, until then some people need to get their tinfoil hats out.

If Trump is selling secrets to foreign nations then it is treason and I believe that still carries the death penalty.

Trump is far more interested in scamming the poor souls that voted for him out of money so he can pay for his next venture or pay back any "loans" he gave to the campaign.

According to this Forbes article dated August 25, 2020, Trump has yet to donate to his 2020 campaign.

Quote
The Trump Corporation has now taken in $281,000 from the campaign since the president entered the Oval Office.

Remember the post I made earlier this year?  When Trump bought an exclusive golf club in Southern California, he took their large reserve fund and used it to pay down the loan he used to buy the club.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2020/08/25/trump-has-now-moved-23-million-of-campaign-donor-money-into-his-private-business/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 11, 2020, 04:05:27 pm
I’m unsure if some are taking this seriously. The clown will never stop. Never. He is mentally ill. Right now, he is a cornered animal, cornered by the fear of looking like a loser. Here’s the important part; he has plenty of support to continue his fight. This is very real and this **** will not end well.

You keep underestimating what republicans will do. They only care about power. That’s all. Laws, morals, traditions these things are irrelevant. Power is all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 11, 2020, 04:53:14 pm
This relates to Reb's reference to what is being said privately.

"But even some of the president’s most publicly pugilistic aides, including White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and informal adviser Corey Lewandowski, have said privately that they are concerned about the lawsuits’ chances for success unless more evidence surfaces, according to people familiar with their views."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-challenges-state-count/2020/11/10/45148fac-2378-11eb-8672-c281c7a2c96e_story.html

Are these the same anonymous sources who assured us Jared and Melania were urging Trump to concede, and it was only a matter of time?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 11, 2020, 05:13:25 pm
The clown will never concede. We need to get that out of our heads. I hope that proves wrong.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 11, 2020, 05:53:07 pm
The clown will never concede. We need to get that out of our heads. I hope that proves wrong.
You have a good chance of being correct when you say Trump will never concede.

DelMarFan and I both think he might quietly disappear to Florida for Thanksgiving or Christmas only to never be heard from again.  I'd settle for that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 11, 2020, 06:03:30 pm
You have a good chance of being correct when you say Trump will never concede.

DelMarFan and I both think he might quietly disappear to Florida for Thanksgiving or Christmas only to never be heard from again.  I'd settle for that.

What is it about Trump's personal history that convinces you fading quietly into the background is a likely outcome?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 11, 2020, 06:24:30 pm
What is it about Trump's personal history that convinces you fading quietly into the background is a likely outcome?
Michael Cohen
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 11, 2020, 06:56:23 pm
Michael Cohen

A very reliable and trustworthy source there.

I was just going to react to that, but I thought I'd reply so Curt can keep revealing his maturity level by reflexively clicking "Dumb" on every comment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 11, 2020, 07:25:00 pm
So clicking dumb reveals maturity level?  But you're my hero and I was just following your lead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 11, 2020, 07:33:58 pm
Keep doing you. 


https://www.simplypsychology.org/pavlov.html#:~:text=Pavlov%20found%20that%20for%20associations,then%20learning%20will%20not%20occur.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 11, 2020, 08:17:03 pm
I tend to think that everything going on right now is mostly Trump protecting his ego. And also, he's potentially protecting himself by getting loyalists in some key positions to clean up for any potential post-presidency investigations. His administration is so dumb that they set up a press conference at a landscaping company because it shares a name with a hotel. They're too dumb to successfully pull off a coup.

I think one of his main goals with all these lawsuits right now is setting himself up to run again in 2024. He wants his followers to think his job was stolen so he won't have the stink of being a loser on him in four years.

In reality, he's probably going lose interest in running again by next summer. Once Fox News starts paying him $25 million a year or whatever to do a two hour weekly show, he's just going to stick with that so he can continue to have his ego stroked by his followers. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 11, 2020, 10:19:46 pm
Much of what you say may come to pass, but the part about Fox I rather doubt.  There are strong signs that Murdoch has fled the sinking ship and wants to move on from Trump.  Much more likely is that T founds his own media network to out-Fox Fox.

I don't dispute that this bunch of cretins probably isn't competent enough to accomplish a coup - electoral or otherwise - but that doesn't mean they wouldn't try.  And if they don't try it will be because people shone a light on it by taking it seriously, rather than dismissing it the way some have dismissed the seriousness of the Trump threat for the past four years.

As it happens I have an in-law who has worked in Naval Intelligence (CIS, basically) for 30+ years - a source I trust a lot more than the anonymous ones in Reb's posts.  Obviously she doesn't say anything she isn't supposed to, and sometimes won't say anything at all.  But sometimes if the question is generic enough - like "is this total BS or should we be taking it seriously?" - she'll give you a push.  And believe me, the people who have most reason to be concerned about what's happening are not taking this threat lightly.  Far from it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 11, 2020, 10:49:36 pm
Much of what you say may come to pass, but the part about Fox I rather doubt.  There are strong signs that Murdoch has fled the sinking ship and wants to move on from Trump.  Much more likely is that T founds his own media network to out-Fox Fox.

Fox, OAN, his own network...whatever. He's going to become a cable TV pundit who makes a clown of himself regularly for money. Just like his friends Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson.

Quote
But sometimes if the question is generic enough - like "is this total BS or should we be taking it seriously?" - she'll give you a push.  And believe me, the people who have most reason to be concerned about what's happening are not taking this threat lightly.  Far from it.

And that's exactly why Trump's efforts could never succeed. I don't know your in-law, but I'm 100% confident that she and her colleagues are so much more competent than Trump and all his sycophants. If they're not taking it lightly, then I have confidence that they (or people like them in the right position) would shut down any real threat from the (really stupid) former game show host.

In my view, this is kind of like the "9/11 was an inside job" conspiracy. People simultaneously thought George W. Bush was the dumbest president in history, but also was supposed to have led a conspiracy that involved the coordination (and silence) of thousands of people. Trump is so much stupider than Bush, so I'm just not worried about him pulling off a similarly unlikely coup.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 11, 2020, 11:10:46 pm
In case anyone is in doubt:  It is still permissible to have an opinion that differs from Deeg's.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 12, 2020, 02:06:27 pm
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/12/politics/donald-trump-2024-republican-nomination/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 12, 2020, 04:40:15 pm
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/12/politics/donald-trump-2024-republican-nomination/index.html

Like I said last night...give him six months of being a pundit with no real responsibility who can stay in his echo chamber and always be worshipped. He'll lose all interest in running again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 12, 2020, 04:45:43 pm
We also saw Trump mental health deteriorate the last few years. At his age it will get worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 12, 2020, 04:49:34 pm
I'm looking forward to ugly, protracted fights between Trump and both the GOP *and* Fox News.  I kind of hope he does run again in 2024 just to screw over the sycophants (Cruz, Rubio, Graham, Pence).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 12, 2020, 04:54:08 pm
I hope he forms his own political party.  That will be the ideal scenario.

Don’t sleep on the electoral college heist scenario.  I think that’s their major focus and they control the legislatures in most of the swing states.  As with the military coup the best way to prevent it is to not underestimate the danger.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 12, 2020, 05:08:09 pm
I haven’t given a single thought to the ignore option since Jes Beard went away.  But, I did not forget about it.  Life is too short to spend waste a minute of it on someone whose primary goal in posting here is to prove that he is smarter than anyone else.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 12, 2020, 10:48:08 pm
Been watching the series, The Roman Empire.   Senators were constantly pressured by more powerful senators or emperors or dictators to do things their way.  They feared speaking out because the retribution for doing so was very disastrous.  Maybe that's wrong with our system.  The President and his minions have become too powerful so that it makes cowards out of the ones we need to stand up to him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 13, 2020, 08:13:46 am
I wonder where Robb went? Probably out on the Dominion voting machine beat. One thing is for sure, he’s definitely very worried about vote fraud that doesn’t exist.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2020, 11:39:53 am
It is seriously starting to look like we could have 50 states worth of overrun hospital systems in a few weeks.  I guess COVID didn't just disappear after the election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 13, 2020, 01:04:00 pm
It is seriously starting to look like we could have 50 states worth of overrun hospital systems in a few weeks.  I guess COVID didn't just disappear after the election.
What worries me is that Thanksgiving has the potential to make Trump's superspreader events look mild in comparison.


The Sturgis motorcycle rally too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 13, 2020, 04:04:37 pm
Trump:  As soon as April, when a vaccine is available, it will be distributed to all parts of the nation.  Except for New York and other areas for political reasons.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 13, 2020, 05:54:45 pm
What worries me is that Thanksgiving has the potential to make Trump's superspreader events look mild in comparison.


The Sturgis motorcycle rally too.
I thought we were all going to JR's for Thanksgiving.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 13, 2020, 06:01:20 pm
I wonder where Robb went? Probably out on the Dominion voting machine beat. One thing is for sure, he’s definitely very worried about vote fraud that doesn’t exist.

Check under the sink?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2020, 06:10:30 pm
What worries me is that Thanksgiving has the potential to make Trump's superspreader events look mild in comparison.


The Sturgis motorcycle rally too.

So a UNMC physician did some math. The positivity rate in Nebraska is 30% right now. If 40% of the population goes to Thanksgiving get together with 10 people it will expose 6% of the Nebraska population in 1 day, 116,000 close exposures. In one freaking day.

https://www.ksl.com/article/50047970/utah-valley-hospital-strained-by-conspiracy-theorists-trying-to-enter-icu

Then you have people like this. A pulmonologist I know is already sounding burned out, and we are just at the beginning of it getting bad here.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 13, 2020, 06:29:35 pm
When Covid-19 was at crisis levels in New York and a few other places earlier in the year, they were able to call in help from other areas around the country.  That won't be an option this time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 14, 2020, 08:37:08 pm
Trump is now accusing Stacey Abrams and Brian Kemp (the guy who beat her in the Georgia governor election in 2018) of colluding to cheat in the election. He's really embarrassing himself at this point.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
The Consent Decree signed by the Georgia Secretary of State, with the approval of Governor @BrianKempGA, at the urging of @staceyabrams, makes it impossible to check & match signatures on ballots and envelopes, etc. They knew they were going to cheat. Must expose real signatures!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 14, 2020, 09:35:32 pm
When in the last 4 years did he NOT embarrass himself?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 14, 2020, 10:06:15 pm
Trump is now accusing Stacey Abrams and Brian Kemp (the guy who beat her in the Georgia governor election in 2018) of colluding to cheat in the election. He's really embarrassing himself at this point.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
The Consent Decree signed by the Georgia Secretary of State, with the approval of Governor @BrianKempGA, at the urging of @staceyabrams, makes it impossible to check & match signatures on ballots and envelopes, etc. They knew they were going to cheat. Must expose real signatures!


The thing that is literally unbelievable is how many people still believe there was some meaningful fraud and the outcome of this election is in doubt.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 15, 2020, 08:00:50 am
Why is it unbelievable? If you watch an infomercial everyday eventually you are buying the food dehydrator.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 15, 2020, 08:07:44 am
If Trump does eventually win it'll be a sight to see.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 15, 2020, 08:38:20 am
If Trump does eventually win it'll be a sight to see.

figures you’d be one of the idiots.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 15, 2020, 08:40:48 am
Why is it unbelievable? If you watch an infomercial everyday eventually you are buying the food dehydrator.

Because it’s so incredibly stupid that I find it incredible there are more than just a fringe group of people buying into it. There are always morons on the margins (flat earthers or Mormons, for example) but it’s jarring to see it go mainstream.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 15, 2020, 09:35:59 am
I never said I'd be one of them.

I just suspect if it does happen there will be a lot of pizza hut's burned down.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 15, 2020, 10:31:47 am
I never said I'd be one of them.

I just suspect if it does happen there will be a lot of pizza hut's burned down.

The fact that you even think it’s possible makes you an idiot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 16, 2020, 01:34:59 pm
Check under the sink?
Still here.  Watching and waiting.  Some of you here have really gone off the deep end. I am paying attention to the fraud allegations as you were in 2016 when you were convinced Trump colluded with Putin to win.  Some fishy crap did go on in key states. Biggest problem i have is the election observers being kicked out.  Why do that if there is nothing to hide? Trump got 5 million more votes than last time.  Republicans picked up seats in the house and will most likely retain the senate, picked up 3 governorships, flipped 5 state houses,  lost no toss ups but Trump lost?  Maybe, but at the least I want an audit and charges of fraud investigated before I accept this was legitimate.  And 72 million Americans feel the same way. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 16, 2020, 01:55:23 pm
Robb, I took all of what you mentioned as a personal repudiation of Trump but not the party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 16, 2020, 02:12:06 pm
Still here.  Watching and waiting.  Some of you here have really gone off the deep end. I am paying attention to the fraud allegations as you were in 2016 when you were convinced Trump colluded with Putin to win.  Some fishy crap did go on in key states. Biggest problem i have is the election observers being kicked out.  Why do that if there is nothing to hide? Trump got 5 million more votes than last time.  Republicans picked up seats in the house and will most likely retain the senate, picked up 3 governorships, flipped 5 state houses,  lost no toss ups but Trump lost?  Maybe, but at the least I want an audit and charges of fraud investigated before I accept this was legitimate.  And 72 million Americans feel the same way.

Interesting that you cite all sort of debunked conspiracies yet say we are going off the deep end.  Yet another cult has its claws pretty deep into you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on November 16, 2020, 02:33:54 pm
no official observers were kicked out  just the unofficial ones that were chanting stop the count and trying to intimidate
the poll workers   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 16, 2020, 04:07:39 pm
Trump got 5 million more votes than last time. 
Yes, and Joe Biden received 13 million more votes than Hillary Clinton did in 2016.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 16, 2020, 04:31:06 pm
Yes, and Joe Biden received 13 million more votes than Hillary Clinton did in 2016.

I would guess that Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson don't include that part in their nightly disinformation monologues, though. That's why Trump voters seem to think "5 million more votes" is a convincing argument.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 16, 2020, 04:39:38 pm
no official observers were kicked out  just the unofficial ones that were chanting stop the count and trying to intimidate
the poll workers   
But even that got twisted.  There are people around here who believe Trump may have won if Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona hadn't STOPPED counting.  Somehow they think it was the Democrats who wanted the counting stopped. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 16, 2020, 05:02:39 pm
I would guess that Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson don't include that part in their nightly disinformation monologues, though. That's why Trump voters seem to think "5 million more votes" is a convincing argument.
I don't recall who it was but one of the talking heads on TV thinks Tucker Carlson is aiming for the GOP nomination in 2024.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 16, 2020, 05:45:16 pm
In other news from the national shame front, Georgia's Republican SoS says he and his wife have received death threats and that elected R officials including Lindsey Graham have been pressuring him to rig the recount for Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/brad-raffensperger-georgia-vote/2020/11/16/6b6cb2f4-283e-11eb-8fa2-06e7cbb145c0_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 16, 2020, 05:47:29 pm
Jaime Harrison
@harrisonjaime

US Senate candidate, SC
Replying to
@harrisonjaime
“Graham also asked whether Raffensperger had the power to toss all mail ballots in counties found to have higher rates of nonmatching signatures, Raffensperger said.
Raffspenger said he was stunned that Graham appeared to suggest that he find a way to toss legally cast ballots.”




Brad Raffensperger is the Georgia Secretary Of State.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 17, 2020, 12:05:02 am
Raffspenger said he was stunned that Graham appeared to suggest that he find a way to toss legally cast ballots.”

Brad Raffensperger is the Georgia Secretary Of State.

As a resident of Georgia who almost certainly will vote for Raffensperger's opponent in two years, I think Raffensperger did a good job with both the primary and general election this year.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 17, 2020, 01:01:05 am
Indeed.  Not only does he seem to be counting (and recounting) the ballots honestly, he ordered Fulton County to open additional polling stations after the primary debacle.

On the one hand, I don't want to lionize Raffensperger too much for basically doing what should be the bare minimum for any elections official. Count all the legal ballots and report them accurately.  OTOH, given how few R elected officials anywhere are showing even a modicum of integrity (or spine), maybe he deserves some recognition. Not being complicit in the attempted dissolution of American democracy must be harder than it looks. If you belong to that party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 17, 2020, 01:50:17 pm
no official observers were kicked out  just the unofficial ones that were chanting stop the count and trying to intimidate
the poll workers   
That's not true at all. Registered workers were removed, not allowed access at all and harassed and called names if they contested any ballots. Even Democrats spoke up about it and were uncomfortable with it. Ballots were delivered in Detroit at 4 in the morning through the back door, not following the chain of custody and laid out on tables 100% for Biden with no down ballots marked. Sworn affidavits have been taken out by people there. Now, if these people were lying then they could face jail time and should. If they are not lying then all Americans should want to know the efficacy of those ballots. That's what the courts are for. If there is not enough evidence of fraud then Biden won, which I think most likely. If there is, then it needs to be rooted out. Regardless of winner we need to know these elections are secure. Democrats have been calling the 2016 election illegitimate for 4 years. We can withstand a few more weeks of court challenges to know what happened in this one.

As for Biden getting 12 million more votes than Obama, that to me is the fishiest of all. Perhaps it was the vote against Trump that inspired it, that could indeed be the case. But it certainly wasn't enthusiasm for Biden/Harris. The mail in voting is ripe for fraud unless they have requested and verified an absentee ballot. This idea of mailing to everyone and not validating even signature matches in PA is basically the honor system. For a party that has spied on Trump, called him a Russian asset, sent thugs into the streets to riot, loot and kill and impeached him over nothing, do you expect Trump voters to believe in the honor system to keep him from being re-elected? He may have lost but all questions need to be litigated before I and millions of others believe it. And if he did lose then we won't spend the next 4 years calling Biden illegitimate though or rioting and looting and burning our cities because we didn't get our way.

If you think conservatives are lapping up their information from Foxnews you haven't been paying attention. Foxnews has moved left more and more to the point where many have turned to other sources of news or just turned them off. Their ratings have tanked since the election.

Jack, your act is tired. Cult cult cult, racist racist racist, blah blah blah. What a hateful and sad existence you must lead. I pity you and hope you will some day find another way to express yourself that isn't the lowest common denominator. Until then I will pray for you to find some measure of peace in your life so you stop treating others like you feel yourself. That is the first step to a happy life. Good luck and I hope you find it someday.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 17, 2020, 02:04:19 pm
That's not true at all. Registered workers were removed, not allowed access at all and harassed and called names if they contested any ballots. Even Democrats spoke up about it and were uncomfortable with it. Ballots were delivered in Detroit at 4 in the morning through the back door, not following the chain of custody and laid out on tables 100% for Biden with no down ballots marked. Sworn affidavits have been taken out by people there. Now, if these people were lying then they could face jail time and should. If they are not lying then all Americans should want to know the efficacy of those ballots. That's what the courts are for. If there is not enough evidence of fraud then Biden won, which I think most likely. If there is, then it needs to be rooted out. Regardless of winner we need to know these elections are secure. Democrats have been calling the 2016 election illegitimate for 4 years. We can withstand a few more weeks of court challenges to know what happened in this one.

As for Biden getting 12 million more votes than Obama, that to me is the fishiest of all. Perhaps it was the vote against Trump that inspired it, that could indeed be the case. But it certainly wasn't enthusiasm for Biden/Harris. The mail in voting is ripe for fraud unless they have requested and verified an absentee ballot. This idea of mailing to everyone and not validating even signature matches in PA is basically the honor system. For a party that has spied on Trump, called him a Russian asset, sent thugs into the streets to riot, loot and kill and impeached him over nothing, do you expect Trump voters to believe in the honor system to keep him from being re-elected? He may have lost but all questions need to be litigated before I and millions of others believe it. And if he did lose then we won't spend the next 4 years calling Biden illegitimate though or rioting and looting and burning our cities because we didn't get our way.

If you think conservatives are lapping up their information from Foxnews you haven't been paying attention. Foxnews has moved left more and more to the point where many have turned to other sources of news or just turned them off. Their ratings have tanked since the election.

Jack, your act is tired. Cult cult cult, racist racist racist, blah blah blah. What a hateful and sad existence you must lead. I pity you and hope you will some day find another way to express yourself that isn't the lowest common denominator. Until then I will pray for you to find some measure of peace in your life so you stop treating others like you feel yourself. That is the first step to a happy life. Good luck and I hope you find it someday.

You are part of two cults that have some things in common.  They both believe things that are objectively untrue (see the stuff you wrote above and the book of mormon) and are both extremely racist.  This is the way it is and I do not apologize for calling you out.  You are a bad person but it may not be your fault. You were raised to be like this and it’s a shame.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 17, 2020, 02:20:02 pm

If you think conservatives are lapping up their information from Foxnews you haven't been paying attention. Foxnews has moved left more and more to the point where many have turned to other sources of news or just turned them off. Their ratings have tanked since the election.


This is just not true. The people on the opinion side (Hannity, Carlson, Ingraham, Fox & Friends, etc.) are just as conservative as ever. They're also proven liars (for example, Carlson's lawyers testified in court recently that viewers know that what he says isn't necessarily truth...and I think they won based off that). The news side of Fox News is generally true and unbiased. Just because it is no longer telling you want you want to hear doesn't mean it's moved to the left.


These other "news sources" people are turning to are just propaganda outlets. If you're moving to them, you're just taking in disinformation. For example, here's what OAN is presenting as the "real" electoral map. It's not news. They're lying and telling people what they want to hear. It's a real problem for our country that conspiracy and propaganda outlets are now seen by some as legitimate news outlets.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EnCvyIVW4AUIY8U?format=png&name=small)


There's a reason that all these election conspiracies are showing up on conservative TV, websites, radio and Trump's/follower's social media, but not in courts. It's because they are LIES. Really, give me one good reason why I should pay attention to these "bombshells" that even the Trump admin doesn't think are worth taking to court? It's frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit from them, but for some reason they don't think the "game changers" are worth pursuing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 17, 2020, 02:28:38 pm
Raffensperger is not holding back on the guys who are accusing him of cheating. Here, he's specifically blaming Trump's messaging about mail-in ballots for the election loss in Georgia:

Justin Gray @JustinGrayWSB
In new intv with me, @GaSecofState says 24,000 GOPs who voted absentee in primary did not vote in General - says Donald Trump cost himself the election by sowing distrust in absentee: "he would have won by 10 thousand votes he actually suppressed, depressed his own voting base"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on November 17, 2020, 03:35:43 pm
That's not true at all. Registered workers were removed, not allowed access at all and harassed and called names if they contested any ballots. Even Democrats spoke up about it and were uncomfortable with it. Ballots were delivered in Detroit at 4 in the morning through the back door, not following the chain of custody and laid out on tables 100% for Biden with no down ballots marked. Sworn affidavits have been taken out by people there. Now, if these people were lying then they could face jail time and should. If they are not lying then all Americans should want to know the efficacy of those ballots. That's what the courts are for. If there is not enough evidence of fraud then Biden won, which I think most likely. If there is, then it needs to be rooted out. Regardless of winner we need to know these elections are secure. Democrats have been calling the 2016 election illegitimate for 4 years. We can withstand a few more weeks of court challenges to know what happened in this one.

As for Biden getting 12 million more votes than Obama, that to me is the fishiest of all. Perhaps it was the vote against Trump that inspired it, that could indeed be the case. But it certainly wasn't enthusiasm for Biden/Harris. The mail in voting is ripe for fraud unless they have requested and verified an absentee ballot. This idea of mailing to everyone and not validating even signature matches in PA is basically the honor system. For a party that has spied on Trump, called him a Russian asset, sent thugs into the streets to riot, loot and kill and impeached him over nothing, do you expect Trump voters to believe in the honor system to keep him from being re-elected? He may have lost but all questions need to be litigated before I and millions of others believe it. And if he did lose then we won't spend the next 4 years calling Biden illegitimate though or rioting and looting and burning our cities because we didn't get our way.

If you think conservatives are lapping up their information from Foxnews you haven't been paying attention. Foxnews has moved left more and more to the point where many have turned to other sources of news or just turned them off. Their ratings have tanked since the election.

Jack, your act is tired. Cult cult cult, racist racist racist, blah blah blah. What a hateful and sad existence you must lead. I pity you and hope you will some day find another way to express yourself that isn't the lowest common denominator. Until then I will pray for you to find some measure of peace in your life so you stop treating others like you feel yourself. That is the first step to a happy life. Good luck and I hope you find it someday.
show us the evidence
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 17, 2020, 05:23:51 pm
There is none, as Giuiliani proved today in his shambolic performance in court.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 17, 2020, 05:29:10 pm

If you think conservatives are lapping up their information from Foxnews you haven't been paying attention. Foxnews has moved left more and more to the point where many have turned to other sources of news or just turned them off. Their ratings have tanked since the election.

When Fox News is no longer "conservative" (more accurate would be Trumpy) enough... wow. I've watched plenty of Fox election coverage to get a sense of what half the nation is taking in. It has *NOT* been "mov[ing] left more and more." Hannity, Ingraham, Carlson, Waters, the rest of the 5 crew, they're all 100% in the bag for the Trump conspiracy theories.

Seriously though: you've repeatedly stated there are a number of non-biased news sources like USA Today, WSJ, etc., that you value. What are those outlets saying?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 17, 2020, 06:31:36 pm
Fox called Arizona for Biden. That’s it. That’s the only reason Fox isn’t conservative enough anymore.

The true believer never waivers. The true believer knows there is a secret server with the true Electoral College tally favoring President Clown.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 17, 2020, 06:59:40 pm
The new Q Continuum.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 17, 2020, 07:04:12 pm
I’m sure someone has already said this but how different would things be if this level of effort by President Clown was applied to the corona virus? $&@&ing Clown.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 17, 2020, 07:21:17 pm
I want one political thing in the next 4 years: the end of the electoral college.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 17, 2020, 07:24:55 pm
I want one political thing in the next 4 years: the end of the electoral college.

Fat chance of that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 17, 2020, 08:27:38 pm
When Fox News is no longer "conservative" (more accurate would be Trumpy) enough... wow. I've watched plenty of Fox election coverage to get a sense of what half the nation is taking in. It has *NOT* been "mov[ing] left more and more." Hannity, Ingraham, Carlson, Waters, the rest of the 5 crew, they're all 100% in the bag for the Trump conspiracy theories.

Seriously though: you've repeatedly stated there are a number of non-biased news sources like USA Today, WSJ, etc., that you value. What are those outlets saying?

He prefers to hear from OANN and The Gateway Pundit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 17, 2020, 08:29:23 pm

This is just not true. The people on the opinion side (Hannity, Carlson, Ingraham, Fox & Friends, etc.) are just as conservative as ever. They're also proven liars (for example, Carlson's lawyers testified in court recently that viewers know that what he says isn't necessarily truth...and I think they won based off that). The news side of Fox News is generally true and unbiased. Just because it is no longer telling you want you want to hear doesn't mean it's moved to the left.


These other "news sources" people are turning to are just propaganda outlets. If you're moving to them, you're just taking in disinformation. For example, here's what OAN is presenting as the "real" electoral map. It's not news. They're lying and telling people what they want to hear. It's a real problem for our country that conspiracy and propaganda outlets are now seen by some as legitimate news outlets.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EnCvyIVW4AUIY8U?format=png&name=small)


There's a reason that all these election conspiracies are showing up on conservative TV, websites, radio and Trump's/follower's social media, but not in courts. It's because they are LIES. Really, give me one good reason why I should pay attention to these "bombshells" that even the Trump admin doesn't think are worth taking to court? It's frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit from them, but for some reason they don't think the "game changers" are worth pursuing.

They took this a little too far when they made CA dark red.  Even Robb isn’t going to buy this one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 17, 2020, 10:05:35 pm
They took this a little too far when they made CA dark red.  Even Robb isn’t going to buy this one.

Have a little faith!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 17, 2020, 10:29:28 pm
As a resident of Georgia who almost certainly will vote for Raffensperger's opponent in two years, I think Raffensperger did a good job with both the primary and general election this year.
  I get confused by this reasoning.  You admit this guy has done a good job and he's doing what's right, but you'll vote for a guy with a D behind his name, just because of the D?  Every election I vote for Jesse White in Illinois.  He normally wins big.  Even though he has a D behind his name, I trust him.  He's done a great job and seems to be of good character and honest.  That's why I vote for him, even though I have an R behind by name.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 17, 2020, 10:33:45 pm
Secretaries of State are directly involved in a lot of policy making.  If you happen to disagree with most of the policy priorities of one candidate it's logical to vote for the other.  I give Raffensperger full credit for not (seemingly) being a crook and a traitor.  But I don't think we need to lower the bar that low in deciding who to vote for, even though the Republican party has been lowering the bar with historic enthusiasm these past several years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 17, 2020, 10:59:59 pm
He basically runs the election, overseas public records, and collects fees for professional licenses and businesses. What policy making is he involved in?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 17, 2020, 11:25:32 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_state_(U.S._state_government)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 18, 2020, 06:32:47 am
He basically runs the election, overseas public records, and collects fees for professional licenses and businesses. What policy making is he involved in?

Running the elections is a big deal. But, to be fair, he seems honest unlike his predecessor who is an absolute crook and now Governor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 18, 2020, 08:03:00 am
Associated Press article

https://apnews.com/article/who-will-get-covid-19-vaccine-first-2f9f8a32b5d9991790f4956497a50124

It begins, of course, by making the case for health care workers.  Here is the last paragraph:

Quote
Many other questions about distribution remain unanswered, Sgaier noted,such as whether to distribute shots equally across the country, or to focus on areas that are hot spots.
   

My first thought was why should South Dakota be rewarded for holding the Sturgis motorcycle rally which made the problem skyrocket in South Dakota and neighboring states?   Instead, favor the states that have stringent controls, including mask mandates.

I’m now thinking that naming hot spots might be opening the proverbial ”can of worms”. The decision should be to avoid the appearance of playing politics and give each state their percentage of the national population.  The pandemic is so far out of control that doing anything else is unthinkable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 18, 2020, 08:35:39 am
How people behaved during the pandemic should have no bearing on when they are eligible to receive vaccines.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 18, 2020, 10:07:08 am
Associated Press article

https://apnews.com/article/who-will-get-covid-19-vaccine-first-2f9f8a32b5d9991790f4956497a50124

It begins, of course, by making the case for health care workers.  Here is the last paragraph:
   

My first thought was why should South Dakota be rewarded for holding the Sturgis motorcycle rally which made the problem skyrocket in South Dakota and neighboring states?   Instead, favor the states that have stringent controls, including mask mandates.

I’m now thinking that naming hot spots might be opening the proverbial ”can of worms”. The decision should be to avoid the appearance of playing politics and give each state their percentage of the national population.  The pandemic is so far out of control that doing anything else is unthinkable.

The first vaccines are almost going to all go to healthcare workers.  They should be going to areas of hot spots, because those healthcare workers are most at risk of death from an overwhelmed healthcare system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_state_(U.S._state_government)

This isn't an article, but it seems like you where trying to link to a general article about the secretaries of state. 

Here's a detailed article on the Georgia Secretary of State and setting policies doesn't seem to be in the description.

https://ballotpedia.org/Georgia_Secretary_of_State
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 18, 2020, 10:28:06 am
Most folks around here arent anti vaccinators but they sure as hell dont believe in the covid vaccine.

My sons pediatrician said he'd never give it at his office.

I'd say I'd take it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 18, 2020, 10:35:58 am
I will take the vaccine as soon as it is available to me.  I don't see a reasonable argument for any other approach.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 18, 2020, 10:39:26 am
I will take the vaccine as soon as it is available to me.  I don't see a reasonable argument for any other approach.

I have a hard time understanding the opposite POV.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 18, 2020, 10:43:37 am
If you heard there was a 94.5% chance of winning the powerball how quickly would you be out the door?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 18, 2020, 10:50:05 am
The first vaccines are almost going to all go to healthcare workers.  They should be going to areas of hot spots, because those healthcare workers are most at risk of death from an overwhelmed healthcare system.


That is certainly a valid consideration but I'd go with nursing home residents second and then have to think about the extremely vulnerable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 18, 2020, 11:18:06 am

That is certainly a valid consideration but I'd go with nursing home residents second and then have to think about the extremely vulnerable.

After healthcare workers it is going to be interesting and that is why President Elect Biden should be getting briefs on this. 

There is certainly an argument that those most at risk should be getting the vaccine, but the dirty little secret is that vaccines have tended to be less effective in those groups.  Giving it young healthy people might actually be more affective at protecting the vulnerable by decreasing the spread.  It is an argument I wouldn't want to be in the middle of.

Most folks around here arent anti vaccinators but they sure as hell dont believe in the covid vaccine.

My sons pediatrician said he'd never give it at his office.

I'd say I'd take it.

Find a new pediatrician.  I'll look at the data before I decide to give it or take, but with the numbers being release so far I don't see a reason why I wouldn't take it or give it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 18, 2020, 11:22:55 am
Even though the number of patients studied so far is limited, the apparent paucity of significant side effects together with the data on efficacy (however limited) is sufficient for me to take the vaccine and I hope they make it available ASAP.  I wouldn't change my behavior much after completing the vaccination process, but I probably would be willing to eat outdoors at restaurants, get my hair cut in a salon, and fly (things I am not willing to risk doing now).   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 18, 2020, 11:35:26 am
I think the first vaccines should go to anyone whose name starts with a C.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 18, 2020, 11:39:58 am
Even though the number of patients studied so far is limited, the apparent paucity of significant side effects together with the data on efficacy (however limited) is sufficient for me to take the vaccine and I hope they make it available ASAP.  I wouldn't change my behavior much after completing the vaccination process, but I probably would be willing to eat outdoors at restaurants, get my hair cut in a salon, and fly (things I am not willing to risk doing now).   

The haven't really released data.  It has just been press releases.  If everything checks out when the release the full data in a peer reviewed journal then I'll be ok with it.  44,000 thousand people is plenty for a medical study and most side effects should show up except for really rare ones in that group.  They will continue to due post approval monitoring so by the time it hits the general population any side effects should be out in the public.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 18, 2020, 11:42:01 am
From what I read, only a few hundred people in the trials actually developed COVID so the data on efficacy is limited.  The data on safety is much more robust.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 18, 2020, 11:59:24 am
When prioritizing distribution, occupations such as grocery store workers, teachers, and bus drivers merit some consideration.  However, the bureaucracy needed to administer such a plan would defeat its purpose.  Inoculating as many people as fast as possible makes a lot of sense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 18, 2020, 12:51:12 pm
From what I read, only a few hundred people in the trials actually developed COVID so the data on efficacy is limited.  The data on safety is much more robust.

The cool thing is you don't need a lot of infections to determine effectiveness.  To detect a 60% effective vaccine you only need about 150 infections in the study.  For a 90% effective vaccine you need considerably less.  Pfizer is currently at 194.  For most vaccines this takes a years to get the number of infections, but with coronavirus it didn't take long. 

The haven't released any of the safety data yet.  Safety data takes longer and you need more people.  Even when vaccine studies go on for a longer time they still do post-marketing studies on meds and vaccines to detect things that don't show up in studies.  Denmark has a study with over 1 million people of the safety of the HPV vaccine to prevent cancer and I still can't convince people that it is safe. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 18, 2020, 12:53:24 pm
Hopefully there will be peer reviewed data soon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 18, 2020, 12:55:27 pm
Hopefully there will be peer reviewed data soon.

That will come when the application to the FDA for either an EUA or approval.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 18, 2020, 01:02:02 pm
That will come when the application to the FDA for either an EUA or approval.

It goes without saying that any FDA approval should not come from some Trump appointed lackey as its head.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 18, 2020, 01:35:03 pm
In case you were wondering if what I say about conservatives leaving Fox, here are the latest numbers.  https://twitter.com/MajorPatriot/status/1329116809971249152?s=19
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on November 18, 2020, 01:36:21 pm
And no,  I don't think Trump won CA. I don't know that he won at all.  I simply want allegations of fraud looked into.  Isn't that horrible?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 18, 2020, 02:03:57 pm
And no,  I don't think Trump won CA. I don't know that he won at all.  I simply want allegations of fraud looked into.  Isn't that horrible?

Pretty much every state has said there was no fraud. Chasing down conspiracies is a waste of time and, if you were honest, you would acknowledge that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 18, 2020, 02:04:48 pm
One of the most unpopular Presidents of our lifetime lost by 6 million votes.  The election wasn't stolen from Trump, he gave it away with his narcissism, lack of empathy, and awful leadership in responding to the pandemic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 18, 2020, 02:16:33 pm
And no,  I don't think Trump won CA. I don't know that he won at all.  I simply want allegations of fraud looked into.  Isn't that horrible?

If these were credible allegations, no. However, that’s not what is taking place. The conclusion of fraud was made months ago without the election having taken place. What we have now is bullshit without evidence. And yes, bullshit is horriBUL.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 18, 2020, 03:32:43 pm
It goes without saying that any FDA approval should not come from some Trump appointed lackey as its head.

Vaccines have a separate committee that they have to go through to get approval and they have pushed back against attempts to rush the vaccine.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 18, 2020, 03:38:18 pm
I have a hard time understanding the opposite POV.

In a country where 47% voted for Trump?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 18, 2020, 05:53:12 pm
Reality-impairment is rampant
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 18, 2020, 06:06:34 pm
They must have some serious dirt on Lindsey Graham, right?  The straight-up golfing and toadying is one thing, but calling secretaries of state to ask about getting ballots thrown out is "do this or we burn you" House of Cards stuff.  Is it possible he's just that much of a weasel?

Quote
“When Senator Graham called, I just assumed that he was calling about the two runoffs for the senators, so I called him back,” Raffensperger said. “During our discussion, he asked if ballots could be matched back to the envelope — the absentee ballots could be matched back to the envelope. I explained our process, after it went through two sets of signature match, at that point they were separated. But then Senator Graham implied for us to audit the envelopes and then throw out the ballots for counties who have the highest frequency error of signatures. I tried to help explain that because we did signature match, you couldn’t tie the signatures back anymore to those ballots.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 18, 2020, 10:11:55 pm
Meanwhile Pete Ricketts was filmed partying at a bar without a mask, and then got the woman who exposed it fired.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 18, 2020, 10:28:42 pm
Ricketts started out doing really well with COVID.  He listened to the ID people at UNMC that are world class, they are one of 4 US bio-containment units.  Then he quit listening and has been a dumpster fire since.  He's currently in quarantine for an "outside" dinner get together with someone that COVID positive.   Rickett's COVID response has reminded me a lot of being a Cubs fan since 2016.

Rickett's keep threatening further lock downs, but he is trying to play the game that hospitals have plenty of beds.  We don't and he does nothing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 18, 2020, 10:31:46 pm
Time causes us to get sloppy.   Yesterday I had to go to two stores I hate to go into because too many won't wear masks.  Both times I walked into the store without my mask on.  I had to turn around and go out to the car and get it.  First four or five months I NEVER forgot it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: BearHit on November 19, 2020, 05:06:20 am
That's caused by a different affliction...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 19, 2020, 12:28:13 pm
I need to create an ****hole advent calendar to count down the days until President Clown ****s off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 19, 2020, 01:16:15 pm
That's caused by a different affliction...
  What are you implying?  That I have CRS?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 19, 2020, 04:54:55 pm
Every attorney who participated in that Giuliani charade today should be disbarred.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 19, 2020, 05:09:30 pm
The rivers of hair dye were my favorite part.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 19, 2020, 05:55:09 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/19/rudy-giuliani-dye-my-cousin-vinny-press-conference

Sweaty Rudy Giuliani suffers hair malfunction in latest bizarre press conference

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/83f7a2c231d2339b284f824dd1ee97d13081a5f7/0_128_3837_2302/master/3837.jpg?width=620&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=e0df2b504e08407e5b68599774e80d79)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 19, 2020, 07:06:55 pm
The hand recount is over in Georgia. Biden still won.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 19, 2020, 07:28:56 pm
All the major news outlets reporting that Trump is "summoning" Republican Michigan state legislators to the White House in an attempt to strong-arm them into declaring state electors for Trump. 

Is being concerned about this stuff still tin-foil-hat territory?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 19, 2020, 07:29:37 pm
The Trump administration deserves credit for providing resources to help Pharma with expedited vaccine development, their other mistakes notwithstanding.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 19, 2020, 08:46:51 pm
All the major news outlets reporting that Trump is "summoning" Republican Michigan state legislators to the White House in an attempt to strong-arm them into declaring state electors for Trump. 

Is being concerned about this stuff still tin-foil-hat territory?

Yes.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-invites-michigan-gop-white-house-6ab95edd3373ecc9607381175d6f3328



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 19, 2020, 08:51:51 pm
When Tucker Carlson is skeptical, you have to wonder what chance you have.

@oliverdarcy: Tucker Carlson calls out Sidney Powell, saying he asked her for evidence to support her election fraud claims, but "she never sent us any evidence despite a lot of requests, polite requests, not a page." 

"When we kept pressing she got angry and told us to stop contacting her." https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1329595108078063619/video/1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 19, 2020, 09:26:59 pm
Yes.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-invites-michigan-gop-white-house-6ab95edd3373ecc9607381175d6f3328



So why are they going to the White House?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 19, 2020, 09:35:39 pm
So why are they going to the White House?

To hear what bribe he’s going to offer.  Always a good idea to publicly go to a meeting where a bribe will definitely be offered.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 19, 2020, 09:59:36 pm
So why are they going to the White House?

Free trip?  I have no clue, but there isn’t anything they can do to.

When Tucker Carlson is skeptical, you have to wonder what chance you have.

@oliverdarcy: Tucker Carlson calls out Sidney Powell, saying he asked her for evidence to support her election fraud claims, but "she never sent us any evidence despite a lot of requests, polite requests, not a page."

"When we kept pressing she got angry and told us to stop contacting her." https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1329595108078063619/video/1

There was a clip of her talking to Lou Dobbs on Fox Buisness. She said some bar **** crazy things about illegal immigrants and even Dobbs tried to walk back her comments and she wouldn’t let him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 19, 2020, 10:04:43 pm
Put the tin foil hat on Romney, cause he just put out a concerned statement on the MI lawmakers' trip to the WH:

"Having failed to make even a plausible case of widespread fraud or conspiracy before any court of law, the President has now resorted to overt pressure on state and local officials to subvert the will of the people and overturn the election. It is difficult to imagine a worse, more undemocratic action by a sitting American President."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 19, 2020, 10:30:39 pm
It is bad for America and democracy for a President to be acting like this, which is what I believed Sen. Romney was addressing.  This isn’t going to change the election results.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 19, 2020, 10:35:00 pm
I agree with Romney that Trump's behavior is shameful.  But all those Trumpers who voted for him KNEW he was ego manic and we have talked about his idiocy for four years.  What do you expect?  Here's the thing: every damn thing Trump and his lawyers have failed.  Boom, flat on their faces.  I don't believe he will swing any legislators his direction, and if he does, Biden will go to court and it will die.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 19, 2020, 10:41:58 pm
I don't think Trump is going to change the election results either. We're lucky the election is such a clear Biden victory, and we're lucky that Trump is such an incompetent boob.

That doesn't mean Trump's behavior is not deeply concerning or damaging. There's a full spectrum between *shrug* and full-blown-coup. And given a closer election with a more capable would-be-autocrat, I do think we might have real trouble. Persuade a single state legislature of fraud, and things could get ugly very fast.

Finally, as someone who lives in a rural area where "militias" are a thing, and having personally witnessed them terrorize peaceful family protests over Antifa conspiracy theories, I'm absolutely concerned about small-scale civil unrest. The refuse pouring out of the White House is the bloodiest of red meat for the would-be-violent militia dogs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 19, 2020, 10:43:37 pm
But all those Trumpers who voted for him KNEW he was ego manic and we have talked about his idiocy for four years. 

Nope, you're wrong here. I know plenty of otherwise-seemingly-sane people who have little-to-no understanding of just how maniacal and idiotic Trump is.

My father-in-law, who is a *WONDERFUL* man, quite literally nearly died because of his belief in the Trump-camp talking points on COVID.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 19, 2020, 10:44:02 pm
I’m more fearful that someone who is actually competent will takes Trump’s playbook and run with it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 19, 2020, 10:46:39 pm
I’m more fearful that someone who is actually competent will takes Trump’s playbook and run with it.

Yes, exactly this. Trump has shown that you can be an abso-f**ing-lute moron and ascend to the most powerful position in the world.

What happens when a *highly competent* sociopathic narcissist climbs the same ladder?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 19, 2020, 10:52:15 pm
Nope, you're wrong here. I know plenty of otherwise-seemingly-sane people who have little-to-no understanding of just how maniacal and idiotic Trump is.
Well, tico, as I've posted dozens of times, this is what the sane people of Germany must have felt like when they saw friends, neighbors, and family buying into Hitler's horseshit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 19, 2020, 10:55:30 pm
I mean, the official GOP party channels and figureheads are pushing "highlights" from the *insane* Powell/Giuliani "press conference" today. Fully half of our 2-party system is basically in Qanon land at this point.

And all for the wretched, reprehensible Donald Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 19, 2020, 10:59:54 pm
Well, tico, as I've posted dozens of times, this is what the sane people of Germany must have felt like when they saw friends, neighbors, and family buying into Hitler's horseshit.

And this is where I've struggled with your point of view: on one hand, you soberly acknowledge the dangerous trajectory we've been on under Trump. On the other, you lump me in with the tin-foil-hat crowd for expressing deep concern about the whole mess.

Where have we misunderstood each other?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 19, 2020, 11:05:27 pm
tico, I was not aware you had removed your tinfoil hat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 19, 2020, 11:08:43 pm
I never put one on! LOL
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 20, 2020, 12:08:25 am
I don't think Trump is going to change the election results either. We're lucky the election is such a clear Biden victory, and we're lucky that Trump is such an incompetent boob.

That doesn't mean Trump's behavior is not deeply concerning or damaging. There's a full spectrum between *shrug* and full-blown-coup. And given a closer election with a more capable would-be-autocrat, I do think we might have real trouble. Persuade a single state legislature of fraud, and things could get ugly very fast.

Finally, as someone who lives in a rural area where "militias" are a thing, and having personally witnessed them terrorize peaceful family protests over Antifa conspiracy theories, I'm absolutely concerned about small-scale civil unrest. The refuse pouring out of the White House is the bloodiest of red meat for the would-be-violent militia dogs.

In the first place, I think it's reckless to assume state legislatures will do the right thing, because with almost no exceptions R elected officials in Washington have not.  No one knows where the line is.

But to Tico's larger point, yes - imagine what would have happened if this election were legitimately close.  If it were within the realm of flipping 1 state to change it, and that state were within 10K votes.  Potentially fatal damage to our democracy is being done here, above and beyond the fact that 47% of the participating electorate supported a candidate most of them knew would not accept electoral defeat.  Yes, perhaps half of T voters don't believe he won, but that still leaves the other half.  And a sizable percentage who know Biden won, but would be perfectly fine with Trump stealing the election illegitimately.

As Stuart Stevens - who has worked for 5 Republican presidents - said, "The GOP has become the anti-democracy party".  And that's a serious fucklng problem for the country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 20, 2020, 01:06:36 am
Look, don’t get bogged down with what the losers may think at the moment or by Trump’s shenanigans. A watchful eye, yes, but what matters are how our crucial institutions are performing:

1. Our independent judiciary is tossing these frivolous lawsuits and Trump’s respectable lawyers are dropping out and leaving the clown Giuliani as lead counsel.

2. Our free press routinely refers to Biden as President-Elect and regularly point out that Trump’s assertions lack factual support.

3. The opposition party gets ready to take power, notwithstanding the obstructionism it faces. On January 20, there will be a transfer of power in the executive branch.

4. As to the military, all you have to know is what out #1 military official said just last week. Listen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMaI1Hg8dl8
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 20, 2020, 04:11:42 am
None of which mitigates the damage this charade is doing to the system, even if all that were taken as read.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 20, 2020, 07:23:12 am
1. Our independent judiciary is tossing these frivolous lawsuits and Trump’s respectable lawyers are dropping out and leaving the clown Giuliani as lead counsel.


Every time I think this whole fiasco can't become any more laughable, it does.

Quote
But his attorneys have repeatedly made elementary errors in those high-profile cases: misspelling “poll watcher” as “pole watcher,” forgetting the name of the presiding judge during a hearing, inadvertently filing a Michigan lawsuit before an obscure court in Washington and having to refile complaints after erasing entire arguments they’re using to challenge results.


https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-politics-lawsuits-elections-a508ebaafae82286c69eb091b75abdfc
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 20, 2020, 08:48:29 am
Very good, Reb.  I agree. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 20, 2020, 09:16:43 am
Look, don’t get bogged down with what the losers may think at the moment or by Trump’s shenanigans. A watchful eye, yes, but what matters are how our crucial institutions are performing:

1. Our independent judiciary is tossing these frivolous lawsuits and Trump’s respectable lawyers are dropping out and leaving the clown Giuliani as lead counsel.

2. Our free press routinely refers to Biden as President-Elect and regularly point out that Trump’s assertions lack factual support.

3. The opposition party gets ready to take power, notwithstanding the obstructionism it faces. On January 20, there will be a transfer of power in the executive branch.

4. As to the military, all you have to know is what out #1 military official said just last week. Listen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMaI1Hg8dl8

I agree with all of this. And yet, to the degree that the national Republican Party has aided and abetted this is extremely dangerous not only because of what it says about the individuals, not only to the extent that it compromises the ability of the Biden administration to hit the ground running on a range of national crises, not only because it signals an extreme degree of obstructionism in the next Congress, but also because it acts like a virus in the very fabric of our society, emboldening the most vile bigotry and authoritarian elements of our country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 20, 2020, 10:27:30 am
The Republican Party deserves the shame and embarrassment that it is receiving, but let's be totally fair.   There are some Republicans who are real asses, like Lindsey Graham.  Many are just lying low because the Trumpers have gotten so powerful they can ruin anyone's career.   I don't disagree that many Trumpers are Republicans, but since up to 16% of Republicans are reported to have voted for Biden, and many Republican Congressmen and Senators were reelected in states that went for Biden or narrowly for Trump, tells me that it was a bigger repudiation of Trump than the party.   Some, here, have to face up to the fact that not all these Trumpers are Republicans...too many of them.  That means that a good portion (maybe 20%) are racist Democrats who found an outlet in this bastard Trump. 

Yes, the Republican Party is broken, taken over by racists, liars, and crooks, but these things are cyclical.  Just 160 years ago what Party opposed Lincoln at every turn, including Emancipation?  What Party made up the Solid South where Jim Crow laws abounded?  Which Party was the party of the Ku Klux Klan back then?  Which Party so opposed the Civil Rights movement that many of its members went Republican in the late 60's?  The history of the Democratic Party isn't rosey.   

What we need to do is stop the fingerpointing and get to resolutions.  It's not really blue states vs. red.  It's cities vs. rural.  Neither understands the other, values, and contribution to the United States.  Somebody needs to step up and stop the polarization.  Don't care which party it is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 20, 2020, 12:09:38 pm
Tico I'm glad you father-in-law is doing better, but he is far from alone in not believing that COVID exists. 

Just how bad it it right now?  In a restaurant with 47 people in it there is a 50% chance that 1 person has COVID in the USA.  In North Dakota there is a 50% chance in a group of 10 people that 1 has COIVD.  Nebraska it was like a 15% chance in a group of 10 people 1 had COVID, but I'm sure it is higher now.

My favorite line right now.
Family get together for Thanksgiving
ICU for Christmas
Cemetery for New Years.

Holidays in 2020.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 20, 2020, 12:18:51 pm
North Dakota has 10 people in the state?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 20, 2020, 12:23:43 pm
Actually, I still have some cousins up there in ND.  They are having a tough time with COVID after having very few cases last spring.  When the population is so sparse, I think wearing masks and staying away from people is tough.  Social distancing is part, to a degree, of everyday life.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 20, 2020, 12:33:06 pm
None of which mitigates the damage this charade is doing to the system, even if all that were taken as read.

What you note above is a separate question from how our institutions respond to Trump’s shenanigans about the vote.

Our institutions, as a whole, will respond appropriately and Biden will be inaugurated on January 20. Fair to assume there will be blip(s) along the way but those will fail.

As Trump has shown disregard and contempt for those institutions during his entire term—-and indeed signaled his plans even before election day—it is a surprise to nobody that he is trying to change the result. That is what tyrants try to do.

But, our institutions have and will respond to overcome the tyrant’s efforts. That is way, way, way more important than the issues of transition problems resulting from his shenanigans—-a different issue. Most of those will be temporary. (Some of his policies over the last four years will be harder to fix, especially internationally).

There is not going to be a coup or anything like that, not that Trump isn’t trying. In this instance, the system is working. There will be future challenges from others in the years ahead—-something that the founding fathers anticipated and one reason why Trump’s attempt will fail.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 20, 2020, 01:44:44 pm
Actually, people like deeg and Jack and tico are part of Trump's sad legacy...disbelief, suspicion, fear, lack of confidence in democratic process.   He did a real number on us.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 20, 2020, 03:26:21 pm
Quote
It's cities vs. rural

Educated vs rubes
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on November 20, 2020, 04:11:02 pm
There is plenty of evidence that, in general there are large divides in our country: urban vs. rural; college educated vs. not college educated; white vs. non-white; male vs. female; and by age group as well.  In some cases these gaps are profound.

That said, it's crucial not to think or act as though belonging to one or more of those groups is predictive of the individual. That is certainly not the case. That's why there is some hope for achieving some measure of communication, understanding and even agreement across these boundaries. That is one of Biden's enormous challenges as President-elect.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 20, 2020, 04:14:04 pm
Educated vs rubes
. That is exactly the kind of belief that divides us.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 20, 2020, 04:30:00 pm
. That is exactly the kind of belief that divides us.
There is a more politically correct way of saying that.  I'll go with the haves and the have nots.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 20, 2020, 04:41:40 pm
I know it's harsh, clearly politically and socially incorrect, and not entirely accurate.  I know educated people--one of my reasonably smart neighbors, who said "Well, Trump may be a little rough around the edges"--who believe what Trump says.  "Critically gullible," maybe.  There are millions and millions of Trump voters

How about competent vs willfully ignorant?

Quote
That is exactly the kind of belief that divides us.

Or maybe, yes, this is exactly true.  There's a whole industry of people making money off keeping people divided and/or ignorant.  A lot of money.  I hope they burn in hell.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 20, 2020, 05:19:16 pm
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Donald_Trump%2C_Jr._%2849563836213%29_%28cropped%29.jpg/440px-Donald_Trump%2C_Jr._%2849563836213%29_%28cropped%29.jpg)

Has now tested positive.

Rudy Guiliani is in quarantine due to being exposed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 20, 2020, 05:19:49 pm
DMF, we've been friends a long time.   How many rural folks do you really know?  I don't know any successful farmers who didn't go to college.  Seriously.  All my nephews and grand nephews and nieces graduated from college with high honors.  You know what you call a farmer without a degree?  He's the guy who moved to the city.   Seward County, Nebraska, once had more millionaires per capita than any other place in the country.  They may have manure on their boots, but they are depositing big checks at the bank.  If we continue the inaccurate portrayal that rural people are all rubes and educated people all live in the cities we're doomed.  It's a dumb stereotype which prevents good negotiation and change, which, yes, I hope Biden begins.  I say "begins," because it's not going to happen in just a few years.  I'm not angry that you consider these rural folks rubes...it concerns me that you have that mindset.   By the way...take Chicago...no rubes there?  They keep electing scoundrels because they're so educated?  Pity. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 20, 2020, 05:35:04 pm
It's not about educated vs. rubes.

ANYBODY and EVERYBODY can be fooled by a skilled charlatan in the right set of circumstances.

Just think Bernie Madoff.  Fooled the Best and the Brightest into giving him their LIFE SAVINGS, not just their vote and support.

Don't ever think you're smarter than somebody else just because you've been fortunate enough to have higher education.

In the right set of circumstances, you can be a horse's ass too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 20, 2020, 06:10:12 pm
A word of caution:  be very careful when using the words "all" and "never".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 20, 2020, 06:10:32 pm
I know we're threading the needle around here on "appropriate level of concern" over Trump's refusal to concede, and for wherever I've been branded part of the tin-foil-hat brigade, as I've said before, I expect Biden to be sworn in on Jan 20. That's not the concern.

In the meantime, Trump's flouting of any traditional transition process not only continues to erode our democratic foundations, it is literally killing Americans, as we watch COVID cases and deaths continue to rise. The nation faces a massive logistical challenge around the distribution of vaccines that may be available as soon as Dec., and the Trump administration refuses to share any of its plans with the Biden administration. This is something the two parties should be working on together, but instead, it looks like Biden is going to take this over midstream and uninformed. Meanwhile, various Trump officials continue to go full scorched-earth on everything from foreign relations to domestic aid packages.

This is more than philosophical, and we continue to hurtle off the tracks between now and Jan 20.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 20, 2020, 06:12:07 pm
It's easy to overestimate how many people have been "fooled" by Trump.  The vast majority know exactly what he is selling and either want to buy it or are willing to accept it for personal financial benefit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 20, 2020, 06:23:51 pm
Edward Norton on Trump:

“I will allow that he’s also a whiny, sulky, petulant, Grinchy, vindictive little 10-ply-super-soft b****h who no doubt is just throwing a wicked pout fest & trying to give a tiny-hand middle finger to the whole country for pure spite, without a single thought for the dead & dying,” wrote Norton, referencing the more than 250,000 Americans who’ve died from coronavirus this year.

“But his contemptible, treasonous, seditious assault on the stability of our political compact isn’t about 2024, personal enrichment or anything else other than trying to use chaos & threat to the foundation of the system as leverage to trade for a safe exit. Call. His. Bluff. Faith in the strength of our sacred institutions & founding principles is severely stretched...but they will hold. They will. He’s leaving, gracelessly & in infamy. But if we trade for it, give him some brokered settlement, we’ll be vulnerable to his return. We can’t flinch.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: DelMarFan on November 20, 2020, 07:02:56 pm
Quote
If we continue the inaccurate portrayal that rural people are all rubes and educated people all live in the cities

Curt, I wasn't trying to say this.  Sure, rural people tend to be less educated, and this seems to be borne out in the data, but clearly it's not just education--I tried to make that point in my last post, if briefly.  I think I want it to be simple so I know where to put my anger, but it isn't.  Seeing people fervently believing in Trump and knowing that there are millions of them is mind-boggling.  Obviously, there's no one reason for where they come from.

My parents were both college professors, but we lived far enough outside of town that I went to a high school in a small town with plenty of farm kids and small-town mentality.  So I'm not totally in the dark about rural vs city.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 20, 2020, 08:39:41 pm
Edward Norton on Trump:

“I will allow that he’s also a whiny, sulky, petulant, Grinchy, vindictive little 10-ply-super-soft b****h who no doubt is just throwing a wicked pout fest & trying to give a tiny-hand middle finger to the whole country for pure spite, without a single thought for the dead & dying,” wrote Norton, referencing the more than 250,000 Americans who’ve died from coronavirus this year.

“But his contemptible, treasonous, seditious assault on the stability of our political compact isn’t about 2024, personal enrichment or anything else other than trying to use chaos & threat to the foundation of the system as leverage to trade for a safe exit. Call. His. Bluff. Faith in the strength of our sacred institutions & founding principles is severely stretched...but they will hold. They will. He’s leaving, gracelessly & in infamy. But if we trade for it, give him some brokered settlement, we’ll be vulnerable to his return. We can’t flinch.”

That’s all well and good, but until Ralph Kramden weighs in we can’t have real unity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 20, 2020, 08:46:26 pm
Rex Chapman tweeted that Edward Norton deal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 21, 2020, 09:32:06 am
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/11/21/michigan-lawmakers-trump-meeting-erin-burnett-monologue-ebof-vpx.cnn
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 21, 2020, 09:37:44 am
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/11/21/michigan-lawmakers-trump-meeting-erin-burnett-monologue-ebof-vpx.cnn

The comments about the intimidation are telling. And, yet another possible legal issue Trump has created for himself.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 21, 2020, 10:50:11 am
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2801D4?fbclid=IwAR3yzLYxV8aa0kxMVQU3oA54pK8UEJCQQT7r78Bdqhjn7ZM_gd8h4nD_EGk&__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 21, 2020, 05:39:29 pm
The difference between interference in Ukraine and Michigan is? Laws don’t matter to these people; only power does.

This chaos is the new normal. It’s corona and chaos for the foreseeable future. And the problem is that half the country wants this. It’s time to pay the butchers bill of stupidity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 21, 2020, 07:26:42 pm
Federal judge in PA:
“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened," Brann added. "Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 21, 2020, 07:29:07 pm
How in the hell are there no sanctions against the attorneys?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on November 21, 2020, 08:02:21 pm
I read a tweet just a minute ago that was great.

It said...

I wont be told Im living in fear for wearing a mask by some redneck who's so scared that he has to carry a gun in Wal Mart.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 21, 2020, 08:53:37 pm
How in the hell are there no sanctions against the attorneys?

Everything they're doing is getting laughed out of court. They're making all these wild claims of fraud in press conferences, Fox News, and Twitter...but then they go to court and show no evidence. Giuliani even testified in court earlier this week (in one of those silly cases where they were trying to get a couple dozen votes thrown out or something) that they weren't actually alleging fraud.

It's mind blowing that there are still so many people who think there was some kind of widespread fraud when they haven't even tried to make a coherent argument in court.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 21, 2020, 09:00:38 pm
Here's a tweet from a guy who handled most of the voting update press conferences in Georgia in the days following the election. He's a conservative Republican.

Gabriel Sterling @GabrielSterling
So this is fun...multiple attempted hacks of my emails, police protection around my home, the threats. But all is well...following the the law, following the process...doing our jobs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 21, 2020, 09:13:13 pm
At first I thought this guy was running a bit. Then I figured he was just way out on the fringes.  Now, it seems this is mainstream Republican thinking. This country is ****.

All fraudulent.  President Trump was WAY ahead and was easily going to win.   Then the 6 states announced they were going to stop counting.  That has NEVER happened before in one state let alone six.

Then I get up the next day and Biden is ahead?  Bullshit!  They used the biggest voter fraud organization in history just like Dementia Joe announced to the world.

No one believes Biden has received more votes then any US presidential candidate in history.  NO ONE!  Not even you and you are pretty stupid.

Yet that is what we have to believe if there wasn't massive voter fraud.  Statistically it is impossible for there to have been that many Biden votes without down ticket votes for him to catch up.  It would be like flipping a coin a hundred thousand times and it coming up heads every single time! 

They used their normal cheating, they used Dominion and were still losing.  Then they stopped counting and filled out ballots and/or (probably both) brought in pre-printed ballots for Biden because they needed so many.

Even with hundreds of sworn affidavits the Trump lawyers keep losing in court because they have to bring them in the very same corrupt places that have been decided by voter fraud.  Judges are elected.  Judges who get elected with voter fraud are corrupt and will protect their own.

It will go to the Supreme Court and the overwhelming evidence will get President Trump re-elected.

Then the corrupt get to go to jail.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on November 21, 2020, 09:37:17 pm
If you read the PA judges ruling, he basically says “get the **** out of my court room and never come back you no nothing hacks.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 22, 2020, 08:03:24 am
Everything they're doing is getting laughed out of court. They're making all these wild claims of fraud in press conferences, Fox News, and Twitter...but then they go to court and show no evidence. Giuliani even testified in court earlier this week (in one of those silly cases where they were trying to get a couple dozen votes thrown out or something) that they weren't actually alleging fraud.

It's mind blowing that there are still so many people who think there was some kind of widespread fraud when they haven't even tried to make a coherent argument in court.

The new expert that is being touted on OAN (and I bet Newsmax but can’t say for sure) is Ron Watkins, one of the men behind 8chan and the Q conspiracy. In case you were wondering, he has no expertise on voting systems but he is an expert on starting and nurturing conspiracy theories. 

https://www.motherjones.com/2020-elections/2020/11/ron-watkins-trump-dominion-fraud/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on November 22, 2020, 05:46:35 pm
Sidney Powell's conspiracies are too toxic even for the Trump administration at this point. Here's a statement they released. She participated in a press conference with Rudy Giuliani last week, so she clearly was part of the team then.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EndtguDW8AMHuJO?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 22, 2020, 07:33:08 pm
Rudy - who has recently been filmed with his hands down his pants in front of a supposed foreign journalist, with hair dye seeming to ooze from his temples, and giving a “major news conference” from a ramshackle landscaping warehouse adjacent to a skeevy dildo shop - has decided that being seen as working with Powell is the wrong optics.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 22, 2020, 09:49:06 pm
Pfizer’s (and likely Moderna’s) vaccine EUA is going to the FDA’s vaccine committee on Dec. 10.  If they don’t give their approval the vaccines will have to wait for the full Phase 3 trials.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 23, 2020, 08:48:40 am
I'd rate the chance that they don't approve the vaccines at <5%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 23, 2020, 01:00:49 pm
3rd major COVID-19 vaccine shown to be effective and cheaper

Quote
The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine was 90% effective in preventing COVID-19 in one of the dosing regimens tested; it was less effective in another. Earlier this month, rival drugmakers Pfizer and Moderna reported preliminary results from late-stage trials showing their vaccines were almost 95% effective.

While the AstraZeneca vaccine can be stored at 2 degrees to 8 degrees Celsius (36 degrees to 46 degrees Fahrenheit), the Pfizer and Moderna products must be stored at temperatures approaching minus-70 degrees Celsius (minus-94 Fahrenheit).

According to CNN, the effectiveness was raised from 70% to 90% by decreasing the amount of the first dose and increasing the amount of the second dose

https://apnews.com/article/astrazeneca-vaccine-third-cheaper-oxford-c99d26eb2946f6fde45a1edc002ff028
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 23, 2020, 01:16:52 pm
Moderna's vaccine can be stored at a similar temperature to the AZ vaccine.  Only Pfizer needs ultra cold storage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 23, 2020, 04:48:33 pm
A lot of things Donald Trump has said and done since he took office fall into the category of “that’s never going to happen”.  Yet he continues to surprise us with his audacity and they do happen.

I sincerely hope this is not another such item:  “I’ll allow those vaccines to proceed only if I get a second term.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 23, 2020, 04:56:39 pm
Worst he could do is delay it until Biden takes office. It might actually get Republicans to stand up against him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 23, 2020, 05:18:44 pm
GSA director Gina Gilliam has finally sent a letter to Joe Biden indicating that the transition can now begin.  She has also stated that she was not part of any delay.

Funny how all of this happens shortly after Michigan certifies their election results.

 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on November 23, 2020, 05:21:19 pm
Worst he could do is delay it until Biden takes office. It might actually get Republicans to stand up against him.

That's true.  But Trump is just irrational enough to try.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 23, 2020, 06:31:36 pm
GSA director Gina Gilliam has finally sent a letter to Joe Biden indicating that the transition can now begin.  She has also stated that she was not part of any delay.

Funny how all of this happens shortly after Michigan certifies their election results.

 

I assume you meant Emily Murphy.  In her whiny and entitled letter she says she reached all her decisions "independently".  Meanwhile Trump tweeted a few minutes later that he's directing her actions, and it was reported that a White House counsel composed the letter she released.

Murphy's please for sympathy are truly nauseating.  No one should get any special commendation for doing their constitutionally-mandated job, much less two weeks late.  She's been in violation of the law and more Americans will die as a result of the delays in formally beginning the transition.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 28, 2020, 11:02:53 pm
To the question of the red states.  Sounds like the Democratic Party is paying attention.

https://theindependent.com/news/national/govt-and-politics/biden-briefing-why-his-win-hides-a-dire-warning-for-democrats-get-updated-on-politics/article_c68ce1af-c99c-5ec6-bc7d-b8fad7de1444.html#utm_source=theindependent.com&utm_campaign=%2Fnewsletter-templates%2Fbreaking&utm_medium=PostUp&utm_content=6aaf36b57377df88bb86de6add6f290086c1f5f3
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on November 30, 2020, 11:06:28 am
CurtOne


While I agree that the Biden Administration needs to articulate an economic message to rural red state voters, I just don't think their looking for one. Trump's America first message was less about economic measures than it was about protecting outdated immoral racial privilege's and stopping the Democratic advantages in diversity, diploma's and density.

Just look at the state of Georgia and how it's politics has changed so much in the past 4 years. I also offer the article below.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/29/gop-party-that-cannot-change/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 30, 2020, 05:30:03 pm
Funny how you see no stories about how the R leadership needs to figure out how to speak to Biden voters, of which there are almost 8 million more than there are Trump voters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on November 30, 2020, 05:38:37 pm
Funny how you see no stories about how the R leadership needs to figure out how to speak to Biden voters, of which there are almost 8 million more than there are Trump voters.
  Actually, the point I was going to make was that Democrats see the need to reach out to rural voters, while the Republicans are sitting around griping instead of looking to appeal to city voters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 30, 2020, 06:36:08 pm
That was a general observation, not a disagreement with you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 30, 2020, 06:49:26 pm
https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/columnists/467820-feehery-how-republicans-can-win-back-the-suburbs%3famp

https://coloradosun.com/2020/11/12/colorado-republican-party-future/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 30, 2020, 07:52:51 pm
The shlt is about to hit the fan.  The defense secretary has been fired, and they've just started building a defensive barricade around the White House.  People need to start taking this seriously - these are not normal times.

I think there’s a very specific progression to this.  Start with vote suppression and intimidation.  Then lawsuits.  Then rogue electoral slates.  And if none of that works, martial law and termination of democracy.

I’ve been saying all along it’s going to come down to what the generals decide to do when the chips are down.  Nothing I’m seeing now makes me think I was wrong.

[/quote] Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
« Reply #5362 on: November 10, 2020, 06:43:38 pm »
Quote
Current R's can no longer be trusted to have an appropriate "line" they will not allow Trump to cost. We are loooooooooong past that. Further, many of them seem happy to use Trump as their unwitting "muscle" in an attempt to maintain power as long as possible (McConnell, etc.) In this environment, my concern is that the longer Trump's abuses and lies are validated by R silence, the more likely it is for his cultish base to engage in coordinated violent activity. Just last month, there was a credible threat to a governor's life, and that was simply about state shutdowns. What are "militias" going to do if/when they are fully convinced the election is being stolen from Trump? If that's not cause for an armed uprising to that demographic, I don't know what is.

Further, while I don't believe we'll see full-blown military support of any Trump coup attempt, the truth is there are members of our armed forces who believe his nonsense, too. As Trump has found enablers to serve in so many senior administration roles, who is to say there aren't senior level military officials who believe Trump's lies and see it as their ultimate patriotic duty to "save the republic" by standing up to the D attempt to "steal the election"?
« Last Edit: November 10, 2020, 07:05:54 pm by ticohans »[/quote]

What do you guys think now??

The military coup stuff seems pretty silly now, right?   As does notion that Rs in election process have no line not willing to cross. 

What has happened is that folks, even Rs, took their jobs seriously in the election process.  And the courts worked.  The free press worked. The opposition party forcefully opposed the Trump shenanigans.  Even Trump's lawyers with reputations dropped out. Giuliani and his ilk have been exposed as clowns.  Military is waiting patiently for a new commander in chief.

Biden will be inaugurated on January 20.

Then there will be the usual and expected partisan fights. 

Instead of posting alarmist nonsense, consider doing something constructive if you so choose.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on November 30, 2020, 10:17:48 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/11/30/trump-election-institutions-coup-electors/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/23/how-trump-placed-ticking-time-bomb-center-our-system/

https://scnow.com/opinion/columnists/clarence-page-this-time-trump-s-abuse-of-public-trust-is-wounding-democracy/article_02071058-2608-11eb-ab0e-231fd627fd35.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/25/trumps-coup-failed-but-us-democracy-has-been-given-a-scare

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/25/did-american-democracy-really-hold-maybe-not-440595




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on November 30, 2020, 11:24:10 pm
You are confused, evidently.

Read what you wrote a few weeks ago:

Martial law, termination of democracy, rogue electoral states, election result depending on what the generals decide to do.

All total nonsense and accusing others of having their head in the sand if disagreed with you.

That stuff made you just as batty as the wackos on the right, probably even more so.

And you were wrong.

The battiness of those remarks is a totally different issue than the stresses on democracy that Trump and his sycophants have caused, discussed in the links. Ironically, those problems will be confronted going forward by many of the same institutions of democracy that you ignored, belittled, and disrespected with your absurd rogue states, martial law, worrisome military generals talk.

Yes, there are serious problems to confront by the Trump attacks on democracy. But, the institutions of democracy defeated the election underminers. No rogue electoral states. No martial law.  No military intrusions. That was not going to happen and didn’t.

Be part of the solution going forward; not part of the wacko craziness.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 01, 2020, 02:56:50 pm
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/30/republicans-overturn-electoral-college-441459

This will be Trump's last hail mary.  What I found interesting in this article is that it has only been used 4 times.

The first was in 1969 when a single faithless elector was challenged (Nixon elector that voted for Wallace).  No change was made.
In 2000 and 2016 Democrats in the House where unable to convince a Senator to go along with them.
In 2005 the Democrats forced a vote on Ohio's electors that was let stand.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 01, 2020, 03:06:35 pm
tico: "I don't believe we'll see full-blown military support of any Trump coup attempt..."

Reb: "What do you guys think now?? The military coup stuff seems pretty silly now, right?"

tico: "Current R's can no longer be trusted to have an appropriate 'line'..."

Reb: "As does notion that Rs in election process have no line not willing to cross."


If you're going to try to dunk on me, at least know what you're talking about, or perhaps bother to read the posts you're quoting.

Reb: "Instead of posting alarmist nonsense, consider doing something constructive if you so choose."

Instead of posting inaccurate, bloviating i-ToLD-yOU-So's, consider reading comprehension if you so choose.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 01, 2020, 04:21:22 pm
Meanwhile, for those who've bothered to *actually* read what I've posted in terms of my election concerns - that Trump is eroding our democratic norms and has an unhinged base which has already proven capable of real violence - the latest from a Republican official in Georgia:

Gabriel Sterling, a high-ranking Georgia elections official, walked to a lectern in the State Capitol in Atlanta on Tuesday and angrily denounced the violent threats and harassment directed at people working on elections issues, urging President Trump to condemn it.

“It has to stop,” said Mr. Sterling, a Republican. “Mr. President, you have not condemned this language or these actions. This has to stop. We need you to step up, and if you’re going to take a position of leadership, show some.”

Mr. Sterling, a wonkish former city councilman in the Atlanta suburb of Sandy Springs, has taken on a starring role as Georgia’s voting system implementation manager while the president continues to call the election “rigged” and urge for the results to be nullified.

“Mr. President, it looks like you likely lost the state of Georgia,” Mr. Sterling said on Tuesday. “We’re investigating. There’s always a possibility, I get it, you have the right to go to the courts. What you don’t have is the ability to — and you need to step up and say this — is stop inspiring people to commit potential acts of violence. Someone’s going to get hurt. Someone’s going to get shot. Someone’s going to get killed.”

Mr. Sterling’s boss, the Republican secretary of state Brad Raffensperger, has come under fire from Trump allies, particularly Senators Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue of Georgia, Republicans who criticized Mr. Raffensperger’s handling of the election and called for him to step down.

A number of lawsuits have been filed seeking to halt the certification of the results in Georgia. A second of two recounts, requested by the Trump campaign, is being conducted. The internet and right-wing news media have flooded the state with baseless conspiracy theories.

Mr. Sterling, who seems to know the ins and outs of the election and recount process in more detail than Mr. Raffensperger, has had the shared duty of explaining and defending these processes, which the secretary of state’s office oversees. The two officials have said that their office is investigating reports of irregularities in the state. But both have maintained that the election results are trustworthy, and that President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. narrowly defeated Mr. Trump.

Speaking loudly, emotionally and deliberately, Mr. Sterling said that Mr. Raffensperger had intruders on his personal property. He said that Mr. Raffensperger’s wife was “getting sexualized threats thorough her cellphone.” Mr. Sterling said he had police protection outside his own house.

He mentioned reports that Joe diGenova, a lawyer for the Trump campaign, said that Christopher Krebs — a federal cybersecurity official who was fired shortly after saying that the election was fair — should be shot.

But Mr. Sterling said that “the straw that broke the camel’s back” had to do with a contractor for a voting system company in Gwinnett County who was targeted by someone who hung a noose and said he should be “hung for treason” simply for doing a routine element of his job.

“This is elections,” Mr. Sterling said. “This is the backbone of democracy, and all of you who have not said a damn word are complicit in this. It’s too much. Yes, fight for every legal vote. Go through your due process. We encourage you, use your First Amendment, that’s fine. Death threats, physical threats, intimidation — it’s too much, it’s not right. They’ve lost the moral high ground to claim that it is.”

He continued: “I can’t begin to explain the level of anger I have right now over this. And every American, every Georgian, Republican and Democrat alike, should have that same level of anger.”


https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/12/01/us/joe-biden-trump?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&fbclid=IwAR0lY8aMFhkuYQDIwwNy6WiCTWEB_yksMl7mkaCjhgG14L5Hywto-qvVnu4#georgia-elections-official-urges-trump-to-stop-inspiring-people-to-commit-potential-acts-of-violence




Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 01, 2020, 04:40:30 pm
Because my faith background is in Evangelical Christianity, I have a front-row seat to numerous "church leaders" "prophesying" the "Trump victory"; actively encouraging people to prepare for "civil war" as instruments of "God's justice"; calling for "traitors" in the Democratic Party, the media, etc., to be lined up for "firing squads" and "shot"; talking about being willing to die for Trump; and similar heinous incitements to "Christian" jihad.

Because I live in a rural area, I have personally witnessed armed-to-the-teeth "militias" terrorizing families with young children at community events that were organized around BLM or encouraging people to vote. The militias chased down people in their trucks and threatened families with guns in hand. Some people from our little town participated in a now-infamous event where a vacationing family was chased by AR-15-toting men in pickup trucks into a remote section of the woods. The militia then proceeded to fell trees around the family vehicle, trapping them entirely, and began to advance on the family while firing their guns, almost perpetrating a modern-day lynching because of a facebook-borne conspiracy that the family was part of an "antifa" attempt to "burn down their businesses and homes."

Please, Reb, continue to lecture me on my position which you have failed to comprehend since the beginning, and argue that the above kind of things are not to be worried about.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2020, 05:03:57 pm
Tico- Shame on you. What you just did in addressing my post is carve out the entire context of your previous remarks.

So, you previously posited the real possibility that some “senior level military officials” would find it their “ultimate patriotic duty” to “save the republic” for Trump. The weasel words “full-blown” [coup] don’t help you because it doesn’t take the entire military to cause havoc if senior military are intent on causing trouble.

What you posted is shameful and shows supreme ignorance about our senior military’s commitment to constitutional principles. That is a bedrock of our democratic republic and you showed disdain for that. That’s the context for your “coup” remarks and you know it.

Further, you also showed disdain toward the election process by pushing the notion there might be no “line” Rs are unwilling to cross for Trump in overturning the actual vote count. Of course, just the opposite happened as Rs joined Ds in taking pride in their election systems and refuting the ridiculous allegations of fraud, time and time again. You seemed to think that if you work in government, you don’t respect your constitutional responsibilities if you’re a R. That is nonsense for the vast majority of government employees having real, everyday responsibilities, regardless of political affiliation. That includes the judiciary too.

What you are confused about is linking those irresponsible Rs at the top of the food chain (mostly in DC)—who obsess about raising money for their re-election, fear the Trump base for their own personal reasons, and have their staffs do most of the day-to-day work antway—with the real work of government performed by countless hard-working folks who take their jobs seriously no matter their party affiliation.

Anyone involved directly in an election process takes great pride in their work, as do judges who are asked to set aside votes based on zero or shoddy evidence. Perhaps you don’t know that.

So, instead of attacking me in your previous post, consider taking responsibility for your previous foolish and erroneous remarks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2020, 05:15:49 pm
Because my faith background is in Evangelical Christianity, I have a front-row seat to numerous "church leaders" "prophesying" the "Trump victory"; actively encouraging people to prepare for "civil war" as instruments of "God's justice"; calling for "traitors" in the Democratic Party, the media, etc., to be lined up for "firing squads" and "shot"; talking about being willing to die for Trump; and similar heinous incitements to "Christian" jihad.

Because I live in a rural area, I have personally witnessed armed-to-the-teeth "militias" terrorizing families with young children at community events that were organized around BLM or encouraging people to vote. The militias chased down people in their trucks and threatened families with guns in hand. Some people from our little town participated in a now-infamous event where a vacationing family was chased by AR-15-toting men in pickup trucks into a remote section of the woods. The militia then proceeded to fell trees around the family vehicle, trapping them entirely, and began to advance on the family while firing their guns, almost perpetrating a modern-day lynching because of a facebook-borne conspiracy that the family was part of an "antifa" attempt to "burn down their businesses and homes."

Please, Reb, continue to lecture me on my position which you have failed to comprehend since the beginning, and argue that the above kind of things are not to be worried about.

Tico- As you know, I did not say one word about how the Trump base might react to Trump’s shenanigans. I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about your foolish remarks about how our government systems would respond to Trump claims about fraud.

Actually, the kind of remarks you made feed into the narrative of those you fear. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 01, 2020, 05:22:43 pm
I wonder who was trying to pay for a pardon.

John Harwood @JohnJHarwood
BREAKING from CNN:  “The Justice Department is investigating a potential crime related to funneling money to the White House in exchange for a presidential pardon, according to a court record unsealed on Tuesday by the chief judge of the DC District Court.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 01, 2020, 05:28:47 pm
I wonder who was trying to pay for a pardon.

John Harwood @JohnJHarwood
BREAKING from CNN:  “The Justice Department is investigating a potential crime related to funneling money to the White House in exchange for a presidential pardon, according to a court record unsealed on Tuesday by the chief judge of the DC District Court.”

  If Epstein would have held out, he probably would be free right now.  Wonder if Cosby has a shot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 01, 2020, 05:39:49 pm
tico, my friend, I agree with most of Reb's points and you know I'm your friend and Reb and I aren't besties.  Yes, living in a rural environment, fundamentalist Christians easily get sucked into the Trumper rhetoric, but both Reb and I have been trying to reassure people that our political system works and that a lot of the lunatic fringes conspiracy theories and projections of Armageddon.   Like you I have Christian values and I am stunned and ashamed of how many good Christian people got sucked into being Trumpers.  That's why I kept posting that this is what the good people of Hitler's Germany must have felt like.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 01, 2020, 05:48:09 pm
Somebody turned on OAN in the doctor’s lounge this morning. I was kinda shocked.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 01, 2020, 05:54:17 pm
Pretty over the top and to the right and over the top?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on December 01, 2020, 07:02:53 pm
Im a proud Christian and Tico's right about a lot of the so called "Christians" around these parts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 01, 2020, 07:08:24 pm
In a perverse way, this is the healthiest I have seen this country.  All of these fears and prejudices have been there for decades but never have they been revealed so starkly as now.  Maybe this is an opportunity for reconciliation and understanding of what we have been as a nation and what we can be. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on December 01, 2020, 07:54:20 pm
On the one hand, I believe there was a degree of hysteria here about the potential of Trump being able to essentially orchestrate a coup (particularly from Deeg). Having lived in Northern Virginia, I came to have a lot of respect for the military people I got to know and was never seriously concerned about military complicity in any attempt by Trump to avoid being replaced.

But I am not entirely reassured by the fact that nearly all of the Republicans directly involved in counting and certifying votes did the right thing. The fact that this has been seen as courage on their part only underscores the desperate state of our democracy.

The failure of Senate and House Republicans (and the RNC) to condemn Trump's utterly astonishing efforts to overturn the results of the election has been unforgivably undemocratic and for the most part cowardly. To the extent that this near treasonous complicity as the result of fear of losing the support of Trump's cult (which was not the case with all of them), it is small comfort. Nor is the fact that Attorney General Barr finally found as aspect of Trump's authoritarian antics a bridge too far. And it was not only DC Republicans who aided and abetted Trump's attempts by either direct support or silence. There were state legislators who were fully prepared to overturn the voters by legislative action. Fortunately they were in a minority.

It's not even certain how this would have turned out if the election had been a truly close one. The fact that Biden beat Trump by over 6 million votes and 4% nationally, and that Biden won handily in enough states to assure him of 270 electoral votes may have saved us from much more skullduggery by Republican office holders.

As so many Republicans leaders have shown a willingness to hold on to power at any cost, including but not limited to aggressive voter suppression and gerrymandering it makes it increasingly difficult for Democrats to compete fairly in elections, I fear for our democracy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 01, 2020, 08:06:31 pm
The video in this article is a must watch.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/georgia-official-trump-election/2020/12/01/f1d5c962-3427-11eb-b59c-adb7153d10c2_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on December 01, 2020, 08:15:56 pm
The fact that Gen. Milley felt it was necessary to make a speech effectively saying "we will not help engineer a coup" indicates that he (unlike some around here) took the threat very seriously.  And thank goodness he did.

The reason our democracy seems likely to (barely) survive this election cycle is mainly down to two things.  One, enough people in positions of authority didn't think like Reb and actually addressed the clear and present danger.  And two, in the end the election wasn't that close.  Biden is already, in fact, farther ahead than Obama was in 2012 in the popular vote.

Now, imagine if the election were as close as 2016, a few thousand votes in enough states to swing the EC.  Even better, imagine if that were true and the reverse scenario existed - Trump won the popular vote and Biden the electoral college.  If you still believe the Rs would have been unsuccessful in stealing the election you're absolutely kidding yourself.  The fact is, an overwhelming majority of elected R officials are refusing to recognize the results even now, in an election that's not very close.

The next time, the ones trying to establish totalitarian rule in defiance of the voters might not be so incompetent.  The few R officials like Raffensberger who were willing to do the right thing might not be (especially if the results are close enough to give them cover).  To look at this cycle and conclude that it was silly to be worried is a laughably bad take.  The lesson is that we've seemingly dodged a bullet by the skin of our teeth, and might not be so lucky next time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 01, 2020, 10:16:53 pm
I think the reason General Milley spoke out was because of all the hairbrained idiocy he was hearing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 01, 2020, 11:00:08 pm
Tico- Shame on you. What you just did in addressing my post is carve out the entire context of your previous remarks.

So, you previously posited the real possibility that some “senior level military officials” would find it their “ultimate patriotic duty” to “save the republic” for Trump. The weasel words “full-blown” [coup] don’t help you because it doesn’t take the entire military to cause havoc if senior military are intent on causing trouble.

What you posted is shameful and shows supreme ignorance about our senior military’s commitment to constitutional principles. That is a bedrock of our democratic republic and you showed disdain for that. That’s the context for your “coup” remarks and you know it.

Further, you also showed disdain toward the election process by pushing the notion there might be no “line” Rs are unwilling to cross for Trump in overturning the actual vote count. Of course, just the opposite happened as Rs joined Ds in taking pride in their election systems and refuting the ridiculous allegations of fraud, time and time again. You seemed to think that if you work in government, you don’t respect your constitutional responsibilities if you’re a R. That is nonsense for the vast majority of government employees having real, everyday responsibilities, regardless of political affiliation. That includes the judiciary too.

What you are confused about is linking those irresponsible Rs at the top of the food chain (mostly in DC)—who obsess about raising money for their re-election, fear the Trump base for their own personal reasons, and have their staffs do most of the day-to-day work antway—with the real work of government performed by countless hard-working folks who take their jobs seriously no matter their party affiliation.

Anyone involved directly in an election process takes great pride in their work, as do judges who are asked to set aside votes based on zero or shoddy evidence. Perhaps you don’t know that.

So, instead of attacking me in your previous post, consider taking responsibility for your previous foolish and erroneous remarks.

Reb, out of nowhere you felt the need to call me out in a patronizing, inaccurate I-told-you-so post.

In response, I literally quoted myself. Then I quoted you. And then I turned your condescending final sentence back at you. If you didn't like it, know the dagger was your own.

I then posted an article from the NYT.

I then posted about my experience in Evangelical Christian and rural communities.

Your reply: "Shame on you" "Weasel words" "Shameful" "Supreme ignorance" "Confused" "Disdain[ful]" "Foolish" "Erroneous"

This is how you're going to talk about me in a post where you whine about my "attacks?" Sure thing, buddy. You just herniated a disc for all your effort to insult me at every chance. Please spare me your self-righteous pearl-clutching about my "attacks."

Reb, as is par for the course with you, you presume to know my own beliefs and opinions better than I do myself. Peak arrogance, and peak Reb. You mis-quote and misrepresent me. You then judge me for your mistaken interpretations, and finally claim that I am taking myself out of context when I simply quote myself in an attempt to set the record straight.

This didn't have to be ugly, but here we are, and I'm done. I don't have time for your bullshit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2020, 11:12:08 pm
First, let’s get the red herrings out of the way that Deeg likes to drop so as to obfuscate.

Trump is a threat to democracy. Nobody in this discussion said otherwise. When the President is a threat to democracy, it’s serious business.

The issue discussed was whether there was some kind of threat of a military coup in support of Trump, partial or “full-blown.” That was nonsense when it was posted and it’s still nonsense. And, it’s irresponsible too.

Also discussed was whether Rs involved in the election process were a threat to flip a result in which the D got 306 electoral votes and won by more than 6 M votes, or that the courts would be complicit in that endeavor. No chance that was going to happen in the absence of actual evidence. Government employees do their jobs and don’t participate in overthrowing election results. The only question was whether there was any such evidence and it was quickly evident there was not.

Rs in the U.S. Senate and House were predictably silent and spineless about Trump’s post-election conduct—-just like they’ve been for 4 years. But, they are powerless as to how state election officials process elections. If you didn’t know that beforehand, now you do.

General Miley was keenly aware of Trump’s predilections, as he already was embarrassed by Trump at St. Johns Church near Lafayette Square and aware that folks like Deeg were talking crazy stuff about coups. That’s why he said what he said as a reminder of the role of the military in our democracy. Sometimes folks need reminders.

Another reminder: the folks who wrote the Constitution were very much aware that democracy in the future was not a sure thing. Indeed, much of the Constitution addresses that concern. But, it’s just a document and people have to enforce it. Another 4 years of Trump would have posed a more grave danger. There will be other threats as time passes.

But, to think that our democratic systems might not hold after a decisive election result based on the ravings of Trump after just 4 years in office—-are you kidding me???  No chance.

If you want to change the facts: a duly re-elected Trump showing that crime pays, and four MORE Trump years and a Trump-like successor candidate down the road in a 2000 Bush/Gore Florida-like situation and 557 vote difference, and four more years of attacks on a free press.....well, we can talk—then—about the future of democracy.

But, those are NOT the facts under discussion and those who suggested military coups and corrupt election officials based on the ACTUAL post-election facts now should be apologetic and own up. That both Deeg and Tico instead choose to attack me, rather than fess up, is telling.

There will always be a need for vigilance. But, espousing crazy, looney theories is NOT vigilance. It’s just what Trump wants you to do, as it feeds into his narrative that democratic institutions are unreliable and corrupted. YOU give sustenance to that with crazy talk about coups and corrupt reversal of elections and the like. So, stop it.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2020, 11:22:28 pm
Tico- ITYS is not appropriate here for baseball predictions and the like. But, this thread is different because it’s not about fun and games.

You quoted snippets of previous posts and I quoted fully what you said in context. So, as you can’t defend what you said on the merits—-you have yet to explain what you say you meant—you instead attack me for your accumulated grievances.

I hoped for more. Hope springs eternal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 01, 2020, 11:27:01 pm
tico, my friend, I agree with most of Reb's points and you know I'm your friend and Reb and I aren't besties.  Yes, living in a rural environment, fundamentalist Christians easily get sucked into the Trumper rhetoric, but both Reb and I have been trying to reassure people that our political system works and that a lot of the lunatic fringes conspiracy theories and projections of Armageddon.   Like you I have Christian values and I am stunned and ashamed of how many good Christian people got sucked into being Trumpers.  That's why I kept posting that this is what the good people of Hitler's Germany must have felt like.


Curt, we are friends. And because of that I'll tell you it's painful to see you co-sign on the bullshit Reb is flinging my way.

I don't care about our differences of opinion. That's the whole point of a message board, for crying out loud.

But I expect more from our friendship than for you to agree with Reb's belittling, condescending insults.

I'm not talking about "lunatic" "fringe" "conspiracy theories". I'm not "projecting Armageddon." How many times do I have to say I don't think there's going to be a coup? How many times do I have to say I'm concerned about Trump's inflaming of his explosive base, and the potential for violence therein?

I'm concerned because people I love have literally been terrorized by Trumpers. I'm concerned because I have to actively consider the possibility that I'm putting my children in harm's way when attending certain community events. I'm concerned because, yes, "this is what the good people of Hitler's Germany must have felt like." I'm concerned because no, I don't think this is a shining example of what our "political system working" looks like. Instead, I think we've seen flaws. I'm concerned because individuals who I used share communion with are now hooked on crazed prophecies proclaiming Trump's victory and warning the faithful to prepare for civil war. I'm concerned because it doesn't take many *actual* lunatics to create a world of heartache. I'm concerned because our President continues to insist the election was stolen from him, and continues to fan the flames of this violent insanity.

And that's all I've ever said. I'm concerned about these things. I've wondered what could happen. I've made no prognostications or predictions. I've just asked a few questions out loud.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 01, 2020, 11:32:23 pm
Reb, you continue to fail basic reading comprehension:

I'm. Done.

I AM DONE



I



AM



DONE
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2020, 11:42:57 pm
You already said you were done...and then you posted again, so......

HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL (again).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 02, 2020, 12:41:09 am
Biden’s lead in the popular vote is now almost 7 million and the % spread is 4.4%, as more votes coming in today from CA, NY, and other states.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on December 02, 2020, 02:21:43 am
I have to say, that gong back and re-reading these posts, I don't blame tico for being upset about the way Reb went after him. Reb seems to have conflated tico's position with Deeg's. I see the fears they expressed as being very, very different. And I suspect that the settings in which tico and Reb live significantly colors their views about just how serious things have become.


I never believed there was a serious possibility of military support for a coup by Trump, and I did not interpret tico to think othewise - in fact he said just the opposite. Nor did he suggest that the people actuallly conducting the election would be complicit. Seeems to me that he directed his fears toward the behavior or Republicans and Trump supporters. The behavior of Republican Senators and House members, and of some state legislators in no way proved him wrong for his fears. And obviously he was right about a huge percentage of Trump's supporters, whose views and behavior were emboldened by Republican leaders, not just Trump.


Whatever disagreements there may have been between the tico and Reb did not warrant the intensity or personal nature of Reb's criticism, in my opinion.


And Reb, the tenor of you criticism certainly gave the impression that you do not share the deep fear that many very level headed, knowledgeable Americans, including members of Congress, members of the press and some Republicans have about the state of our democracy at this time, based on not only Trump's behavior but that of a huge swath of the Republican Party, including it's elected officials. Your failure to acknowledge what I believe to be the legitimate fears tico expressed is disappointing to me. The fact that our institutions did not fracture is a relief, but not any final resoution given the loonacy that taken hold within the Republican Party and a very large segment of our population.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 02, 2020, 03:37:08 am
Ron- I don't see it that way.

I view Deeg and Tico's posts after the election as expressing the same kind of hysterical fears that play into the hands of Trump about our democratic institutions.  I said so at the time of the original posts 

This is what Tico said:  "who is to say there aren't senior level military officials who believe Trump's lies and see it as their ultimate patriotic duty to 'save the republic' by standing up to the D attempt to 'steal the election'."  

Patriotic duty to stand up for Trump and save the republic from Dems trying to steal the election?  What do you think that means, if not some kind of military action pertaining to the election? 

As I repeatedly also noted, Tico said he was not projecting a "full blown" {his words--whatever that means} coup but this is the kind of thing that Trump himself does all the time:  says he "heard this" or "not saying saying so and so but what about this so-and-so terrible thing." We know what is being said. The rest is cover. The only difference between Deeg and Tico here is that Deeg, as always, uses his customary sledge hammer approach and Tico used a more modest hardware tool to say the same thing. You may notice that Tico has never said how the above-quoted remarks are different than a "full-blown" coup.  Maybe you can.

I recognize that Tico is also concerned about Trump militia-type folks roaming around.  I never addressed that, ever, in any of my posts.  It's a totally separate concern and I choose not to post about it and it has nothing to do with anything I have said. I have no beef about such concerns.

I also have repeatedly called Trump a threat to democracy, a tyrant, an authoritarian.  To say I haven't acknowledged legitimate fears about what Trump is capable of  attempting to do is flat wrong.  You are losing the distinction between what Trump wants to do if he had his way and what he CAN do in the face of our democratic institutions.  I have repeatedly noted those opposing forces:  a free press, a strong opposition party, an independent judiciary.  How many times do I have to say that?

And, you don't think I have pointed out the lunacy surrounding the Trump base?  Seriously?  I have said to Deeg and Tico:  don't be like those crazies and stop playing playing into their lunatic hands. 

But, no,  I don't believe that most of the 74 million folks who voted for Trump---or however number of  "a large segment of our population" {your words} are loonies.  Many are R regular voters who vote R year after year after year.  Many are good-intentioned folks who have been fooled by the greatest charlatan in American political history.  As I have noted, you and I can be fooled in the right circumstances by a skilled charlatan, so don't think you're immune.  Some are whites worried about being in the minority racially and Trump is a master of stroking their fears.  Some actually believe that Trump did a great job with the economy and overlook his "personal style."  (See Maureen Dowd's brother column in the Times).  It's a mixed group and many were the base of the FDR coalition for decades and then Ds like the Clintons forgot about them and let them leave.  And, yes, elitism of much of the left toward the working class is a problem. Folks don't like to be looked down upon by their self-proclaimed "betters." 

I wonder and kind of fear that you may be painting too many of these folks with a broad brush as threats to democracy because they support Trump.  Those who feel that way about these folks are part of the problem that you complain about, seems to me.  I genuinely believe that Biden does NOT view these folks that way, so I have some hope going forward.  If you look down at a substantial portion of 74 million Americans as loonies ( not saying that you do, but maybe), then you are contributing to the chaos of today. 

Finally, as to the R senators and House members and governors--I have repeatedly called most of them sycophants here.  But, they have nothing to do with counting votes after an election.  Yes, it would be much better if more stood up for democratic principles but their conduct has very little to do with military coups or to what state election officials will do.  Frankly, it is passé here in Washington to drone on about these folks. This has been going on for four years.  Not worth the bother. We know what to expect from them.  Nothing useful. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on December 02, 2020, 11:47:37 am
Reb - For whatever reason, we are talking past each other here and I am not interested in a prolonged exchange on the subject. But I do feel the need to answer your response to my post.

I believe you are being unfair in how you are interpreting and characterizing tico’s earlier comments. He expressed fear that there were those in the military who could be sympathetic to Trumps attempts to overturn the results of the election. It's worth noting that there have been very high ranking military officials in the relatively recent past who were capable of such actions, specifically Curtis Lemay and Edwin Walker. More recently, the name Michael Flynn comes to mind. Tico never suggested they would carry the day. While I seriously doubt there are any such guys in the military leadership today, it's not impossible and I don't find a fear of that as being looney.

Equating tico’s characterization to “the kind of thing that Trump himself does all the time” may be a fine debating tactic, but it’s unfair and inaccurate. When you do something like that, how on earth do you expect the recipient to react? If you are trying to convince someone of your point of view, that is not the way to do it.

I get that your focus is on our institutions: the press, the judiciary the opposition party and the bureaucracy that manages the election process.  While I have plenty of criticism of how the press has allowed Trump to use them in the last 4+ years, and I am concerned about the number and type of unqualified and deeply ideological judges appointed by Trump, it is certainly true that when the s h i t  really hit the fan after the election, those institutions stepped up. And there is ample evidence that the people counting and certifying the votes did their jobs admirably - in spite of the pressures some were under.

I appreciate the fact that nearly all of the people involved in counting and certifying the votes were honorable in their actions. But given the lunacy that has taken place in some state and local Republican Parties, it wasn’t unreasonable to be uncertain that would be the case. And, as you know, there were exceptions among those charged with certification, in both Michigan and Pennsylvania, and maybe Arizona as well. Even so, I don’t recall tico specifically suggesting that those folks would participate in a coup.

I do not believe it was unreasonable to be unsure the process would work as smoothly as it has going into election day, given the environment in which we find ourselves.

Trump has increasingly trampled long cherished norms without any pushback from the Republican Party, clearly emboldened by Republican failure to hold him accountable in the impeachment process. McConnell refused to allow consideration of a Supreme Court nominee simply because he could, with no pushback from the Republican Party. Outrageously unqualified, and in some cases looney nominees to the judiciary have been approved as judges, in most cases without any Republican pushback. The same with cabinet appointments. Only one Republican Senator voted to convict Trump of a single count in the impeachment process. Under McConnell, the Senate has utterly failed to provide the guardrails upon which our democracy depends. That institutional framework has not held. It is understandable that some would worry that Trump would be able to continue to push through normal institutional restraints. You suggest that once Biden is president, “there will be the usual and expected partisan fights.” I wish. That is not what we have seen in either the Senate or the House in recent years, including before Trump. What we have seen is obstructionism, denial of scientific evidence, and deranged conspiracy theories unparalleled in my lifetime. I expect more of the same, which will further erode the political environment in which our democracy exists. I hope I’m wrong.

Tico complained that you presumed to know his beliefs and thoughts, and I can relate to that. You said: “And, you don't think I have pointed out the lunacy surrounding the Trump base?  Seriously?  I have said to Deeg and Tico:  don't be like those crazies and stop playing playing into their lunatic hands.”  Can you please point out where I said anything of that sort?

You also said: “I wonder and kind of fear that you may be painting too many of these folks with a broad brush as threats to democracy because they support Trump. Those who feel that way about these folks are part of the problem that you complain about, seems to me.”

You are way to quick to reach that sort of conclusion or even suspicion about my views toward Trump supporters. And you did this in spite of the fact that you know me well enough that you should know better. As it happens, I have a complex view of the 70+ million who voted for him.  A very substantial portion of his support does come from those who have adopted him as their cult leader. There is ample evidence from multiple polls in recent years that at least 30%, and probably a higher percentage of Americans harbor deeply authoritarian, racist and xenophobic views. Trump did not create that reality, but he has brought it out into the open, emboldened it and, to some degree, normalized it. The result is a monster has been created that today's Republican leadership is afraid to offend.

Beyond that core group, of course, Trump manipulated a lot of well meaning, decent people. There are millions of people who simply feel they are being left behind in our changing economy and they are desperately in search of someone to be their champion. That they see Trump as that person is bizarre, but it is what it is. Some have done better in an economic recovery begun in the Obama years and attribute that success to Trump. That’s ignorance but it isn’t vile. Many Trump supporters see the society in which were brought up disappearing before their eyes – not only through economic uncertainty, but with minorities, immigrants, gays and women becoming increasingly visible in mainstream media. And they are having trouble adjusting to this new reality. Not all of those people are inherently bigoted. I do not blame them. I blame the Republican leadership who consciously exploit and manipulate their insecurity and fear.

Yeah, the Dems need to do a better job of understanding and reaching out to that group. Sherrod Brown is an example of someone who seems good at doing that. Ironically, Al Franken did that well after his first election in Minnesota. That is a different subject though.

But in Nazi Germany, there were plenty of people who were manipulated in supporting actions they would not have normally supported. That didn't make the result any more benign. I don’t think Democracies collapse in a single moment. They are eroded and I believe ours is being seriously eroded. This is the context in which reasonable people can develop and express fears of elections being stolen. In such an environment, I believe you should be way more understanding of the type of fears expressed by tico.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on December 02, 2020, 12:23:46 pm
Speaking of General Michael Flynn (a kook who until relatively recently held a high position in the military):

Josh Marshall
@joshtpm
Here’s from the manifesto Gen Flynn tweeted and endorsed, calls on Trump to declare martial law and suspend the constitution, then have the military hold a new election.

https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1334001013397786626/photo/1



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 02, 2020, 01:03:37 pm
Flynn is the scariest of the bunch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 02, 2020, 02:27:47 pm
Ron- There is zero threat to our institutions from the military. ZERO. Flynn was ousted from active military duty almost a decade ago and has morphed into a Giuliani-type figure. Stuff like that happens with human beings sometimes. When he became unhinged, he had no power within the military. He was a civilian. Once respectable and then crazy. Edwin Walker and Curtis Lemay was over six decades ago and lost credibility and pushed out. That is evidence of institutions holding, not of the dangers of a military coup. You have it backwards. Those folks are parodies, as LeMay was parodied in Strangelove.

You are soft-selling Tico’s actual words on this subject because it seems you have similar sentiments on the subject. That’s not a value judgment on you or him (or Deeg) but how I see the merits of your argument. Yeah, I think talking military coup, even as not “full-blown”, is serious business, kind of a shameful discourse, and ought to stop because it contributes to undermining democratic institutions.

This attitude kind of reminds me of what happened here when the glow of the 2016 WS win wore off. Back to gloom and doom.

Hey, Biden won, Trump lost, the good guys won, the arguments about fraud in the election are discredited. Get ready for a 1/20 inauguration of the new guy. Widespread riots and violence on the streets post-election? Hasn’t happened.

Yes, be vigilant, always, and the threats to democracy never go away altogether. But, parallels to Nazi Germany? Good grief, get a hold on.

I have to tell you, frankly, I resent anyone making that parallel to what happened in Nazi Germany. Study that, yes, as a historical matter but it trivializes the Holocaust and the havoc pushed on to the world to compare that to anything happening here today, even to put in the same sentence of a post on a baseball board. I had much of my family ancestors wiped out by those murderers and how it happened in the run-up to Nazism is not remotely parallel to today, especially with Trump defeated. Use a different example if you must.

Don’t downplay the strength of our democratic core or make really poor historical parallels. And, it’s worth calling out hysterical and deeply exaggerated comments on all sides of the political spectrum, including those coming from the left.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on December 02, 2020, 02:50:04 pm
Reb - I am not downplaying the strength of our "democratic core." I have spent my life working in support of our democratic ideals and institutions. But those ideals and institutions are not immune to attack and many serious minded people believe they are being eroded by both what occurred before and after the election.

I was trying to explain the reasons why reasonable people could have what seem to you to be irrational fears. But you seem to have no interest in understanding what underlies the specific words being expressed. Sometimes you seem to get into a debate mode in which you really do not even try to understand what others are trying to say. Instead, you interpret and characterize what is said in a way that supports your argument and places the other person in a position in which they do not belong.

I am sorry you were offended by my reference to Nazi Germany, but to suggest that I was trivializing the Holocaust is a cheap shot and absurd.  Of course we are not in the same place as Nazi Germany under Hitler. But it took a while to get there, and there are parallels with the early stages that led to that period. Your mischaracterization of what I said illustrates the point I am making here.  I was trying to have a discussion in which people listen to one other with an open mind, sincerely attempting to understand what the other person means, however inartfully those views are expressed. You prefer to debate, making points that support your position and undermine your opponent's position. I have no interest in participating in a debate with you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 02, 2020, 03:24:27 pm
Ron- I also wanted to address your comments on the Trump core that concern you—-the ones that Trump accurately described as committed to him even if he shot somebody dead on Fifth Avenue.

Yeah, I’m guessing too it’s about a 1/3 of his overall support. So, that’s 1/3 of 47% of the voters. 15-16% of voting Americans.

Do you think there is any point in American history in the last 150 years when there wasn’t at least a 15-16% core of folks who had racist or undemocratic notions?

That has always been around (as you’ve noted) and the advent of social media doesn’t make them any more or less dangerous. It just means we hear about it more. It’s everywhere. Yes, it allows this core to organize better but it also allows the small d democrats to organize better. Sunlight is what despots don’t want. This core has no real influence on our military. There is no full-blown, half-blown, quarter-blown military coup in the works.

As I’ve said many rimes, Trump is a genius at playing to those fears. He has been defeated.

The sycophantic posture of so many elected Rs in their silence is a symptom of hyper-partisan politics and not about anti-democratic beliefs. In the Senate and House, you don’t actually have to do anything if you don’t want to. There have been actually medically early-onset demented U.S. Senators in office and the staffs do all the work.  So, silence is the default position.

But When you are administering an election process, as the states have been doing, you have to actually do stuff. Active stuff. When that occurred, you saw what happened: Rs did their duty and certified votes and Trump appointed judges  threw out no-merit cases.

Don’t get bogged down with the silent sycophants. They are marginally important on this matter, if at all. Their mischief is blocking legislation—-a whole other matter entirely.

Finally, there is voter disenfranchisement generally—-the kind of thing that Rs learned from southern democrats years ago and gerrymandering—-the kind of thing first mastered by Democrats in California decades ago. It’s an institutional problem by those in power seeking an advantage. Yeah, democracy isn’t perfect.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on December 02, 2020, 04:48:50 pm
Reading Reb’s posts these days it’s like having Jes back again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 02, 2020, 07:28:50 pm
https://www.rollcall.com/2020/12/02/iowa-democrat-rita-hart-to-appeal-2nd-district-results-to-house/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on December 02, 2020, 07:36:26 pm
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/michael-flynn-suspend-constitution-martial-law-trump-reelection-b1765467.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 02, 2020, 09:09:10 pm
Reading Reb’s posts these days it’s like having Jes back again.

Sharma is reporting that Deeg has been non-tendered.

Personally, I would have offered him a split contract.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 02, 2020, 10:40:19 pm
Reb, I made several references to Nazi Germany and Hitler but within the context of the atmosphere Hitler created and the rhetoric people sucked up. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 03, 2020, 08:44:32 am
(https://uclabruins.com/images/2020/12/2/RIP_Rafer_Johnson2_Twitter.jpg?width=720&quality=80&format=jpg)


Many of us noted the death of Olympic great Rafer Johnson on Wednesday.  I immediately thought of a version of What the World Needs Now Is Love” that includes a reference to him.

If you have never heard this song, please give it a listen.   If you’ve heard it before, you will want to hear it again, all six minutes of it.  It's message applies now more than ever.

https://youtu.be/1uqNLnEzDLA
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 03, 2020, 08:53:11 am
Great article about him.

https://joeposnanski.substack.com/p/rafer-johnson-and-the-power-of-10?r=1jukj&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=copy
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on December 03, 2020, 09:14:39 am
Dolchstoßlegende.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on December 03, 2020, 09:47:31 am
If all individuals are susceptible to a conman, that means that ALL institutions are also susceptible. The changes occurring at the civilian level at DOD are not benign. What those changes are leading to should be a cause of concern. If you disagree, perhaps you need to consider your own blinders? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on December 03, 2020, 11:14:42 am
Here is Paul Krugman on "the usual and expected partisan fights" Reb assured us will occur once Biden is President.  Emphasis mine.


How Will Biden Deal With Republican Sabotage?[/i][/b][/font]
He needs to make the G.O.P. pay a price for obstruction.
By Paul Krugman
Nov. 30, 2020
When Joe Biden is inaugurated, he will immediately be confronted with an unprecedented challenge — and I don’t mean the pandemic, although Covid-19 will almost surely be killing thousands of Americans every day. I mean, instead, that he’ll be the first modern U.S. president trying to govern in the face of an opposition that refuses to accept his legitimacy. And no, Democrats never said Donald Trump was illegitimate, just that he was incompetent and dangerous.
It goes without saying that Donald Trump, whose conspiracy theories are getting wilder and wilder, will never concede, and that millions of his followers will always believe — or at least say they believe — that the election was stolen.
Most Republicans in Congress certainly know this is a lie, although even on Capitol Hill there are a lot more crazy than we’d like to imagine. But it doesn’t matter; they still won’t accept that Biden has any legitimacy, even though he won the popular vote by a large margin.
And this won’t simply be because they fear a backlash from the base if they admit that Trump lost fair and square. At a fundamental level — and completely separate from the Trump factor — today’s G.O.P. doesn’t believe that Democrats ever have the right to govern, no matter how many votes they receive.
After all, in recent years we’ve seen what happens when a state with a Republican legislature elects a Democratic governor: Legislators quickly try to strip away the governor’s powers. So does anyone doubt that Republicans will do all they can to hobble and sabotage Biden’s presidency?
The only real questions are how much harm the G.O.P. can do, and how Biden will respond.
The answer to the first question depends a lot on what happens in the Jan. 5 Georgia Senate runoffs. If Democrats win both seats, they’ll have effective though narrow control of both houses of Congress. If they don’t, Mitch McConnell will have enormous powers of obstruction — and anyone who doubts that he’ll use those powers to undermine Biden at every turn is living in a fantasy world.
But how much damage would obstructionism inflict? In terms of economic policy — which is all I’ll talk about in this column — the near future can be divided into two eras, pre- and post-vaccine (or more accurately, after wide dissemination of a vaccine).
For the next few months, as the pandemic continues to run wild, tens of millions of Americans will be in desperate straits unless the federal government steps up to help. Unfortunately, Republicans may be in a position to block this help.
The good news about the very near future, such as it is, is that Americans will probably (and correctly) blame Donald Trump, not Joe Biden, for the misery they’re experiencing — and this very fact may make Republicans willing to cough up at least some money.
What about the post-vaccine economy? Here again there’s potentially some good news: Once a vaccine becomes widely available, we’ll probably see a spontaneous economic recovery, one that won’t depend on Republican cooperation. And there will also be a vast national sense of relief.
So Biden might do OK for a while even in the face of scorched-earth Republican opposition. But we can’t be sure of that. Republicans might refuse to confirm anyone for key economic positions. There’s always the possibility of another financial crisis — and outgoing Trump officials have been systematically undermining the incoming administration’s ability to deal with such a crisis if it happens. And America desperately needs action on issues from infrastructure, to climate change, to tax enforcement that won’t happen if Republicans retain blocking power.
So what can Biden do?
First, he needs to start talking about immediate policy actions to help ordinary Americans, if only to make it clear to Georgia voters how much damage will be done if they don’t elect Democrats to those two Senate seats.
If Democrats don’t get those seats, Biden will need to use executive action to accomplish as much as possible despite Republican obstruction — although I worry that the Trump-stacked Supreme Court will try to block him when he does.
Finally, although Biden is still talking in a comforting way about unity and reaching across the aisle, at some point he’ll need to stop reassuring us that he’s nothing like Trump and start making Republicans pay a political price for their attempts to prevent him from governing.
Now, I don’t mean that he should sound like Trump, demanding retribution against his enemies — although the Justice Department should be allowed to do its job and prosecute whatever Trump-era crimes it finds.
No, what Biden needs to do is what Harry Truman did in 1948, when he built political support by running against “do-nothing” Republicans. And he’ll have a better case than Truman ever did, because today’s Republicans are infinitely more corrupt and less patriotic than the Republicans Truman faced.
The results of this year’s election, with a solid Biden win but Republicans doing well down-ballot, tells us that American voters don’t fully understand what the modern G.O.P. is really about. Biden needs to get that point across, and make Republicans pay for the sabotage we all know is coming.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on December 03, 2020, 11:42:03 am
It is my hope that every frivolous lawsuit that has been filed on behalf of President Clown is returned and matched in kind with indictments by the federal government and SDNY on January 20, 2021 at 12:01pm. This dude only knows the language of lawsuit. Time to speak his language.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 03, 2020, 11:46:18 pm
(https://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_e183e767-bdc2-49f6-a2b8-1bd3ae5963cd.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=300)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 06, 2020, 03:37:16 pm
Rudy Giuliani has COVID. He was at a Georgia Senate hearing with no mask on Thursday, so there's a good chance he spread it to some other people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 06, 2020, 03:56:01 pm
Rudy Giuliani has COVID. He was at a Georgia Senate hearing with no mask on Thursday, so there's a good chance he spread it to some other people.
Rudy also held "hearings" in Michigan and Arizona last week.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 06, 2020, 05:53:47 pm
"Rudy" was also on Saturday Night Live.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on December 06, 2020, 06:41:50 pm
Rudy Giuliani has COVID. He was at a Georgia Senate hearing with no mask on Thursday, so there's a good chance he spread it to some other people.

How in the world did it take this long?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 07, 2020, 02:11:29 pm
Sounds like my clinic will be getting the COVID vaccine next week through the public health department.  While I'd really like to see some published data first, the situation has gotten bad enough around here that I'm just going to go ahead and do it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 07, 2020, 02:17:44 pm
So we should head to Omaha?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 07, 2020, 04:04:54 pm
Only if you want to get COVID.  I won't have any COVID-19 vaccines for months if at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 07, 2020, 04:32:00 pm
Bummer.  I had just gassed up the car.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on December 07, 2020, 06:16:52 pm
Sounds like my clinic will be getting the COVID vaccine next week through the public health department.  While I'd really like to see some published data first, the situation has gotten bad enough around here that I'm just going to go ahead and do it.

Lying RINO. pushing a bs vaccine to the Scamdemic!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on December 07, 2020, 06:59:26 pm
I'd take the vaccine.

I dont know many others who would.

I read something like 90% of the U.S. would get it before I would though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 07, 2020, 07:57:25 pm
I'd take the vaccine.

I dont know many others who would.

I read something like 90% of the U.S. would get it before I would though.
. There's an IQ cutoff?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 07, 2020, 11:19:16 pm
Another interesting difference between American and British terminology

When you get the vaccine here, you get a "shot".  In the UK, you get a "jab".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 08, 2020, 11:09:28 am
Trump's other lawyer Jenna Ellis also has COVID now. Not a surprise considering she had been working so closely with Giuliani.

We're averaging more than 200,000 new cases a day now, more than double what we had just a month ago. If deaths continue to trail new cases like they are now, that means we could see 4,000-5,000 deaths per day by early January.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 08, 2020, 11:31:16 am

A tweet from the official Arizona Republican Party Twitter account from overnight:


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EouDC3fXIAEGm-W?format=jpg&name=small)


They originally followed this up by tweeting a video from one of the Rambo movies, but that was later deleted. So the official Arizona GOP account is unambiguously suggesting that violence may be appropriate to address fair election results they don't like.


When does this kind of conduct become criminal? This is beyond irresponsible, and whoever manages their social media should be fired immediately.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on December 09, 2020, 05:18:46 pm
Par for the course with the GOP. Remember when Gabriel Giffords district was in a political ad with crosshairs? It’s difficult to see how someone doesn’t get killed over this. As a reasonable person you would expect that after the Michigan governor had a plot to kidnap and assassinate her, people would be momentarily cautious with their language; we are no longer dealing with reasonable people. We are now in the “marketplace of fantasy.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2020, 08:48:43 pm
https://www.fda.gov/media/144246/download

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 10, 2020, 09:58:35 pm
Good to see the data published.  On what basis did 4 committee members vote to recommend not approving the EUA?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2020, 10:10:02 pm
I believe it was because the EUA age range started at 16. The studies with children are just starting and not complete. I saw their was some concern about the 2 allergic reactions in Britain as well.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 11, 2020, 09:52:05 am
I think that cartoon is a little unfair.  The anti-vaxers, Q and social media distortions are all really close on a venn diagram.  The people who mistrust the vaccine for what ever reason will start taking it the more they start to see the benefits and see others doing it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 12, 2020, 07:58:36 am
Blue, I've already had Covid and hav tested positive for anti-bodies. Will they suggest that people in my category take the vaccine anyway?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2020, 08:51:49 am
Yes, because we don’t know how long your immunity will last.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on December 12, 2020, 03:26:02 pm
Glad your ok Robb
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on December 12, 2020, 10:10:09 pm
Thanks Robert. It wasn't fun but we came through fine. I hope everyone stays away from it.  I've had a few clients hospitalized with it. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 14, 2020, 04:44:38 pm
Bill Barr resigns minutes after Biden technically clinches the election in the Electoral College.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 14, 2020, 08:15:47 pm
Bill Barr resigns minutes after Biden technically clinches the election in the Electoral College.

He probably wants nothing to do with the mess Trump is about to make with the pardons.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 15, 2020, 07:14:40 pm
I've gotten a lot of mail from David Perdue since September, and it's been really noticeable how much his strategy has changed from the general election to the runoff. In the general, he was clearly appealing to the xenophobic voters--most of the mail I received suggested that Ossoff supported Islamic terrorists because he had worked with Al Jazeera in the past. But over the last couple of weeks, all the mail I have received has nothing but generic Republican talking points...you could remove his picture and replace it with any Republican in the Senate from Ted Cruz to Mitt Romney and it would make sense. He's looking to appeal to centrists and moderates now.

I don't know what that means, though. Does it signal that the campaign doesn't expect as many nationalist Trump voters to come out so he needs to reach out to more establishment voters to win? Or does he think the Trumpers are already in the bank so he doesn't need to worry about them? Or some combination of both?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 15, 2020, 07:20:07 pm
Maybe you’re on a moderate mailing list, and there’s another MAGA mailing list you’re not on.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 15, 2020, 07:29:48 pm
Well I definitely got all the MAGA mail for the general election. I'm not sure why they'd change the mailing list now.

In any case, David Perdue has wasted a lot of money on me. I think I've gotten at least 5 pieces of mail from him/associated PACs every week since early September (with a short break just after the election), and there was never a chance that I was voting for him. It's especially wasteful now since my mail vote was accepted more than a week ago.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 15, 2020, 08:05:58 pm
Well I definitely got all the MAGA mail for the general election. I'm not sure why they'd change the mailing list now.

In any case, David Perdue has wasted a lot of money on me. I think I've gotten at least 5 pieces of mail from him/associated PACs every week since early September (with a short break just after the election), and there was never a chance that I was voting for him. It's especially wasteful now since my mail vote was accepted more than a week ago.

I would imagine he’s not pleased by the MAGA response to the November election and it worried they are not going to show because of no Trump and all the fraud crap.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 15, 2020, 09:06:26 pm
Usually it is a sign that they think the base isn’t enough to win and they have to move to the center.  He knows he has to get the suburban voters back. Just a guess but he’s running on x is a socialist and is going to be in AOC/Bernie’s best friend and I really reached across the isle to work.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on December 15, 2020, 11:49:36 pm
168K early voted on the first day, easily eclipsing numbers for the general (which itself saw turnout almost 20% up over 2016 in the middle of a pandemic).  If voters are experiencing the usual runoff detachment, no signs of it so far.

What with Moscow Mitch having finally conceded, it'll be interesting to see if Perdue and Loeffler follow suit.  They're really caught in a trap partially of their own making.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 16, 2020, 09:25:11 am
Donald Trump has turned on Mitch McConnell for acknowledging that Joe Biden won the election.

With friends like him who needs enemies?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/12/16/trump-mcconnell-election-biden-president/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on December 16, 2020, 01:06:40 pm
Donald Trump has turned on Mitch McConnell for acknowledging that Joe Biden won the election.

With friends like him who needs enemies?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/12/16/trump-mcconnell-election-biden-president/

January 20 can't get here fast enough.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 16, 2020, 01:56:03 pm
January 20 can't get here fast enough.
It's getting to the point where the cabinet should invoke the 25th amendment just to ensure that the CIC (clown in chief) does not do something catastrophic between now and then.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 16, 2020, 02:14:28 pm
It's getting to the point where the cabinet should invoke the 25th amendment just to ensure that the CIC (clown in chief) does not do something catastrophic between now and then.
. My son and I were sharing that thought the other day.   I'd like to see Biden pardon him with two provisions...that he never tweet again or run for any office.  Save us from this nightmare again.  Of course Trump couldn't stay off his Twitter account.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 16, 2020, 04:14:01 pm
(http://cdn-webimages.wimages.net/04e05c1a2a43334330110a2488f2b61b61b4eb-wm.jpg?v=3)

I intend to follow that sound advice.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 16, 2020, 06:08:36 pm
. My son and I were sharing that thought the other day.   I'd like to see Biden pardon him with two provisions...that he never tweet again or run for any office.  Save us from this nightmare again.  Of course Trump couldn't stay off his Twitter account.

Giving him a pardon just helps normalize this behavior.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 16, 2020, 06:10:23 pm
A pardon wouldn't last.  No way that dummy stays off Twitter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 16, 2020, 06:11:41 pm
I wonder why the word segregate came to mind?

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EpYWBaaW4AA52Ms.png?format=png&)

https://www.ajc.com/politics/politics-blog/the-jolt-even-when-its-over-presidential-election-still-not-over-for-georgia-gop/QNB4GYFYH5HKBK7VJ2PHMDKQFA/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 21, 2020, 01:42:18 pm
Newsmax is now walking back all the conspiracy theories they've supported since the election. Here's a clip from this morning:

https://twitter.com/existentialfish/status/1341078245878472706

Fox News did the same thing on several shows last week (all in response to a threat of lawsuit from Smartmatic). IMO, it's too late. Smartmatic should still sue Newsmax into bankruptcy to make an example. These propaganda outlets need to see some consequences for their harmful misinformation.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 21, 2020, 04:17:33 pm
Newsmax is now walking back all the conspiracy theories they've supported since the election. Here's a clip from this morning:

https://twitter.com/existentialfish/status/1341078245878472706

Fox News did the same thing on several shows last week (all in response to a threat of lawsuit from Smartmatic). IMO, it's too late. Smartmatic should still sue Newsmax into bankruptcy to make an example. These propaganda outlets need to see some consequences for their harmful misinformation.

OAN is not backing down. This aired today.

@AndrewFeinberg: Amazing. At the exact same time @NicolleDWallace and @benyt are talking about how @FoxNews and @newsmax have walked back the ridiculous and false claims hosts and guests have made re Smartmatic and Dominion Voting Systems, OAN doubles down with this segment. https://twitter.com/AndrewFeinberg/status/1341139430426505216/video/1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 21, 2020, 07:52:15 pm
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1239163

Seeing Senator Joni Ernst get a COVID vaccine before a large number of nurses and doctors is just a wee bit infuriating.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 21, 2020, 08:24:35 pm
She's only 50 years old.  Does she have risk factors that would justify moving her to the front of the line?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 21, 2020, 08:25:28 pm
I'm 71 years old and would feel guilty receiving the vaccine before first line workers and those over 75.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 21, 2020, 08:34:38 pm
Giving her the benefit of the doubt that she was asked to get a shot to encourage others to do so like the Pences and the Bidens have done.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 21, 2020, 08:35:10 pm
She's only 50 years old.  Does she have risk factors that would justify moving her to the front of the line?

Nope, perfectly healthy. She accused doctors of false inflating COVID numbers to get paid more earlier in the year and attended Trump’s maskless super spreader event in Omaha before the election. Zero doctors in western Iowa have gotten the vaccine because we don’t have the fridges for Pfizer’s vaccine. Hopefully we will start getting Moderna vaccine on Wednesday, assuming Operation Warp Speed hasn’t messed that up

She tweeted this out and I’m trying really hard not to tell her to **** herself.

2/3 I encourage all Iowans and Americans to do the same when their time comes. Thanks to #OperationWarpSpeed and the tireless work of Americans across the country, we are one step closer to defeating this virus.

Part of my frustration is having to try and chase down a vaccine for myself and the people that work in our clinic. I recently lost my first patient to COVID and have another one on a vent right now. It has been a frustrating few weeks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 21, 2020, 08:41:40 pm
My wife and I are 73.  Bad news: if we were in a nursing home we would be first in line for the vaccine.  The good news?  We aren't in a nursing home.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 21, 2020, 08:46:28 pm
My parents are 69 and my dad would be at a lot more risk if he got it. The good news is you should be 1c and should be eligible sometime in Feb or sooner if Oxford vaccine gets an EUA.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 22, 2020, 08:12:06 am
Those politicians who are eligible now due to age and/or risk factors should all get the vaccine and publicize it to encourage others to accept vaccination.  The remaining politicians should get in line with the rest of us.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 22, 2020, 07:43:58 pm
I think if you’re a politician who has publicly downplayed COVID in order to please Trump, you can put your money where your mouth is and get in the back of the vaccine line. You can still encourage vaccine adoption while not jumping to the front of a line of people you endangered by spreading disinformation. That’s simple accountability, IMO.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 22, 2020, 09:37:04 pm
Only people currently eligible are health care workers and nursing home residents. Apparently the House of Representatives and the senate are 1A, it must be nice to write the laws or something.

I’m completely fine if you are the President or in the line of succession getting the vaccine. I think the case for National self defense is pretty strong. Ernst, Rubio, Warren, AOC can all go **** themselves. The don’t need it and there is no compelling national defense interest in them getting it.  It isn’t often that I am going to agree with Sen. Rand and Rep. Omar.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 22, 2020, 10:34:09 pm
With something like 1/3 of the population (or more) skeptical about the vaccine, on top of all the crazy anti-vax movement folks already around for years, I don’t have a problem with politicians that have a following moving up in the line.

AOC has a lot of folks in her district skeptical of vaccines, Joni Ernst has the Trumpers who are skeptical. Anybody in political office has a following. They have an influence. So, show your followers they should do this.

Sure, if the issue was about fairness only, they should not move up in the line. But, fairness is secondary to getting the highest possible % of the population immunized. That’s when the virus will mostly disappear, right? So, that is more important on the balance of interests.

Not worth spending energy on fairness. Rich and influential folks will end up getting immunized faster in any case. That’s how the world works. Not worth getting into nasty fights about a place in line when it’s so important that six months from now most everybody is vaccinated. Last thing we need is social squabbling about you bumped me in line. Just get vaccinated when you can.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on December 23, 2020, 12:54:22 am
Only people currently eligible are health care workers and nursing home residents. Apparently the House of Representatives and the senate are 1A, it must be nice to write the laws or something.

I’m completely fine if you are the President or in the line of succession getting the vaccine. I think the case for National self defense is pretty strong. Ernst, Rubio, Warren, AOC can all go **** themselves. The don’t need it and there is no compelling national defense interest in them getting it.  It isn’t often that I am going to agree with Sen. Rand and Rep. Omar.

I'm not sure why you would lump AOC and Warren in with COVID deniers like that, but Warren is over 70.  Even if she weren't a Senator (who's been pushing a strong response to the pandemic before almost any other politician) she should be pretty high on the vaccine list.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 23, 2020, 05:01:33 pm
I'm not sure why you would lump AOC and Warren in with COVID deniers like that, but Warren is over 70.  Even if she weren't a Senator (who's been pushing a strong response to the pandemic before almost any other politician) she should be pretty high on the vaccine list.

They are using their power as politicians to get a vaccine that they aren't currently eligible for.  I literally now nurses and doctors taking care of COVID patients that won't be able to get a vaccine until next week.  The only people eligible right now are health care workers and nursing home patients.  After that it is people over 75 and front line workers.  Senator Warren wouldn't be eligible for months for the vaccine.  AOC should literally be at the end of the **** line.  They are abusing there power to get a vaccine that others in their risk category can't get.  I get you like their politics, but **** them. 

The Senate and House of Representatives have functioned just fine without a few members that have had COVID at various times and they would have access to treatment that no one else in the US would if they got sick enough. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 23, 2020, 05:07:02 pm
With something like 1/3 of the population (or more) skeptical about the vaccine, on top of all the crazy anti-vax movement folks already around for years, I don’t have a problem with politicians that have a following moving up in the line.

AOC has a lot of folks in her district skeptical of vaccines, Joni Ernst has the Trumpers who are skeptical. Anybody in political office has a following. They have an influence. So, show your followers they should do this.

Sure, if the issue was about fairness only, they should not move up in the line. But, fairness is secondary to getting the highest possible % of the population immunized. That’s when the virus will mostly disappear, right? So, that is more important on the balance of interests.

Not worth spending energy on fairness. Rich and influential folks will end up getting immunized faster in any case. That’s how the world works. Not worth getting into nasty fights about a place in line when it’s so important that six months from now most everybody is vaccinated. Last thing we need is social squabbling about you bumped me in line. Just get vaccinated when you can.

Those people won't be eligible for a months.  Have them get the vaccine when it would actually start to be available to the general public.  They are literally taking shots away from doctors and nurses.  A lot of nursing homes haven't even started to get the shot and if you had any clue what these poor people have been going through since March you'd be pissed too. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on December 23, 2020, 05:50:59 pm
Remember when we were being lectured that Democrats should support Raffensberger for re-election because he wasn’t as overtly criminal or psychotic as most Trump Republicans?

https://www.ajc.com/politics/georgia-elections-chief-seeks-to-end-no-excuse-absentee-voting/UJAKYKRPLBBALHWTSF7UAJZCNU/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 23, 2020, 06:32:28 pm
Yeah, that's exactly why I'll be voting for his opponent in two years. Like most Republicans now, he wants fewer people to vote just so his party (which has a minority of support in America) can continue to control the government.

I'll acknowledge that he was honest and transparent in this election, and he strongly repudiated against Trump's post-election nonsense. But election day is only part of his job. I a Secretary of State who doesn't want to suppress the vote. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 24, 2020, 01:32:47 pm
Those people won't be eligible for a months.  Have them get the vaccine when it would actually start to be available to the general public.  They are literally taking shots away from doctors and nurses.  A lot of nursing homes haven't even started to get the shot and if you had any clue what these poor people have been going through since March you'd be pissed too.

A pediatrician friend of mine was vaccinated last week. There have now been $1 million vaccinations in the U.S. There’s going to be geographical disparities, and other disparities. Unfortunately, that’s the way the world works. Don’t be naive. Most suppliers are doing the best they can. Nursing home issues arose because of legal consent forms. They are at the top of the list.

Fairness is secondary to getting 80-90% of the country vaccinated. The guy I would move to the top of the list for vaccination—-if he would agree to be vaccinated on live television—is Robert Kennedy Jr.—-perhaps the most notorious anti-Vaxxer. If he did that, it might influence tens of thousands anti-Vaxxers to take the shots. Way more important to get everybody vaccinated that starting a fight about fairness. There are standards about priority and we can fight about that and undermine the social contract more than it already has been. Not worth it.

Just read an article about disputes among staff in a hospital about which staffers getting vaccination priority. Human nature being what it is, that’s going to happen but ought to be avoided whenever possible socially. There is a more important problem than who gets what when. It’s getting mass immunity in the country. We don’t need squabbling about individuals.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 24, 2020, 03:26:31 pm
A pediatrician friend of mine was vaccinated last week. There have now been $1 million vaccinations in the U.S. There’s going to be geographical disparities, and other disparities. Unfortunately, that’s the way the world works. Don’t be naive. Most suppliers are doing the best they can. Nursing home issues arose because of legal consent forms. They are at the top of the list.

Fairness is secondary to getting 80-90% of the country vaccinated. The guy I would move to the top of the list for vaccination—-if he would agree to be vaccinated on live television—is Robert Kennedy Jr.—-perhaps the most notorious anti-Vaxxer. If he did that, it might influence tens of thousands anti-Vaxxers to take the shots. Way more important to get everybody vaccinated that starting a fight about fairness. There are standards about priority and we can fight about that and undermine the social contract more than it already has been. Not worth it.

Just read an article about disputes among staff in a hospital about which staffers getting vaccination priority. Human nature being what it is, that’s going to happen but ought to be avoided whenever possible socially. There is a more important problem than who gets what when. It’s getting mass immunity in the country. We don’t need squabbling about individuals.



1 million doses doesn’t come close to covering the number of nurses in the US, let alone the healthcare professions. Every shot not going to a politician is continuing to put healthcare workers at risk. 3,000 have died of COVID in the US from doing their job.  If the article you read was about Standford giving vaccines to pathologist and radiologists over residents that have exposure to COVID patients then that is just as crappy politicians getting it.

Getting to 70-80% vaccination is going to be a fight, but it isn’t going to be possible for months, because the supply of shots is scarce and will continue to be scarce for months until multiple vaccines have been approved. The greatest impact of celebrities and politicians getting a vaccine is going to be during that time, months down the road.  What should be going on right now is protecting the healthcare system and the highest risk individuals.

RFK Jr is already plotting with the other anti-vaxxer’s about how to undermine the COVID vaccine. He’s just another worthless lawyer. Anti-vaxxer’s are a small percentage of people, they won’t be moved no matter who gets the vaccine or how safe it is. Limiting their reach on social media is more important. Vaccine hesitant people are easier to reach.   The link below discusses their strategy and how to combat it.

https://f4d9b9d3-3d32-4f3a-afa6-49f8bf05279a.usrfiles.com/ugd/f4d9b9_25e2a7b73e8c4236a53c1002db4017b4.pdf
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 24, 2020, 04:13:41 pm
I believe that public displays of vaccinations have an impact. When the vaccine becomes more widely available, people will remember who was vaccinated and encouraged vaccination. That’s why I have no problem with the AOC and Joni Ernst public displays, as that might promote wider vaccinations. This crisis is a PUBLIC HEALTH issue first and foremost, so there needs to be a pro-vaccination mindset from day one.

The public health issue far outweighs concerns about individuals—-as tragic as each serious case is—as well as squabbles about who gets in line where and other favoritism matters. Think the guidelines out there are fair but are going to be implemented statewide and locally and there will be oddities and some unfairness with a massive endeavor such as this. Whatever promotes folks to get vaccinated should be encouraged and whatever divides folks among themselves should be discouraged. It is short-sighted to get bogged down with the latter.

As to RFK, Jr, that obviously was a hypothetical and, yes, I’d put him ahead of the line if he agreed to be vaccinated publicly. The way you get a public buy-in in the millions is piece-by-piece. There are a lot of segments of skepticism. Build a coalition.

By the way, the problem with RFK, Jr has nothing to do with him being a lawyer. As a lawyer, he has done terrific work as an environmental lawyer for the public good. The problem is that he is, of course, a total wacko about vaccinations and does a lot of public harm in that endeavor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on December 24, 2020, 06:25:26 pm
I agree with CUBluejay that there is plenty of time for politicians who have been covid-19 skeptics and celebrities to serve as role models. The people for whom they could serve as role models, for the most part, are not yet eligible for vaccines.  Above all, healthcare workers who have been courageously and diligently risking their own lives should be vaccinated before anyone else in my view. I do think it makes sense for people in extremely critical governmental positions (Presidents, Vice Presidents, etc) to be exceptions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on December 24, 2020, 07:24:55 pm
From what I have heard, the elderly population won’t be completed until May or June at the earliest...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on December 24, 2020, 07:31:32 pm
It's going to be many months before scarcity becomes a non-issue. 

So, you end up waiting for many months to use role models?  With the final priority group and not before? 

Obama and George W. Bush are private citizens.  No reason they should have been vaccinated.....except they have influence.

Too bad this guy isn't still around:

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/12/18/elvis-presley-polio-vaccine-confidence-448131
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 25, 2020, 12:09:37 pm
Have some of Trump's true believers gotten an early start?

Police: Explosion in Nashville believed to be ‘intentional’

(https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/8f5ad92be6ce49b4800503242fc5dd4d/800.jpeg)


https://apnews.com/article/nashville-explosion-christmas-52708bfd05e4f6ff433cc404443c65d4
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on December 25, 2020, 12:16:40 pm
It's not wise to make any assumptions at this point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on December 25, 2020, 12:22:00 pm
Suggesting a possibility is not the same thing as making an assumption.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 25, 2020, 01:20:13 pm
If you watched Quantico, this is the work of a black ops who report only to the President to give him the power to order martial law.  The FBI unit being sent in has already been infiltrated by the CIA black ops group who will plant false evidence implicating Hunter Biden in the attack, implicating the President-elect's participation.  Vice President Pence will learn the truth, have Trump arrested and the election nullified and take power.   You just gotta watch more Netflix.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 27, 2020, 04:57:59 pm
Unreal.  The stories the right is spouting makes my story above look believable.  According to them, the AT&T building was where the Dominion voting machines would be examinedrevealing voted fraud.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 27, 2020, 09:13:31 pm
Trump is not just a terrible person and president but he’s really bad at politics.  How many times has he created a crisis, held out, and then folded getting nothing in return? All he did here was make it crystal clear which party is trying to get stimulus to the people who need it and which are telling those same people to F off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 29, 2020, 05:02:24 pm
Another election conspiracy theory debunked:

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/cobb-county/gbi-finishes-signature-audit-cobb-county-finds-only-two-mismatches/ON42CSQBORHYJDBGZKKMPC3YAQ/?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot

Trump has been claiming there were rampant problems with the signature match in Georgia. The GBI audited 15,118 randomly selected ballot envelopes. Of those, only two ballots had issues: a wife signed both hers and her husband's ballot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 29, 2020, 05:50:52 pm
br, Facebook is actually attaching a disclaimer to many of the conspiracy theories.   Like the AT&T building was going to audit the Dominion machines.   No such activity was being considered and that building is mostly a relay and sub-station inequipped to handle any such audit. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on December 30, 2020, 11:46:43 am
The conspiracy isn’t relevant. Your laws don’t matter. Democracy is just a word that is easily redefined. Nothing matters except for what they want; Fat Stalin.

Disproving bullshit is a waste of time; it’s like cutting the head off a Hydyra.

Legitimate news sources and all of us need to stop amplifying bullshit. The only time we should hear about this blatant bullshit is when the news organizations are being sued. I hope Smartmatic and Dominion carry through with all of their lawsuits.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 03, 2021, 01:11:18 pm
Here's a recording of Trump basically threatening that Raffensperger may be in legal trouble if he doesn't "find" enough votes to overturn the results in Georgia. I guess Susan Collins was wrong when she said Trump learned "a pretty big lesson" from the Ukraine/impeachment situation, because this is the same thing taken to a much worse level:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/d45acb92-4dc4-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html

In any other administration, this would be one of the biggest scandals in the history of the country. The president would be out of office this week. In this administration, it will be mostly forgotten by Wednesday. Republican Senators will mostly say they haven't heard the audio and won't comment on it. A few (Romney, Collins, Murkowski) will make some weak condemnation then take no action to change things.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 03, 2021, 01:13:02 pm
Here's a recording of Trump basically threatening that Raffensperger may be in legal trouble if he doesn't "find" enough votes to overturn the results in Georgia. I guess Susan Collins was wrong when she said Trump learned "a pretty big lesson" from the Ukraine/impeachment situation, because this is the same thing taken to a much worse level:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/d45acb92-4dc4-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html

In any other administration, this would be one of the biggest scandals in the history of the country. The president would be out of office this week. In this administration, it will be mostly forgotten by Wednesday. Republican Senators will mostly say they haven't heard the audio and won't comment on it. A few (Romney, Collins, Murkowski) will make some weak condemnation then take no action to change things.

According to Collins, this time he’s going to learn his lesson. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 03, 2021, 01:56:06 pm
According to Collins, this time he’s going to learn his lesson. 
Donald Trump is pulling all of these shenanigans because he knows how high the odds of his being incarcerated are after he leaves office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 03, 2021, 02:18:10 pm
Here's a recording of Trump basically threatening that Raffensperger may be in legal trouble if he doesn't "find" enough votes to overturn the results in Georgia. I guess Susan Collins was wrong when she said Trump learned "a pretty big lesson" from the Ukraine/impeachment situation, because this is the same thing taken to a much worse level:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/d45acb92-4dc4-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html

In any other administration, this would be one of the biggest scandals in the history of the country. The president would be out of office this week. In this administration, it will be mostly forgotten by Wednesday. Republican Senators will mostly say they haven't heard the audio and won't comment on it. A few (Romney, Collins, Murkowski) will make some weak condemnation then take no action to change things.

In a normal world, there is no way he can avoid prosecution from this one unless he’s pardoned. It seems like a self-pardon is not going to be possible so does he resign and get Pence to pardon him?  What an interesting mess he’s made for himself here.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 03, 2021, 05:49:53 pm
I doubt this just came out of the blue.

Quote
All 10 living former defense secretaries: Involving the military in election disputes would cross into dangerous territory

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/10-former-defense-secretaries-military-peaceful-transfer-of-power/2021/01/03/2a23d52e-4c4d-11eb-a9f4-0e668b9772ba_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 03, 2021, 05:55:49 pm
"Yeah, it's a crime...but the guy who reported the crime is just as bad." That's how the current Republican party seems to think.

Erick Erickson @EWErickson
Georgia Republicans I’ve talked to tonight are not happy with the President, but also critical of the Secretary of State leaking the audio.  “Just one more f**king day,” complained one who said had it dropped Monday after or during the rally it wouldn’t be as bad.


(And by the way, it's not clear that Raffensperger's side leaked the audio.. In fact, many people have pointed out that the audio seems clearer on Trump's side, which would seem to indicate it came from someone on his side).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 03, 2021, 06:13:16 pm
Fortunately Trump violated not just federal but GA law in that extortion call.  So, in theory, even if he self-pardons or effectively does so by resigning and having Pence do it, if Georgia (which is still run by Republicans, so there's that) sees fit he would still be subject to indictment there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 04, 2021, 08:44:54 am
I'm sure those 10 former defense secretaries (including Trump's own and Dick Cheney) feeling the need to release a statement warning against a military coup - and call out Trump's acting SoD in doing so - means there's nothing to worry about, right?

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1345857644423163910
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 04, 2021, 11:28:45 am
Right.  Clearly Trump is a crazy phuqr.  He might TRY anything.  That doesn't mean it will work.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 04, 2021, 06:14:13 pm
Right.  Clearly Trump is a crazy phuqr.  He might TRY anything.  That doesn't mean it will work.

And that doesn't mean it's not catastrophic and dangerous for the country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 04, 2021, 11:50:04 pm
Republican Congressman accidentally admits they no longer care about convincing a majority of voters to vote for them. They just want to reach the minority who can win in the outdated and unfair Electoral College.

https://massie.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=Z5MPA3CVK5FYZQ3KBYQIDSAWB4

From a purely partisan perspective, Republican presidential candidates have won the national popular vote only once in the last 32 years. They have therefore depended on the electoral college for nearly all presidential victories in the last generation. If we perpetuate the notion that Congress may disregard certified electoral votes—based solely on its own assessment that one or more states mishandled the presidential election—we will be delegitimizing the very system that led Donald Trump to victory in 2016, and that could provide the only path to victory in 2024.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 04, 2021, 11:58:09 pm
Bill Kristol  @BillKristol  2h
OK you wanted outside the box:

1. Pence would prefer not to subvert the Constitution on Jan. 6.
2. But Pence feels a strong sense of loyalty to Trump.
3. And Pence wants to avoid a demand that he pardon Trump upon a Trump resignation Jan. 19.
So: Pence resigns as VP tomorrow.


Chances Pence does this rather than continuing the charade when it come time to certify the electoral college votes?  Slim and none.  And Slim just left town.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 05, 2021, 05:41:21 am

Ryan Lizza
@RyanLizza
Former Defense Secretary William Cohen just said this on
@CNN
:

"All of us [10 living defense secretaries] came to the same conclusion that we are in danger, that we have a commander-in-chief who is not above trying to use the military in order to achieve a political objective."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 05, 2021, 08:55:32 am
At least Tom Ricketts is only ruining a baseball team. His brother is much worse.

@hannahmeisel: Gov. Ricketts of Nebraska will block undocumented immigrants from getting the vaccine.

When he visited Chicago last month, Surgeon General @JeromeAdamsMD said the fed govt has "no restrictions whatsoever on who can and who cannot get this vaccine based on documentation status" https://twitter.com/ketvlincoln/status/1346130986971574273
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 05, 2021, 08:58:48 am
At least Tom Ricketts is only ruining a baseball team. His brother is much worse.

@hannahmeisel: Gov. Ricketts of Nebraska will block undocumented immigrants from getting the vaccine.

When he visited Chicago last month, Surgeon General @JeromeAdamsMD said the fed govt has "no restrictions whatsoever on who can and who cannot get this vaccine based on documentation status" https://twitter.com/ketvlincoln/status/1346130986971574273

Ricketts wants them to become infected and spread it around even more?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 05, 2021, 09:00:11 am
Ricketts wants them to become infected and spread it around even more?

It’s always good to remember that cruelty is the point with these people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 05, 2021, 09:12:52 am
The final 538 runoff polling averages have both Warnock and Ossoff up by about 2 points, and results have improved for both of them recently:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/georgia-senate-polls/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 05, 2021, 10:07:42 am
FWIW
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 05, 2021, 10:49:57 am
At least Tom Ricketts is only ruining a baseball team. His brother is much worse.

@hannahmeisel: Gov. Ricketts of Nebraska will block undocumented immigrants from getting the vaccine.

When he visited Chicago last month, Surgeon General @JeromeAdamsMD said the fed govt has "no restrictions whatsoever on who can and who cannot get this vaccine based on documentation status" https://twitter.com/ketvlincoln/status/1346130986971574273

I don't think that is going to be enforceable at all.  All I needed for my vaccine was a hospital ID and an email.  Our employees where able to get it with a letter of employment.  Nebraska is planning on using home health care companies to do vaccinations on essential workers and a large majority of Nebraska's undocumented workers are going to be at meat packing plants.  The company will say we need x shots and a nurse will show up and start vaccinating people.  They aren't going to be doing background checks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 05, 2021, 11:34:48 am
So it’s a pointless racist gesture which, I guess, is meant to appeal to the MAGA crowd.  The Ricketts just want to leave no doubt that they are the worst.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 05, 2021, 06:23:22 pm
Judging by the progression of Trump's election delusions, he will have won the Electoral College 538-0 over Biden in a few weeks' time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 05, 2021, 06:29:05 pm
This is good.

@briantylercohen: NEW: Turnout today in heavily-Democratic DeKalb County, GA has now surpassed Election Day turnout for the November contest. DeKalb broke for Biden in the general election 83.1% to 15.7%.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 05, 2021, 08:59:28 pm
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
I've seen enough. Raphael Warnock (D) defeats Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R) in GA's special Senate runoff. #GASEN


Bold call with Warnock down about a point with 79% of the votes counted...but he's probably right. There are a ton of votes left to report in DeKalb County, and that's going at least 80% to the Democrats. Also a lot left to count in Cobb and Chatham (Savannah). Also, 10-15% of Fulton, Gwinnett, and Clayton probably offsets most of the votes remaining in the rural counties.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 05, 2021, 09:37:59 pm
With the way they're talking on CNN, I think they're going to call Warnock as a winner pretty much immediately after the DeKalb County votes come in.

NY Times has Warnock at 94% to win and Ossoff at 80% to win even though they're both trailing pretty significantly with 13% of the vote left to count.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 05, 2021, 09:50:15 pm
He guess their is a question of how many votes are left in DeKalb.  CNN was saying there are only 130,000 votes he the 170,000 they thought where left. With 130,000 votes Purdue probably wins and Warnock is still possible to win.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 05, 2021, 09:54:04 pm
I'm not sure why DeKalb has been so much worse at reporting than every other county in the state. Given all the conspiracy theories about late Democrat votes in the general election, it would've been nice if the most Democratic county in the state (or maybe second most--Clayton is similarly blue) could figure out how not to be the last to report their votes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 05, 2021, 10:03:30 pm
He guess their is a question of how many votes are left in DeKalb.  CNN was saying there are only 130,000 votes he the 170,000 they thought where left. With 130,000 votes Purdue probably wins and Warnock is still possible to win.

@GabrielSterling: Let me restate...DeKalb has 171k+ advanced votes to upload. https://twitter.com/blakeaued/status/1346663746761068551

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 05, 2021, 10:04:32 pm
He guess their is a question of how many votes are left in DeKalb.  CNN was saying there are only 130,000 votes he the 170,000 they thought where left. With 130,000 votes Purdue probably wins and Warnock is still possible to win.

Gabriel Sterling (Georgia elections official, I don't know his exact title) just said that a DeKalb County official had the numbers wrong in her CNN report, so the bigger number is still out there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 05, 2021, 10:05:49 pm
He was just on CNN, the local county guy made a mistake when talking to somebody.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 05, 2021, 10:07:15 pm
NY Times now has Warnock at >95% to win (which is as high as they go, so that's as close as they'll go to calling it without actually calling it). And Ossoff is now at 91%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 05, 2021, 11:06:52 pm
Another bold projection, but his first one looks almost certain to be correct at this point:

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
I've seen enough. Jon Ossoff (D) defeats Sen. David Perdue (R) in GA's other Senate runoff. #GASEN

Democrats win control of the Senate.


This is a pretty good night to live in Georgia.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 05, 2021, 11:41:16 pm
Neither race has been called, but Warnock is making a victory speech right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 01:02:22 am
CNN projects Warnock as the winner.

Ossoff is now ahead by about 3,500 votes, and most of the remaining votes are in the Atlanta metro area and Savannah. Democrats are going to control the Senate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2021, 07:14:49 am
This is the best outcome for somebody like me. 2 Republican turds lose power. Biden gets to appoint a cabinet and have a functioning government, but the most liberal thing that can pass is going to have to be allowed by Sen laotors Manchin and Tester.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 06, 2021, 07:21:13 am
‘22 looks like a tough year for the GOP in the Senate. Hopefully the Dems can hold the House, expand the Senate, and not be held hostage by Manchin and Tester.  Expanding the judiciary and DC statehood would be nice but aren’t happening unless the margin grows in the mid-term.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2021, 08:10:48 am
Mid-terms usually don’t go well for parties that are in power, but there are way too many unknowns. How involved is Trump,  are Republicans running idiots, how is the economy, are liberal Democrats going after moderate Democrats, how left do the Democrats want to go, etc...   

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: goblue007 on January 06, 2021, 09:22:11 am
 ;D
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 06, 2021, 10:01:44 am
The lowest stakes bet ever made.

@atrupar: Giuliani says he's will to stake his reputation and Trump's reputation on there being fraud in the presidential election (there is no evidence of fraud and Giuliani's reputation is in tatters) https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1346847760595755010/video/1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 12:25:34 pm
Multiple buildings being evacuated on Capitol Hill.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 06, 2021, 12:27:27 pm
Multiple buildings being evacuated on Capitol Hill.


Weird that the police seem to have misplaced their tear gas.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 12:33:54 pm
ABC has some very good coverage of the voting and process right now.  Balanced.  Positive strokes to those R's standing up for the Constitution; condemnation of those R's obstructing.  Positive comments how the R's will use today to begin reconstruction. 

Even McConnell has spoken against what's going on.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 01:38:21 pm
Trumpers have broken into the Capitol Building now, and Trump is on Twitter attacking Mike Pence. All the Republicans who have been going along with Trump's temper tantrum over the last two months are responsible for this.

It really is time to consider invoking the 25th amendment.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 01:39:51 pm
Pence evacuated.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 06, 2021, 01:50:09 pm
Welcome to Trumpistan. I'm sure half the bears board is out there right now. probably one of the idiots waving the confederate flag.

Did the cops lose their tear gas and guns now? i can imagine what would happen if a bunch of black people stormed a federal or state building to stop proceedings of any kind.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 02:00:34 pm
Peaceful BLM protestors gassed, clubbed, and shot so that Trump could hold up a book he's never read in front of a building he's never seriously attended.

Angry white men literally break into the Capitol building, storm the halls, take the dais in the chamber, fly Confederate flags in the White House and... cops just wanna talk to them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 02:04:39 pm
It would be nice if CNN would stop referring to these terrorists as "protestors."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 02:07:20 pm
Nothing to worry about. Institutions all functioning perfectly normally. Just a lot of inconsequential hot air.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 06, 2021, 02:08:57 pm
50 bucks says we hear atleast one trumpster say the words "Obama was more divisive".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 02:10:39 pm
If this were happening in a developing nation somewhere in South America or Eastern Europe, just THINK about how our news media would be covering this event.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 02:12:16 pm
So if a Republican Representative that is a National Guard pilot is calling this a coup, is that still a dirty word?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 02:16:48 pm
Republican Congressman who supports Trump: "I've not seen anything like this since I deployed to Iraq."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 02:18:11 pm
What it looked like when peaceful BLM protestors marched on DC just a few months ago.

https://twitter.com/williamlegate/status/1346904942666244109
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 02:18:46 pm
We are seeing the beginning of the end for Trumpism.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 02:29:47 pm
After this is cleared and they start counting the Electoral votes again, people like Ted Cruz who were trying to pander to Trump and Trumpers today need to drop their objections.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2021, 02:35:32 pm
Where is the National Guard?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 02:36:06 pm
The Defense Department initially declined a request to deploy the National Guard, per multiple media outlets.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2021, 02:38:52 pm
Trump should be removed right now. Hawley, Jordan, Cruz, etc... should be removed from Congress. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 02:43:24 pm
Trump should be removed right now. Hawley, Jordan, Cruz, etc... should be removed from Congress. 
. And tried for treason...They've violated their lathes of office
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 02:43:55 pm
Maggie Haberman @maggieNYT
Per people close to the White House, several official and unofficial aides are trying - without success - to get the president to issue a stronger statement. He simply won't do it. He's been furious at Pence for refusing to do something he doesn't have power to do and that's that


Yeah, he has to be removed immediately.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2021, 02:51:24 pm
Some women was shot in the capital and they where doing CPR on here on the way out.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 02:51:42 pm
At least one pipe bomb found and safely destroyed by law enforcement in DC.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 02:55:01 pm
If we're not going to use the 25th Amendment now, just tear it out of the Constitution.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 06, 2021, 02:58:49 pm
Impeachment should happen immediately.  It doesn’t require weeks of hearings. And, if this isn’t enough, nothing ever will be.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 03:06:16 pm
Arrest him for treason and sedition.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 03:07:30 pm
We have officially failed the test of a peaceful transition of power.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 06, 2021, 03:10:18 pm
We have officially failed the test of a peaceful transition of power.

It was bound to happen eventually but I will never believe that it happened for this utter cartoon character buffoon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 03:12:02 pm
"We" have not unless you're aligned with Trump.  We the people are still running the show.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 06, 2021, 03:17:33 pm
Those of you that think trumpism is going away. I hope your realize you are watching the permanent fracture of American society right now. There is a group pf people who will never return to the fold.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 06, 2021, 03:20:56 pm
Kevin McCarthy ripping into these folks right now. but still wont condemn trump. Cant get him to give a live address. They are trying to get him to release a video message.

He's refusing. He loves this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 03:24:11 pm
Trump finally released a video message. While he tells people to go home, he also continues to lie about the election. And he tells the people at the Capitol that he loves them.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1346928882595885058
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 06, 2021, 03:25:32 pm
Wow... just wow. This is unreal. 25th amendment say what?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 03:27:31 pm
"We" have not unless you're aligned with Trump.  We the people are still running the show.

I mean "we" as a nation, and we have failed. This is in no way peaceful.

Meanwhile Trump's "statement" emphasizes, more than anything else, that the election was stolen from him and from these terrorists.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 03:27:43 pm
That video is basically "stand back and standy by" all over again. It conveys the same message.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2021, 03:28:12 pm
America has also failed the IQ test.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2021, 03:30:47 pm
“This tweet can’t be replied to, retweeted or liked due to a risk of violence”.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 06, 2021, 03:57:21 pm
January 6, 2021

A date which will live in infamy
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on January 06, 2021, 03:59:14 pm
If someone would just assassinate this MFer they'd deserve a medal.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 04:01:14 pm
Remove that Dusty or the Secret Service will be knocking at your door
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 04:21:58 pm
From a NY Times article about activating the National Guard this afternoon...anyone notice a significant name missing from the list of officials who asked the acting defense secretary to activate the National Guard?

Mr. Miller said on Wednesday afternoon that he had spoken with Vice President Mike Pence, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senators Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer, and Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland about the protests at the Capitol.

As method said earlier, Trump loves this.


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/national-guard-capitol-army.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on January 06, 2021, 04:43:28 pm
To the Trump supporters who want to use religion in their stance...

Psalm 118:8, KJV It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 04:43:46 pm
Those of you that think trumpism is going away. I hope your realize you are watching the permanent fracture of American society right now. There is a group pf people who will never return to the fold.
  Method, there have always been hate groups within the borders of most countries.   In our country, there's been the KKK, White Peoples Power, Black Panthers, and others.  Most get marginalized over time.  Those thugs who were strutting around today giggling over there disruption of civility are not the majority of Americans'.  They are not US.  And on January 21 when the FBI and DC police begin arresting those who so nicely took off their masks and took selfies, these will begin the marginalized.   As someone who has agonized over the fate of my party, I welcome today.  Today we'll separate the scum from the pond.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 06, 2021, 04:49:02 pm
  Method, there have always been hate groups within the borders of most countries.   In our country, there's been the KKK, White Peoples Power, Black Panthers, and others.  Most get marginalized over time.  Those thugs who were strutting around today giggling over there disruption of civility are not the majority of Americans'.  They are not US.  And on January 21 when the FBI and DC police begin arresting those who so nicely took off their masks and took selfies, these will begin the marginalized.   As someone who has agonized over the fate of my party, I welcome today.  Today we'll separate the scum from the pond.


The Republican Party is the hate group now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on January 06, 2021, 04:53:09 pm
Not all of them but the majority are.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 05:01:57 pm
The New York Times @nytimes
Vice President Mike Pence, not President Trump, approved the order to deploy the D.C. National Guard on Wednesday, defense and administration officials said. It was unclear why the president, who is still the commander in chief, did not give the order.


If true, I really don't see how they can move forward without using the 25th amendment. This would seem to make it clear that he no longer cares at all about governing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: mO on January 06, 2021, 05:05:01 pm
  Method, there have always been hate groups within the borders of most countries.   In our country, there's been the KKK, White Peoples Power, Black Panthers, and others.  Most get marginalized over time.  Those thugs who were strutting around today giggling over there disruption of civility are not the majority of Americans'.  They are not US.  And on January 21 when the FBI and DC police begin arresting those who so nicely took off their masks and took selfies, these will begin the marginalized.   As someone who has agonized over the fate of my party, I welcome today.  Today we'll separate the scum from the pond.

You had 4+ years.  This didn't happen over night.  This wasn't unexpected....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 05:06:32 pm
Trump leaves no doubt that he thinks the attempted coup today was justified:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Boris From Downunder on January 06, 2021, 05:06:47 pm
Wishing you guys all the best over there. In other news, how do so many people not realise what a complete nutbag this Trump c*** is?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2021, 05:13:10 pm
Congrats to Robb and as well to all the Trump apologists who’ve tried to have it both ways for four years and are just as guilty.  This is what you’ve done to our country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 06, 2021, 05:24:15 pm
This is amazing and appalling yet I'm not all that bent out of shape.  What are they really accomplishing?  As long as the good guys don't overreact and give the Trumpians a big PR coup, all this really seems to do is delay the inevitable certification of Biden's win by a day or two.  More important is Ossoff's win making it possible to actually get some legislation discussed and maybe even some useful things accomplished over the next few years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2021, 05:28:01 pm
This is amazing and appalling yet I'm not all that bent out of shape.  What are they really accomplishing?  As long as the good guys don't overreact and give the Trumpians a big PR coup, all this really seems to do is delay the inevitable certification of Biden's win by a day or two.  More important is Ossoff's win making it possible to actually get some legislation discussed and maybe even some useful things accomplished over the next few years.

One victim at least is dead.  It's accomplished that.

This is not on Trump, or on zealots like Robb.  This is on the entire Republican party who viciously and openly undermined our system of democracy and actively sought to destroy confidence in it.  We have to face reality - one of our two political parties is now, as David Frum said, the anti-democracy party.  There are consequences to that, and today is the tip of the iceberg.  It's a huge problem for the U.S. going forward and I don't know how you solve it.  What do you do in a two-party democracy if one party openly rejects democracy?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 05:34:14 pm
Trump leaves no doubt that he thinks the attempted coup today was justified:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!

   The moron really believe that.


The Republican Party is the hate group now.
  Way too broad a brush.  In 1866 was the WHOLE Democrat Party the hate party?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 05:37:51 pm
Yeah, this will get Trump's mug on Mt. Rushmore.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 05:39:53 pm
There are a lot of unbelievably stupid people behind Trump, but this display should mean the Green Party outvotes him if he chooses to run again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 05:41:09 pm
Deeg, I'll have to start posting all your posts in EVERY topic, dumb again, if you don't quit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 06, 2021, 05:44:22 pm
There are a lot of unbelievably stupid people behind Trump, but this display should mean the Green Party outvotes him if he chooses to run again.

If the election were run again today, he’d get 70 million votes.  The Republican Party voters know exactly what they are supporting in this guy and what is happening today does not change it at all.   I’m willing to say that about 5% of his original voters would probably not vote again after today but not much more. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2021, 05:48:14 pm
If the election were run again today, he’d get 70 million votes.  The Republican Party voters know exactly what they are supporting in this guy and what is happening today does not change it at all.   I’m willing to say that about 5% of his original voters would probably not vote again after today but not much more. 

5% is probably generous.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 05:48:59 pm
If the election were run again today, he’d get 70 million votes.  The Republican Party voters know exactly what they are supporting in this guy and what is happening today does not change it at all.   I’m willing to say that about 5% of his original voters would probably not vote again after today but not much more. 

I would hope you're wrong.   As a friend of mine has said, people need to realize that many people aren't voting for Trump, they're voting against people like Pelosi, Schumer, OKC, and more.  That may be true.  They certainly were voting against Hillary.   I hope Biden can bring some anti-polarizing to the table.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2021, 05:52:06 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErFbAGaUcAAbZBm?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 06, 2021, 05:57:20 pm
Do we know the details of the death (i.e., who shot her)?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2021, 05:57:20 pm
Rebecca Buck
@RebeccaBuck
·
11m
The Republican governor of Vermont calls for Trump to resign or be removed from office.
Quote Tweet
Governor Phil Scott
@GovPhilScott
 · 1h
The fabric of our democracy and the principles of our republic are under attack by the President. 

Enough is enough.

President Trump should resign or be removed from office by his Cabinet, or by the Congress. 6/6
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 06:04:23 pm
Trump fired all the Cabinet members who would have had the cajones.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 06, 2021, 06:05:09 pm
It appears that the dead woman was shot by police.  Evidently she was one of the protesters.  That's the chance you take.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 06:15:29 pm
Twitter has now deleted Trump’s video where he said he loves the insurrectionists and also his crazy follow-up tweet where he said the attack was justified.

He’s going to get banned from Twitter within a week after leaving office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 06, 2021, 06:25:42 pm
Twitter has now deleted Trump’s video where he said he loves the insurrectionists and also his crazy follow-up tweet where he said the attack was justified.

He’s going to get banned from Twitter within a week after leaving office.

And I’m afraid that’s the worst thing that will happen to him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2021, 06:36:06 pm
Twitter has now deleted Trump’s video where he said he loves the insurrectionists and also his crazy follow-up tweet where he said the attack was justified.

He’s going to get banned from Twitter within a week after leaving office.

Yeah, that'll really fix his wagon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2021, 06:48:54 pm
I had been in the camp that it was pointless to impeach Trump again for the Georgia Godfather call two weeks before the end of his reign of terror.  But now things have changed.  The 25th isn't going to happen, and two more weeks of this is a huge risk to the nation.  If nothing else, force Republicans in the Senate to go on the record as pro-insurrection by voting not to convict.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 07:39:56 pm
Outstanding reporting here:

https://www.itv.com/news/2021-01-06/donald-trump-fires-up-protesters-in-washington-as-congress-prepare-to-confirm-biden-victory
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 08:44:06 pm
Cabinet is discussing 25
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 08:44:07 pm
On CNN, Jim Acosta just reported that some cabinet members are discussing the 25th amendment. I doubt it goes anywhere, but it is being talked about as a possibility.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 08:46:39 pm
Beat u, br
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 08:48:01 pm
One second late.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 06, 2021, 08:49:32 pm
Trump's a coward.  He will die a slow death over the next 2 weeks.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2021, 09:34:17 pm
Gabriel Sherman
@gabrielsherman
·
35m
Per source, White House counsel Pat Cipollone told west wing staffers today not to help Trump stage a coup or else they could be prosecuted for treason.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2021, 09:35:57 pm
Lest anyone forget what the real problem is, and what it isn't:

Quote
Mike Baker
@ByMikeBaker
·
5m
YouGov poll:

• 45% of Republicans approve of the storming of the Capitol building
• 52% of Republicans say Biden is to blame for the storming
• 30% of Republicans say those who overtook the Capitol today are "Patriots"
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 09:59:56 pm
NY Times reporting it was Trump himself that refused the initial request to deploy the National Guard.

He literally told the military to stand down while his goons were laying siege to the Capitol.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 10:13:13 pm
Lest anyone forget what the real problem is, and what it isn't:

  Checked Yougov.   True that 45% approve.  You omitted that 43% strongly disapprove.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 10:20:42 pm
Curt, that’s a minority of R’s that disapprove. That’s not a hopeful sign.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 06, 2021, 10:22:17 pm
See also:

“Another milestone in the GOP evolution out of the western democratic tradition: a clear majority of House Repubs (including their leader) vote to overturn the election results from Arizona. Like today's riot/insurrection, another step in GOP's embrace of anti-democratic means”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 10:25:34 pm
Already, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, and Matt Gaetz (among other terrible people) are claiming that "Antifa" (which is not an actual organization) infiltrated the protestors today. They're saying it was really left wing extremists who invaded the Capitol just to make conservatives look bad. That's obviously complete bullshit.

But let's just imagine that's true and pretend they were fake terrorists. Donald Trump still released that ridiculous video where he told the terrorists he loves them, and he tweeted that the invasion was justified because people had been mean to him and his followers. So no matter who the insurrectionists are, they're still making apologies for a guy who clearly supports insurrection.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 10:29:32 pm
I realize that, but some folks on here have a habit of saying all or even most.  That's almost a 50/50 split.   Does the party have problems?  Sheesh. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 10:31:47 pm
Already, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, and Matt Gaetz (among other terrible people) are claiming that "Antifa" (which is not an actual organization) infiltrated the protestors today. They're saying it was really left wing extremists who invaded the Capitol just to make conservatives look bad. That's obviously complete bullshit.

But let's just imagine that's true and pretend they were fake terrorists. Donald Trump still released that ridiculous video where he told the terrorists he loves them, and he tweeted that the invasion was justified because people had been mean to him and his followers. So no matter who the insurrectionists are, they're still making apologies for a guy who clearly supports insurrection.
  Maybe Carlson and Hannity should be reminder that their President described the invaders as wonderful people.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2021, 11:19:30 pm
Josh Hawley is an embarrassment. Pandering to Trumpers and making an empty objection to Pennsylvania's votes after today's events should disqualify him from any national office for the rest of his life.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 06, 2021, 11:25:01 pm
All Trumpers should be barred from running for office in the future.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 12:07:13 am
Ted Cruz is also uniquely awful. He's the biggest coward in the Senate. After all Trump said about him, his wife, and his father, he still votes to join in on the Pennsylvania objection because he thinks it can advance his career. It's hard to imagine being so afraid of Trump (and so in need of power) that you pick him over your own family. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 07, 2021, 12:28:56 am
Mike Sacks
@MikeSacksEsq
·
10h
True Story:

I was two years behind Josh Hawley in that fancy post-college teaching fellowship at an elite 500-year-old London high school.

The first thing one teacher asked me when I showed up?

"You're not a fascist like that Joshua Hawley, are you?"

This was 2004.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 07, 2021, 07:23:53 am
How many times have you watched the news and said "I'm sure glad I don't live in a country like that"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 01:40:46 pm
Pelosi just called for the cabinet to use the 25th amendment. If they don't, the House will consider impeachment again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2021, 01:43:38 pm
But...but...but...aren't we Making America Great Again?   I don't understand.

What if...Joe Biden had run in 2016 instead of Hillary?  Sigh.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 07, 2021, 02:01:29 pm
Pelosi just called for the cabinet to use the 25th amendment. If they don't, the House will consider impeachment again.

Why bother with impeachment with only 13 days left in his term?  If successful, it would prevent Trump from running again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 07, 2021, 02:02:17 pm
The Senate would never vote for impeachment, IMO.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 07, 2021, 02:32:23 pm
Is using the 25th amendment a way to say goodbye to Donald Trump?    Very little chance.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/21/how-removal-under-th-amendment-works-beginners-guide/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 02:34:04 pm
I'm not sure if the Senate would vote to remove him. But I do think a lot of Republicans are ready to just be done with him for good. I'm sure you'd get the Collins/Murkowski/Sasse types on board with Romney this time, and there are others have given strong rebukes in the last day.

And I guarantee a few of the cowardly opportunists like Cruz and Rubio would jump on board just because it would mean they wouldn't have to run against him in 2024.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 07, 2021, 02:42:11 pm
Any Republican who votes to impeach Trump would be kissing their presidential ambitions goodbye.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 07, 2021, 02:50:46 pm
One thing the 25th amendment does not cover:

Before sending his letter denying the incompetence charges, Trump could fire the cabinet.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2021, 03:05:56 pm
He doesn't have to fire them; they're all quitting
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2021, 04:43:23 pm
OMAHA -- The Trump-supporting extremist groups who led Wednesday's raid on the U.S. Capitol are pleased with the results and likely to plan more such activities in the future, the leader of a new counterterrorism center at the University of Nebraska at Omaha said.

"How they're portraying it on their channels is that this is a success," said Gina Ligon, co-founder of UNO's National Counterterrorism Innovation, Technology, and Education Center. "I think you'll see more of this at the state level."

The center was established at UNO last year with a $36.5 million grant from the Department of Homeland Security and includes more than 50 academics at universities across the country.

The center's researchers routinely monitor the online communications of both foreign and domestic terror groups. Ligon said the Proud Boys, (a white-supremacist group) and the Oath Keepers (a far-right militia group) were both heavily involved in the raid. So were "accelerationist" groups, which believe in an imminent, apocalyptic race war, and are looking for signs that it has started.

"They were definitely part of inciting the violence," she said.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 04:44:38 pm
I will never understand why they just let almost everyone walk away from that. Everyone who was in the building when the police got there should've been escorted directly to jail.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2021, 04:49:13 pm
Probably because they didn't want to provoke an even bigger riot.   These clowns were all caught on camera.  These are not people loyal to America or to a party.  They were loyal to a fool and predictably became the same.  I really liked Biden's speech today.  No holds barred.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2021, 04:54:19 pm
On ABC at noon, they talked about 25th Amendment, Impeachment, and a third option.   Both the 25th and Impeachment may be too late with only a couple weeks left.  The third option was the one used before Nixon's resignation.  Then they fired his mental state, too, so Kissinger and the Defense Secretary told the military that they should not obey any commands from the White House, and the rest of the inner circle of government simply froze him out of any decisions or made decisions without him.   Word is that several insiders, if not resigning, are staying just to keep the ship floating, but freezing Trump out.  Some are making decisions without clearance.  An example would be Pence calling out the National Guard yesterday.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2021, 04:55:40 pm
Prosecutors 'looking at all actors,' including Trump, as charges are filed against Capitol rioters:  CNN headline
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 07, 2021, 05:01:17 pm
Probably because they didn't want to provoke an even bigger riot.   These clowns were all caught on camera.  These are not people loyal to America or to a party.  They were loyal to a fool and predictably became the same.  I really liked Biden's speech today.  No holds barred.   

CNN had a piece on some of the leaders.   Their identities are well known to the authorities.  More to come.


Care will have to be taken that the leaders are not turned into martyrs.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 05:07:50 pm
Word is that several insiders, if not resigning, are staying just to keep the ship floating, but freezing Trump out.  Some are making decisions without clearance.  An example would be Pence calling out the National Guard yesterday.

That does sound like it could be an effective way to manage this situation. I don't know if this would work with a competent president because they know how the system works and would be able to find a way to challenge it. But Trump is an idiot, and the only lawyers who will still associate with him are even bigger idiots...so if Pence and the cabinet decided he should essentially function as president for the next two weeks without going through all the paperwork to make it official, I'd bet Trump would have no way to take control back.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 05:09:45 pm
Simon & Schuster will no longer publish Josh Hawley's book:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/07/books/simon-schuster-josh-hawley-book.html

Good, I hope he becomes a complete pariah and no one will associate with him. Guys like Hawley and Cruz need to see consequences for their actions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 07, 2021, 05:10:49 pm
OMAHA -- The Trump-supporting extremist groups who led Wednesday's raid on the U.S. Capitol are pleased with the results and likely to plan more such activities in the future, the leader of a new counterterrorism center at the University of Nebraska at Omaha said.

"How they're portraying it on their channels is that this is a success," said Gina Ligon, co-founder of UNO's National Counterterrorism Innovation, Technology, and Education Center. "I think you'll see more of this at the state level."

The center was established at UNO last year with a $36.5 million grant from the Department of Homeland Security and includes more than 50 academics at universities across the country.

The center's researchers routinely monitor the online communications of both foreign and domestic terror groups. Ligon said the Proud Boys, (a white-supremacist group) and the Oath Keepers (a far-right militia group) were both heavily involved in the raid. So were "accelerationist" groups, which believe in an imminent, apocalyptic race war, and are looking for signs that it has started.

"They were definitely part of inciting the violence," she said.


One silver lining from yesterday, and having the Biden administration coming in, is that right wing extremism is way more likely to be taken seriously.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 07, 2021, 05:23:47 pm


One silver lining from yesterday, and having the Biden administration coming in, is that right wing extremism is way more likely to be taken seriously.

Good because it will probably get a lot worse.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 07, 2021, 05:35:23 pm
I will never understand why they just let almost everyone walk away from that. Everyone who was in the building when the police got there should've been escorted directly to jail.

I assume you say that rhetorically, since the reason why could not possibly be more obvious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 07, 2021, 05:42:11 pm
Here's a shocker:

Quote
The New York Times
@nytimes
·
26m
Vice President Mike Pence is opposed to a call by Democrats in Congress and some Republicans to invoke the 25th Amendment to strip President Trump of his powers, a person close to the vice president said.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 07, 2021, 05:48:16 pm
Here's a shocker:

Time to run the impeachment fun back again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 06:48:34 pm
This is far from a perfect speech, and there was clearly a rant they edited out after he said "Now Congress has certified the votes." But this is very different in tone and in content than what he was saying and doing yesterday.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347334804052844550

Maybe Pence and the cabinet told him he had to record this video or the 25th amendment was coming and he wasn't going to be able to give out pardons.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 07, 2021, 06:52:42 pm
Are we really going to keep up with the “new tone” stuff even now whenever he manages to deliver prepared comments and not sound like a deranged maniac?  Obviously he didn’t write this, want to say this, or mean a single word of this.  We’ll see if he has enough discipline to avoid contradicting himself the next time he speaks off the cuff or tweets like every other time he’s had a new tone.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 07, 2021, 06:54:32 pm
I assume you say that rhetorically, since the reason why could not possibly be more obvious.

Yeah, no kidding.  The only surprising thing is that the capitol police didn’t run in with the crowd like some of the DC police did.

Quote
One current Metro D.C. police officer said in a public Facebook post that off-duty police officers and members of the military, who were among the rioters, flashed their badges and I.D. cards as they attempted to overrun the building. “If these people can storm the Capitol building with no regard to punishment, you have to wonder how much they abuse their powers when they put on their uniforms,” the officer wrote.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/07/capitol-hill-riots-doj-456178
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 07, 2021, 07:49:13 pm
Are we really going to keep up with the “new tone” stuff even now whenever he manages to deliver prepared comments and not sound like a deranged maniac?  Obviously he didn’t write this, want to say this, or mean a single word of this.  We’ll see if he has enough discipline to avoid contradicting himself the next time he speaks off the cuff or tweets like every other time he’s had a new tone.

The edits in that were hilariously obvious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 07, 2021, 07:56:57 pm
The edits in that were hilariously obvious.

Imagine what off the prompter stuff they had to cut out. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 08:04:19 pm
Are we really going to keep up with the “new tone” stuff even now whenever he manages to deliver prepared comments and not sound like a deranged maniac?  Obviously he didn’t write this, want to say this, or mean a single word of this.  We’ll see if he has enough discipline to avoid contradicting himself the next time he speaks off the cuff or tweets like every other time he’s had a new tone.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply there was anything real about the "new tone." Like you said, it's obviously not his words.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2021, 08:10:15 pm
He's a Barnum and Bailey showman.  It's a performance. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 07, 2021, 08:19:08 pm
Sorry, didn't mean to imply there was anything real about the "new tone." Like you said, it's obviously not his words.

Yeah, I know. To be fair, the tone compared to yesterday was different but completely phony as you note.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 08:32:23 pm
I'm mostly just curious how they convinced him to do the video. There had to be a threat of some kind, right?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 07, 2021, 08:36:32 pm
I'm mostly just curious how they convinced him to do the video. There had to be a threat of some kind, right?

I would assume the threat of the 25th amendment or even the Senate voting to remove him were both given. I can’t imagine what else matters to him.  The thing is that I don’t know why such a phony gesture that nobody on either side believes or is happy with would matter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 08:39:11 pm
Well, Ivanka seems to matter to him (kind of). But they probably didn't threaten her.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on January 07, 2021, 08:46:37 pm
And I guarantee a few of the cowardly opportunists like Cruz and Rubio would jump on board just because it would mean they wouldn't have to run against him in 2024.

Actually I think the 2024 Republicans would still think they couldn’t vote for impeachment because Trump’s endorsement or a Donald Trump, Jr. run still sadly might be big factors in 2024.  I think Trump, Jr. is more likely to run than his dad, and sadly that scumbag would probably be a formidable opponent in the primaries.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 07, 2021, 08:58:15 pm
This genius died yesterday by accidentally tasering himself in the balls while trying to steal a portrait of Tip O’Neill.  What a loss.

(https://refuge-cdn.nolayingup.dev/original/3X/1/e/1ec43fee9cfcbc89be482e38da17ee49d6a4e4f8.jpeg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2021, 09:23:31 pm
First nominee for 2021 Darwin Award.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2021, 10:14:47 pm
People at the US Capitol riot are being identified and losing their jobs

But they shouldn't bother with a job search.  The warden will assign them a job.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2021, 10:26:00 pm
Maybe there were a few edits here, but this sounds more like Trump. 

https://twitter.com/SnoopMikey/status/1347360458819321857
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 07, 2021, 10:28:03 pm
I’m glad someone had the balls to write this article about the real victims of all this - the Trump staffers who need a job next month.

Quote
“The people who this is hardest on, aside from obviously the people in the Capitol and the police and the people who were hurt, are the people who have staked their reputations and their political, financial and career fortunes on defending the president and he’s just made it harder on us,” said one lower-level Trump administration official.

Got to love these true believers, fighting “socialism” also worrying about their unemployment benefits.

Quote
Others in the administration had work benefits on their mind. Some wondered whether it was worth it to burn more paid vacation time they could earn. Some were reluctant to depart before their formal off-boarding date because doing so could leave them ineligible for unemployment benefits as they begin a job search.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/07/trump-staffers-next-job-456315
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 08, 2021, 01:23:58 am
I wonder if they've read The Scarlet Letter.

J/K, ROFL.  Like any of them read books that aren't Ayn Rand.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 08, 2021, 02:14:22 am
Quote
“The president was trying to stage a coup. There was little chance of it happening, but there was enough chance that the former defense secretaries had to put out that letter, which was the final nail through that effort. They prevented the military from being involved in any coup attempt. But instead, Trump tried to incite it himself,” said Fiona Hill, Trump’s former top Russia adviser. “This could have turned into a full-blown coup had he had any of those key institutions following him. Just because it failed or didn’t succeed doesn’t mean it wasn’t real.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 08, 2021, 07:13:43 am
Looks like Trump is going to get impeached again. I guess if you are going to be the worst of all time, might as well set a standard that is nearly impossible t be beat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 08, 2021, 08:00:39 am
Here's a recording of Trump basically threatening that Raffensperger may be in legal trouble if he doesn't "find" enough votes to overturn the results in Georgia. I guess Susan Collins was wrong when she said Trump learned "a pretty big lesson" from the Ukraine/impeachment situation, because this is the same thing taken to a much worse level:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/d45acb92-4dc4-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html

In any other administration, this would be one of the biggest scandals in the history of the country. The president would be out of office this week. In this administration, it will be mostly forgotten by Wednesday. Republican Senators will mostly say they haven't heard the audio and won't comment on it. A few (Romney, Collins, Murkowski) will make some weak condemnation then take no action to change things.

Amazingly, this call which is one of the biggest scandals in American political history, will now be no more than a footnote when describing  what happened  just THIS WEEK.  It’s kind of hard to even understand what a debacle this guy has been. I keep telling my kids to pay attention because this will be in their kids history books and they will be getting lots of questions about it years from now.  They’ll be talking about insane stuff that won’t even make it into the official story. Look at the Lin Wood stuff. That guy is beyond unhinged and he was one of the president’s lawyers just a couple weeks ago. What a world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 08, 2021, 09:43:32 am
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-attempted-coup-federal-law-enforcement-capitol-police-2021-1?amp&__twitter_impression=true

“America's international military and security allies are now willing to give serious credence to the idea that Trump deliberately tried to violently overturn an election and that some federal law-enforcement agents — by omission or otherwise — facilitated the attempt.”

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 08, 2021, 05:34:28 pm
Twitter has permanently barred Donald Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 08, 2021, 05:37:35 pm
Behind barrs is good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 08, 2021, 05:42:22 pm
Did he tweet something out this afternoon that was over the line? I can't find evidence of it. He did tweet a couple times this morning that were not as explicitly false as in the past, but could be interpreted as dog whistles for his violent base.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 08, 2021, 05:51:44 pm
Looks like it was the dog whistle tweets earlier today that got him suspended:

https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 08, 2021, 05:58:41 pm
Or he tried to tweet something even worse and they had him on moderation or something.  It doesn't matter - in the end I put these acts by twitter and FB on the same level as politicians like Graham trying to be sanctimonious and righteous now - you get zero credit for doing what you should have done years ago.  They're all complicit and should all bear the responsibility.  It's also no coincidence that twitter and FB did this 2 days after the Democrats secured control of the Senate.

As far as all these cabinet officials resigning, they're cowards doing so because they don't want to be put on the spot as regards the 25th.  Impeach the bastard and make every Republican in the Senate go on record.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 08, 2021, 06:02:41 pm
Democrats do plan to start the impeachment process in the House on Monday if the 25th amendment isn't used over the weekend.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 08, 2021, 06:08:05 pm
It would be more unifying if some Republicans joined the effort from the get-go.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 08, 2021, 06:09:55 pm
Sasse has indicated he's open to a yes vote.  Mittens will probably vote yes.  Maybe Murkowski, outside chance "very concerned" Collins.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 08, 2021, 06:10:59 pm
It would be more unifying if some Republicans joined the effort from the get-go.

Republicans are only ever interested in unifying on their terms only. Time to stop playing that game.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 08, 2021, 06:11:49 pm
And, his new tone on Parler is going to be a doozy.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 08, 2021, 06:14:56 pm
Neither side has expressed interest in unifying since Clinton's first term.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 08, 2021, 06:28:30 pm
And, his new tone on Parler is going to be a doozy.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/apple-threatens-ban-parler
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 08, 2021, 06:43:33 pm
Parler will never be able to replace Twitter for someone like Trump because half his reason for tweeting what he does is to troll and irritate everyone. If he's in his echo chamber at Parler where everyone agrees with him, he doesn't get to cause the chaos he wants.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 08, 2021, 06:51:17 pm
What's the point in getting congressional Republicans on record with a second impeachment effort?  Most Republicans are sympathetic with the vandals.  Those voting against impeachment are not going to pay any political price.  The verdict of history concerning Trump and his supporters is already clear.  Unless you know you can get bipartisan support and actually remove the guy from office, I don't see the value in impeaching. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 08, 2021, 07:28:39 pm
What's the point in getting congressional Republicans on record with a second impeachment effort?  Most Republicans are sympathetic with the vandals.  Those voting against impeachment are not going to pay any political price.  The verdict of history concerning Trump and his supporters is already clear.  Unless you know you can get bipartisan support and actually remove the guy from office, I don't see the value in impeaching. 

Some of those voting against it could pay a political price, I believe.  We're already seeing conservative newspapers in right-wing areas arguing that Hawley and Cruz should resign or be expelled from the Senate.  Half of Republicans may support sedition now but it's not totally impossible that could change as more details about Trump's direct involvement in this come out.  There are a lot of Rs in purple or blue states running for Senate re-election in 2022 and getting them on the record as anti-removal will not do them any good in a general election.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 08, 2021, 07:37:54 pm
Some of those voting against it could pay a political price, I believe.

There's a good argument that all of Trump's nonsense since November was a big part of why Warnock and Ossoff won. Anything that adds to the perception that the Republican party is complicit in his chaos is good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 08, 2021, 07:40:05 pm
Trump tried to use the POTUS Twitter account and it was taken down. They will apparently ban any account he tries to use.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 08, 2021, 07:50:54 pm
Trump tried to use the POTUS Twitter account and it was taken down. They will apparently ban any account he tries to use.

Even this one?

(https://refuge-cdn.nolayingup.dev/original/3X/2/5/2507be17ab815a27a9863453882f52adad30721c.jpeg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 08, 2021, 07:52:35 pm
Neither side has expressed interest in unifying since Clinton's first term.

Sorry, Curt that is utter B.S.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on January 08, 2021, 08:00:03 pm
Nobody knows the Trump core base like Trump does. The most prescient thing that anybody ever said about them was by Trump himself with the shoot-somebody-on-5th Avenue comment long ago. He had it exactly right.

Trump knows exactly how to push their buttons and what they’ll think and do based on what, how, and the context of what he says.

So, there should be no doubt that Trump planned and executed a plan to get this core base to storm the Capitol. Note his remark that he would be there with them going to the Capitol—a classic provocateur tactic knowing that he actually would not be going.

What Trump DIDN’t anticipate was the ineffective security that permitted the mob to actually breach the Capitol building. What he instead expected was that his mob would be beat up, clubbed, shot outside the building, and become martyrs to the “cause” that would rile up the wider base, cause daily chaos, and impede the Biden transition—-thanks to phony allegations of police brutality, police overreaction to lawful first amendment advocates, and the like.

The whole thing backfired only because the mob actually was able to run amok, so folks were appalled by the desecration to one of the first places tourists come to see in D.C. and that lawmakers and staff had to shelter in place like victims of a terrorist attack.

Trump’s plan didn’t work and maybe, just maybe, the resulting outrage will help to discredit his pathology.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 08, 2021, 08:19:10 pm
Not only is Murkowski calling for Trump's ouster, she's hinting at leaving the party (which makes sense, given her situation with Alaska's new electoral system and general purpling).  She would be a certain yes vote for removal.

I still think there's little chance of getting 18 Rs to vote to convict, but there are some whisperings that Moscow Mitch might put his weight behind it.  I'm skeptical but the political calculus makes sense for him, potentially.  As to whether it's worth doing, considering that it means total ineligibility to run for federal office, removal of pension, and termination of secret service protection at taxpayer expense, I think the answer is an unequivocal yes. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 08, 2021, 08:32:12 pm
Sorry, Curt that is utter B.S.

In no way arguing that is equal, because the Republicans went of the deep end enough to get me to switch my party affiliation to No Party in Nebraska, but yeah the Democrats haven’t been interested in unity except for a brief moment around 9/11. That doesn’t mean the are in any way on par with Republicans, but the country has become far more polarized than it was. Democrats and Republicans used to be able to work together to do things like pass a budget, they haven’t done that since 43.

Here is an interview with Senator Sasse from today.

https://hughhewitt.com/senator-ben-sasse-on-impeachment-and-transition-the-gop-in-minority/

He touches on a lot of things including Trump’s response to the storming of the capital.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 08, 2021, 08:34:16 pm
There is now a report that McConnell has sent a memo to his caucus that if the House votes for impeachment, he will not allow consideration to begin until January 19th.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 08, 2021, 08:37:19 pm
There is now a report that McConnell has sent a memo to his caucus that if the House votes for impeachment, he will not allow consideration to begin until January 19th.

To be fair, he was outlining the rules of the Senate which say that, unless they have unanimous consent, they can’t do anything on the impeachment until they are back in full session. If that doesn’t happen, which it obviously wouldn’t, the rules tie his hands on this which I’m sure is just fine with him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 08, 2021, 08:49:58 pm
Here is my fantasy.  To avoid federal prosecution, Trump agrees to resign if Pence agrees to pardon him.  Pence agrees.  Trump resigns. Pence does nothing. The ultimate revenge for how Trump treated him during and after the insurrection.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 08, 2021, 09:13:26 pm
There seems to be some argument that the Senate can still proceed with impeachment hearings after Trump leaves office with punishment being that he can’t hold federal office in the future.

I wonder if you could impeach Ivanka as well?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 08, 2021, 09:30:57 pm
There seems to be some argument that the Senate can still proceed with impeachment hearings after Trump leaves office with punishment being that he can’t hold federal office in the future.

I wonder if you could impeach Ivanka as well?

They definitely can impeach him after he’s out of office.  If he’s impeached, he loses his pension, $1M/yr travel budget, secret service protection, and the right to hold any future office. So, following through on this is worthwhile.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 08, 2021, 09:39:48 pm
They definitely can impeach him after he’s out of office.  If he’s impeached, he loses his pension, $1M/yr travel budget, secret service protection, and the right to hold any future office. So, following through on this is worthwhile.

Exactly!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 08, 2021, 09:41:43 pm
Sorry, Curt that is utter B.S.
I'm sure from your viewpoint it is.  That's the problem, neither side can see their own flaws
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 08, 2021, 09:44:58 pm
Here is my fantasy.  To avoid federal prosecution, Trump agrees to resign if Pence agrees to pardon him.  Pence agrees.  Trump resigns. Pence does nothing. The ultimate revenge for how Trump treated him during and after the insurrection.
. That's been predicted already this summer.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 08, 2021, 09:54:12 pm
Daniel Dale
@ddale8
·
52m
Twitter tells
@b_fung
 that it has banned Trump’s
@teamtrump
 campaign account because the president tried tweeting there tonight after his own account was banned and his attempted tweets were swiftly deleted from the government
@POTUS
 account.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 08, 2021, 10:00:17 pm
Daniel Dale
@ddale8
·
52m
Twitter tells
@b_fung
 that it has banned Trump’s
@teamtrump
 campaign account because the president tried tweeting there tonight after his own account was banned and his attempted tweets were swiftly deleted from the government
@POTUS
 account.

I wonder if he knows that he has a press briefing room right down the hall and that it would be full with TV cameras on if he went in there and starting talking?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 08, 2021, 10:09:35 pm
I'm sure from your viewpoint it is.  That's the problem, neither side can see their own flaws

Curt - I am disappointed and, frankly hurt by your response.

The Obama administration repeatedly did its very best to try to find middle ground with Republicans, all the while McConnell repeatedly committed himself to making sure he blocked anything Obama attempted. He was explicit about this, yet Obama continued to try to compromise. The Obama administration repeatedly thought they had reached compromises with Boehner,, only to have the agreement blown apart after Boehner went back to his House members. 

Maybe you just were not paying close attention during that period. But treating both sides as anything like the same or even similar is flat out wrong. I am guessing you know who Norm Ornstein is.  He's a republican, a moderate Republican, who has documented the degree to which the divisions have been driven, overwhelmingly, by Republicans.

I would never suggest that Democrats are without fault. I have pointed out, here, my history of ACTIVELY WORKING WITH Republicans against corrupt Democrats in Chicago and Illinois. So I deeply resent and am insulted by your characterization. I am not one of those people who are incapable of acknowledging mistakes or limitations of Dems. But it is demonstrably wrong to claim that "Neither side has expressed interest in unifying since Clinton's first term." I expect better of you than that simplistic characterization.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 08, 2021, 10:51:20 pm
Ron, had no intentions of causing you pain.   I respect Barack Obama.  I think he conducted himself with grace and dignity, a Christian family man who was above reproach.  One cannot even begin to compare Obama and Trump as civil, courteous human beings.  I would vote for him over most Republicans any day.   That said, I didn't agree with all his policies.

One thing I do recall, in the early days of his administration, he attended a Republican caucus and basically told them, I won, you lost, I don't need you.  That may have been because there was already scuttlebutt that Republicans were conspiring to derail his administration.   Why?  As retribution for the Democrats undermining the Bush administration because they still begrudged the Gore loss and the 2004 close election.  Both parties have practiced a scorched earth approach since the days of Clinton-Lewinsky.   Yes, I will agree that Republicans of late have been far worse, particularly with the invasion of the Trumpers, but I don't think the Democrats are blameless. 

I still hope that the Republicans either turn the party over to the Trump extremists and start a new, fresh party or the exorcise the Trumers.  Can they win without the Trumpers?  Probably not, but it's like rebuilding a baseball team; they'll have to re-evaluate what Americans need and want and build from there.

I apologize if I hurt your feelings, Ron.  Definitely not my intent.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 08, 2021, 10:54:26 pm
To be fair, he was outlining the rules of the Senate which say that, unless they have unanimous consent, they can’t do anything on the impeachment until they are back in full session. If that doesn’t happen, which it obviously wouldn’t, the rules tie his hands on this which I’m sure is just fine with him.
They definitely can impeach him after he’s out of office.  If he’s impeached, he loses his pension, $1M/yr travel budget, secret service protection, and the right to hold any future office. So, following through on this is worthwhile.
  Yeah, I don't think a lot of people know that.  Strip the dickhead.  Too bad that can't just skip from Obama to Biden in the history books.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 08, 2021, 11:14:16 pm
Great comments by Biden:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/08/biden-praises-mcconnell-romney-vpx.cnn
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on January 09, 2021, 12:35:35 am
Disqualification from holding future office is not automatic with an impeachment conviction.

Senate can vote separately, after a conviction, whether to disqualify permanently. That sanction is a separate matter, after the conviction.

There is Congressional precedent that the latter vote need only be a majority vote, unlike the higher bar for conviction. The Supreme Court would probably have to decide that question, if the permanent disqualification vote was only a simple majority.

In any case, if Trump were convicted, highly likely permanent exclusion would pass too with a similar margin.

Doubt conviction will happen unless Trump engages in more mischief—-a scary proposition as to what that might be. If goes past January 20, doubt that Biden is going to want all the air sucked out dealing with Trump during Biden’s early days in office. That’s when actual legislative work traditionally moves into high gear by a new administration.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 09, 2021, 06:20:55 am
The reason conviction might just have a small chance is that Republicans have the most vested in ensuring Trump can't be their nominee in 2024, which can only happen after a conviction.  There are several in the Senate who would seek the nomination themselves if Trump were out of the picture, and others who fear the further damage another Trump nomination could inflict on the party.  I still think it's a longshot but it's not a total impossibility.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 09, 2021, 10:30:05 am

One thing I do recall, in the early days of his administration, he attended a Republican caucus and basically told them, I won, you lost, I don't need you.  That may have been because there was already scuttlebutt that Republicans were conspiring to derail his administration.   Why?  As retribution for the Democrats undermining the Bush administration because they still begrudged the Gore loss and the 2004 close election.  Both parties have practiced a scorched earth approach since the days of Clinton-Lewinsky.   Yes, I will agree that Republicans of late have been far worse, particularly with the invasion of the Trumpers, but I don't think the Democrats are blameless. 


Curt - I would welcome some sort of documentation about the meeting you describe as happening. I do not recall that.  In any event, substantively, the Dems repeatedly sought compromises over specific legislation, beginning with the Affordable Care Act and through the rest of Obama's two terms, particularly during the first term. McConnell famously announced upon becoming majority leader that he had one priority, which was blocking any success by Obama. No majority leader, to my knowledge, had ever done anything like that.

It's disappointing that you do not realize the enormous gulf between the behavior of Dems and the behavior of the Republicans, beginning with Newt Gingrich and escalated further by the Congressional Republicans in both houses under Obama.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 09, 2021, 10:34:41 am
The hard left just doesn't have the volume of popular support that the hard right has.  That's been true for decades.  It makes it politically much more difficult for Republicans to compromise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 09, 2021, 11:22:11 am
Curt - I would welcome some sort of documentation about the meeting you describe as happening. I do not recall that.  In any event, substantively, the Dems repeatedly sought compromises over specific legislation, beginning with the Affordable Care Act and through the rest of Obama's two terms, particularly during the first term. McConnell famously announced upon becoming majority leader that he had one priority, which was blocking any success by Obama. No majority leader, to my knowledge, had ever done anything like that.

It's disappointing that you do not realize the enormous gulf between the behavior of Dems and the behavior of the Republicans, beginning with Newt Gingrich and escalated further by the Congressional Republicans in both houses under Obama.
I respect your opinion.  My issue is not that people like Newt weren't doorknobs like Hawley today.  My issue is with "enormous." 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 09, 2021, 11:50:40 am
Mexico has now said it WILL pay for the Wall.  And Canada wants one too.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 09, 2021, 12:40:16 pm
I respect your opinion.  My issue is not that people like Newt weren't doorknobs like Hawley today.  My issue is with "enormous." 

OK.  Can we agree on "substantial" or "significant?" See, this Dem is willing to compromise to find unity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on January 09, 2021, 12:45:22 pm
Given recent posts, I thought this may be of interest. Senate conviction does not require 67 senators; it requires 2/3 of all senators "present." Some R senators could simply stay away, at least in theory.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2019/10/10/the-impeachment-loophole-no-ones-talking-about/

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on January 09, 2021, 12:48:54 pm
Another option would be for the House to impeach but to delay the Senate trial until after Biden and Congress tend to other pressing emergencies in the days following 1/20. They could have a real trial--taking the time necessary to educate the public about the truly terrible facts--this spring or summer, with the idea of convicting solely for purposes of stripping him of the capacity to hold federal office again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 09, 2021, 12:52:26 pm
OK.  Can we agree on "substantial" or "significant?" See, this Dem is willing to compromise to find unity.
LOL   Yes, I'll compromise.   

I think there are issues that neither side can see a compromise which causes polarization and ill will.    In the 1800's it was slavery.   Today, it is abortion.  How do you compromise when one side sincerely believes a woman is being deprived of her rights if she cannot control her own body and the other side believes the fetus is a human life and ending it is wrong?  The reason I mention this is because it is usually the sticking point on most bills going through Congress.   There's a really good bill that helps people and at the last minute a pro-choice Representative sticks an amendment to it and then pro-life people are forced to vote no and all most people see is that one party is opposed to something good.  The opposite is also true.  A lot of bills die because a pro-life amendment gets hung on it.

In the $600 stimulus bill, how many billions were given to foreign countries instead of increasing the 600?  I'm sure a lot of that pork was stuck on the bill by members of both parties.  Can we find out which Representatives or Senators responded to special interests instead of their own constituents? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 09, 2021, 12:52:34 pm
Another option would be for the House to impeach but to delay the Senate trial until after Biden and Congress tend to other pressing emergencies in the days following 1/20. They could have a real trial--taking the time necessary to educate the public about the truly terrible facts--this spring or summer, with the idea of convicting solely for purposes of stripping him of the capacity to hold federal office again.

It would be nice if GA would hurry up and certify the Senate elections. I don’t know if the new Senators would be seated during this recess if the election was certified but, if they were, then the decision on timing would no longer be McConnell’s which would be nice. I’m sure he’d love to disrupt the first days of the new congress and admin if he could which an impeachment trial certainly would.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 09, 2021, 01:02:08 pm
In the $600 stimulus bill, how many billions were given to foreign countries instead of increasing the 600?  I'm sure a lot of that pork was stuck on the bill by members of both parties.  Can we find out which Representatives or Senators responded to special interests instead of their own constituents?

Very little. Most of the aid that was in the spending bill that the COVID bill was attached to came from the White House.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 09, 2021, 01:07:44 pm
It would be nice if GA would hurry up and certify the Senate elections. I don’t know if the new Senators would be seated during this recess if the election was certified but, if they were, then the decision on timing would no longer be McConnell’s which would be nice. I’m sure he’d love to disrupt the first days of the new congress and admin if he could which an impeachment trial certainly would.

McConnell retains control until it becomes Vice President Harris and the new senator from California is seated.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 09, 2021, 01:26:01 pm

In the $600 stimulus bill, how many billions were given to foreign countries instead of increasing the 600?  I'm sure a lot of that pork was stuck on the bill by members of both parties.  Can we find out which Representatives or Senators responded to special interests instead of their own constituents? 

There were two separate bills. You are referring to the general funding bill, not to the coronavirus bill. The foreign aid money was, in fact, based on a budget submitted by Trump and the Republicans.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 09, 2021, 05:43:47 pm
I respect your opinion.  My issue is not that people like Newt weren't doorknobs like Hawley today.  My issue is with "enormous." 

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

- Mitch McConnell
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 10, 2021, 12:40:40 pm
Interesting.  My post on 5903 only shows up on my desktop, not my phone or tablet.  Dave, can you explain?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 10, 2021, 01:01:37 pm
Interesting.  My post on 5903 only shows up on my desktop, not my phone or tablet.  Dave, can you explain?

When you use quote you see a bunch of code in your own posting box.  It looks like you are trying to post an attachment to an email.  Then as soon as you ask for a preview nothing is there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 10, 2021, 01:40:03 pm
Ah, yes, my great technological skills.  Can you see it, Bennett.  If I'm the only one that can see it, I might as well take it down.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 10, 2021, 03:28:50 pm
https://twitter.com/schwarzenegger/status/1348249481284874240?s=21

What I think is a really powerful message from Arnold.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 10, 2021, 04:11:42 pm
That was impressive.  Thanks for the link.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 11, 2021, 07:21:12 am
The military may not have been an active participant in the attempted coup but some parts did what they could to help.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sund-riot-national-guard/2021/01/10/fc2ce7d4-5384-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 11, 2021, 12:33:54 pm
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/11/ana-navarro-alice-stewart-i-call-bull-trump-republican-tent-sot-newday-vpx.cnn
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 11, 2021, 12:58:34 pm
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/11/ana-navarro-alice-stewart-i-call-bull-trump-republican-tent-sot-newday-vpx.cnn

Maybe not some vague notion of values that may or may not have ever existed in the past. But he definitely represents the values of the GOP today and 74 million votes and one coup attempt prove it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 11, 2021, 01:10:17 pm
Trump liked to use the term RINO whenever a Republican didn't support him.  Trump is the biggest RINO of all time.  That's why many Republicans are leaving the party.  Yes, the bastard got a lot of votes; there aren't that many Republicans.  Statistics seem to indicate that as many as 10% voted for Biden or didn't vote at all.  That means that a helluvalot of people who have identified as Democrats or Independents in the past, bought into Trumps bull ****.  That's why I bristle when the media or some posters say "all" Republicans.  That's not true.  Racists and haters from both parties united in their twisted way behind the big RINO. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 11, 2021, 01:55:45 pm
Trump liked to use the term RINO whenever a Republican didn't support him.  Trump is the biggest RINO of all time.  That's why many Republicans are leaving the party.  Yes, the bastard got a lot of votes; there aren't that many Republicans.  Statistics seem to indicate that as many as 10% voted for Biden or didn't vote at all.  That means that a helluvalot of people who have identified as Democrats or Independents in the past, bought into Trumps bull ****.  That's why I bristle when the media or some posters say "all" Republicans.  That's not true.  Racists and haters from both parties united in their twisted way behind the big RINO.

You might want to consider that you are the RINO not Republican president, leader of the party, and 74 million people who voted for him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on January 11, 2021, 02:32:46 pm
The military may not have been an active participant in the attempted coup but some parts did what they could to help.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sund-riot-national-guard/2021/01/10/fc2ce7d4-5384-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html

“Did what they could to help” the attempted coup?

As the article linked notes, this was a combination of bureaucratic turf issues, ineptitude, and very bad judgment. And, we’ll find out much more when there are Congressional hearings on the matter.

But, the notion that the Secretary of the Army tried to help the insurrectionists is shameful. Let’s see the evidence to support that.

The backdrop to this was that Trump’s misuse of the Guard last June in DC was an embarrassment to the military and they were wary about their presence when other forms of security had primary responsibility. Obviously, they should have responded much faster on 1/6 but to attribute that, without evidence, to a desire “to help” the insurrectionists is shameful.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 11, 2021, 05:16:00 pm
You might want to consider that you are the RINO not Republican president, leader of the party, and 74 million people who voted for him.
  No, a reject that.  Trump hijacked the party that he felt he could most influence and would be the easiest.  He wanted to be President and if catering to racists and separatists was necessary, fine.  I don't believe he was Republican before 2015...and he still isn't one.  It was just a convenient label.  He and Cruz and Hawley and Cotton and several others can all go to hell.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 11, 2021, 05:21:14 pm
In fairness, Trump's approval rating among those who identify as Republicans has been somewhere north of 80%.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 11, 2021, 05:48:13 pm
Then I and many of my friends are in the 20%.

I'd like to know how many of that 80% identified as Republican before 2016.   Like I said, many weren't voting Republican as much as they were voting against Hillary.  Biden provided no such issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 11, 2021, 05:51:27 pm
It seems clear to me that a majority of national Republican politicians view Trumpism as the future of their party.  There's no other way to explain their behavior.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 11, 2021, 05:59:18 pm
It seems clear to me that a majority of national Republican politicians view Trumpism as the future of their party.  There's no other way to explain their behavior.
Lord, I hope you're wrong.   Then, more than ever, I hope a new party forms.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 11, 2021, 06:02:10 pm
It seems clear to me that a majority of national Republican politicians view Trumpism as the future of their party.  There's no other way to explain their behavior.

Denial is more than a river in Africa.

This is the crux of the matter.  Trump is the symptom, not the disease - the result, not the cause.  Republicanism had been building to Trump for decades and he was the price they (and the country) paid for that.  Even if some try and pretend otherwise and wash their hands of him now, the stain won't come off that easily.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 12, 2021, 08:00:44 am
  No, a reject that.  Trump hijacked the party that he felt he could most influence and would be the easiest.  He wanted to be President and if catering to racists and separatists was necessary, fine.  I don't believe he was Republican before 2015...and he still isn't one.  It was just a convenient label.  He and Cruz and Hawley and Cotton and several others can all go to hell.

I don’t know what your attachment to the label is but you need to come to terms with the fact that the Republican Party is not what you think it is. I also hate to tell you but it’s been this way for awhile.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 12, 2021, 11:40:40 am
I don’t know what your attachment to the label is but you need to come to terms with the fact that the Republican Party is not what you think it is. I also hate to tell you but it’s been this way for awhile.
  Thanks Jack.  The Republican Party was the party of my family for years.  Most of my friends are or were Republicans.   Do I realize that many Republicans of the past would not recognize this Party?  Yes.  Many Republicans including past Presidents and Cabinet people are disassociating. 

I leaned to drive in my dad's DeSotos.   I still miss that brand.   Maybe my sentiment for the GOP is what New York fans felt when the Dodgers and Giants moved to the West Coast.  Or when a favorite athlete or entertainer dies.    That kind of thing.  But you are right.  I have to go to look for another party.  If I can find my tinfoil hat, maybe I'll be a Libertarian.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 12, 2021, 12:43:08 pm
Come join me in the land of newly minted Independents. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 12, 2021, 04:07:53 pm
If McConnell is in favor of impeachment and finding Trump guilty, I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that the Senate will let him off the hook this time. It also wouldn't surprise me at all if McConnell wanted to ditch Trump from the party completely now that he's no longer useful.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/12/us/mitch-mcconnell-trump-impeachment.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on January 12, 2021, 04:29:01 pm
FYI  trump today again proclaimed that he "has no responsibly for anything" and instead blamed Antifa for showing up at his rally and then marching to the Capitol to rioti at his behest.




Impeach the motherfucker now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on January 12, 2021, 05:37:16 pm
Republican members of Congress implicated in collaborating with organizers of the Jan 6 insurrection:

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2021/01/10/reps-andy-biggs-paul-gosar-implicated-capitol-insurrection/6614177002/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 12, 2021, 05:43:08 pm
If McConnell is in favor of impeachment and finding Trump guilty, I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that the Senate will let him off the hook this time. It also wouldn't surprise me at all if McConnell wanted to ditch Trump from the party completely now that he's no longer useful.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/12/us/mitch-mcconnell-trump-impeachment.html

It wasn't the Democrats who went to Richard Nixon and told him it was time to go,  it was the Republicans.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 12, 2021, 05:53:33 pm
It wasn't the Democrats who went to Richard Nixon and told him it was time to go,  it was the Republicans.
  Arrest them.  States should recall them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on January 12, 2021, 07:39:02 pm
Republican members of Congress implicated in collaborating with organizers of the Jan 6 insurrection:

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2021/01/10/reps-andy-biggs-paul-gosar-implicated-capitol-insurrection/6614177002/

That’s an Op-Ed, not a news piece.

Are there any journalists detailing this?  If so, then it’s newsworthy. Until then....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 12, 2021, 10:13:04 pm
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2021/01/10/paul-gosar-andy-biggs-credited-video-organizing-trump-crowd-dc/6603721002/

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 12, 2021, 11:54:57 pm
https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/politics/2021/01/12/mikie-sherrill-pro-trump-rioters-got-tour-congress-members/6648386002/?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 13, 2021, 07:53:30 am
Many people expect Donald Trump to announce a large number of pardons on January 19.  Will he have the guts to include this guy and his buddies?

(https://www.kxan.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/2021/01/p1-3.jpg?w=1024&h=683&crop=1)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 13, 2021, 01:32:26 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/13/no-trump-cant-pardon-himself-impeachment-would-strip-him-that-power/

Seems like if he tried it would end up in the courts or possibly even congress to see if they could stand.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 13, 2021, 02:19:08 pm
I'd like Reb or East's opinion.  Seems to me the pardon of impeachment refers to someone else's.  For example, if John Roberts got impeached, Trump couldn't pardon him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on January 13, 2021, 02:28:37 pm
The Constitution prevents the president from using the pardon power to stop or undo an impeachment. But an impeached president continues to hold the pardon power unless and until removal from office.

The issue of a power to pardon oneself is an open one. The arguments against it that the constitutional language of "granting" a pardon is better understood as authorizing pardons only for third parties, and that there is no good reason why anyone should have this power in a country where nobody is supposed to be above the law. I tend to think that a self-pardon would not prove to be effective if a subsequent president took the position that a president cannot pardon himself and prosecuted a self-pardoned ex-president anyway.  But obviously corrupt pardons to third parties are pretty universally regarded as effective, even though they can give rise to charges like obstruction of justice against their grantor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 13, 2021, 03:04:37 pm
There seems to be a missing post from this morning.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 13, 2021, 03:37:34 pm
Trump has officially been impeached again. Ten Republicans voted to impeach, which makes this the most bipartisan impeachment in history.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 13, 2021, 03:45:23 pm
Trump has officially been impeached again. Ten Republicans voted to impeach, which makes this the most bipartisan impeachment in history.

David Pakman (@dpakman) Tweeted:
Donald Trump has now been impeached twice, lost the popular vote twice, lost the House for Republicans in 2018, lost the Senate for Republicans in 2020, and made himself a one-term President. WINNING!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on January 13, 2021, 03:53:23 pm
I question whether 10 Republican votes in the House makes the impeachment "bipartisan".
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 13, 2021, 03:58:14 pm
So much impeaching.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 13, 2021, 04:03:44 pm
I question whether 10 Republican votes in the House makes the impeachment "bipartisan".

Well, it's not bipartisan...but it's more bipartisan than any other in history. The previous high from the president's party was 5 votes from the Democrats when Clinton was impeached.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 13, 2021, 06:00:39 pm
Listening to all the comments...alright...MOST of the comments today, I don't agree with the Articles depending on Trump's speech prior to the DC riot.  He should have been impeached for inciting an insurrection by lying for 2 months about the election being stolen even when it was shown him in black and white that wasn't true.  Most of those idiots who were in Washington on the 6th, had been bombarded with those lies everyday since the Election.  If a candidate wants to contest an election, ask for a recount, or just point out a couple of discrepancies, fine, but spreading deliberate lies and rumors, isn't fine.  That's what fired him the lunatic fringe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on January 14, 2021, 12:14:01 am
There are now more troops here in DC than in Afghanistan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 14, 2021, 05:58:11 pm
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/14/politics/fbi-director-wray-us-capitol-suspects/index.html

Excellent
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 14, 2021, 07:01:44 pm
It's becoming increasingly clear that the terrorists were aided and abetted by several members of the House, up to and including giving them reconnoissance tours the day before the attack.  It's going to be very interesting to see what, if any, consequences they suffer as the R leadership keeps demanding "unity and healing" in the press.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 15, 2021, 09:07:03 am

Garry Kasparov
@Kasparov63
Attack, grab territory, then sue for peace and call your victims the warmongers. The GOP's calls for deescalation and unity today are much like the pattern of foreign aggression by dictatorships.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 15, 2021, 12:30:11 pm
He still doesn't get it and probably never will

Trump's team is reportedly trying to assemble a crowd for a 'major send-off' hours before Biden's inauguration

Quote
"Trump has expressed interest to some in a military-style sendoff and a crowd of supporters," CNN says, but it's unclear "whether that occurs at the White House, Joint Base Andrews, or his final destination, Palm Beach International Airport."

https://news.yahoo.com/trumps-team-reportedly-trying-assemble-052400350.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 15, 2021, 08:08:31 pm

Greg Sargent
@ThePlumLineGS
·
10h
The new Post poll has some awful findings among Republicans:

51% say GOP leaders didn't go far enough in nullifying election

56% say Trump bears zero blame for the insurrection

66% say he has acted responsibly
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 15, 2021, 11:04:04 pm
So Trump invited the My Pillow guy to the White House for a discussion of invoking the Insurrection Act and declaring martial law.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/15/politics/cia-kash-patel-mypillow-notes-lindell-trump/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 17, 2021, 10:04:31 pm
This is f-ing great.

@kylegriffin1: WASHINGTON (AP) -- Defense officials tell AP they fear possible inside attack at inauguration, will have National Guard troops vetted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on January 18, 2021, 12:30:24 am
Just have the inauguration at a secure indoor site and televise from there. I don't care if it's a bad look - having the incoming president assassinated by his predecessor's fascist supporters is a worse one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 18, 2021, 07:48:50 am
Here’s what I hope happens on January 20:

The Secret Service, the FBI, the U.S. Army, the Capitol Police, DC Metro, the National Guard, the Forest Service, NUMA, and everyone else involved in protecting the inauguration comes up with a plan that tricks Trump’s rioters into doing something they just can’t resist.  An opening that looks like a sure fire way to the podium suddenly appears and they all rush into it only to find themselves completely surrounded.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 19, 2021, 11:14:31 pm
Bill Kristol  @BillKristol  10h
I think Mitch is looking forward to hanging back on the roll call, and then being the 67th vote for convicting Trump.

I'll believe that when I see it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on January 19, 2021, 11:31:46 pm
(https://chorus.stimg.co/22246371/ows_4d24caec_294e_4509_82b4_ec9b67621d28.jpg?auto=compress&crop=faces&dpr=2.5&w=300)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 20, 2021, 11:04:28 am
He who shall not be named is gone and Joe Biden is President of the United States of America.  This is the best day I've had in a long time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 20, 2021, 11:08:23 am
He who shall not be named is gone and Joe Biden is President of the United States of America.  This is the best day I've had in a long time.

Can’t wait to find out which jurisdiction gets the honor of issuing the first indictment.  Hope it happens soon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on January 20, 2021, 11:31:19 am
NY most likely.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 20, 2021, 11:41:35 am
He who shall not be named is gone and Joe Biden is President of the United States of America.  This is the best day I've had in a long time.

Man, I just thought everybody was really happy that I was getting my second COVID shot today.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on January 20, 2021, 12:04:11 pm
I figured it was relief that I survived the COVID...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on January 20, 2021, 03:51:29 pm
Warnock, Ossoff, and Padilla (replacement for Harris) were just sworn in, so now the Democrats control the Senate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dihard on January 21, 2021, 02:13:38 pm
And we have a president who is sane. And decent.

I honestly feel like I can breathe easier today.

Maybe we’ve now finished paying the devil for that 2016 World Series?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on January 25, 2021, 10:51:08 pm
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/25/politics/rob-portman-retirement-senate-moderate-gop/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on February 01, 2021, 08:30:44 am
What a surprise, a white supremacist thinks a white supremacy symbol is no problem.

I wonder what he thinks of his WH Press Secretary flashing the white supremacy symbol?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 01, 2021, 08:35:32 am
I wonder what he thinks of his WH Press Secretary flashing the white supremacy symbol?

You know (maybe you don't), intent matters.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on February 01, 2021, 11:57:21 am
The Hypocrisy.

(http://bbf.createaforum.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=347.0;attach=1024;image)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on February 01, 2021, 12:10:51 pm
I don't recall anyone calling Trump a white supremacist for that particular thing (though maybe somebody did). I definitely recall him being called a supporter of white supremacists for his refusal to condemn them, and for his implied if not explicit support of them. No president in my lifetime has done those sorts of things before him. To deny he took those actions is itself deeply troubling.  To conflate Trump's overall behavior with Psaki's motion is beyond absurd and I'm sure you know that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 01, 2021, 12:49:07 pm
Here is a decent summary of the whole OK sign.  I remembered it more during the Kavanaugh hearings. 

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/5/17821946/white-power-hand-signal-brett-kavanaugh-confirmation-hearing-zina-bash-4chan
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on February 04, 2021, 09:58:21 am
Curt incase you were under any dilusions of what the GOP is now... they are defending the nut job from GA... and blasting Cheney... the GOP as we knew it is dead. its now the QOP.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 04, 2021, 01:27:14 pm
No dilusions.  No delusions either.  Yes, it is in disarray.  It's a train wreck.  But there are plenty of people in this country who do not agree with a far left agenda, including conservative Democrats.  The trick will be to find a means to unify them behind someone trustworthy, an anti-Trump.  Nobody said it would be easy.  Or possible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 04, 2021, 01:35:16 pm
No dilusions.  No delusions either.  Yes, it is in disarray.  It's a train wreck.  But there are plenty of people in this country who do not agree with a far left agenda, including conservative Democrats.  The trick will be to find a means to unify them behind someone trustworthy, an anti-Trump.  Nobody said it would be easy.  Or possible.

What is the far left agenda?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 04, 2021, 01:40:16 pm
The stuff advocated by Jack Birdbath.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on February 04, 2021, 01:53:04 pm
Smartmatic sues Fox News, their hosts, Giuliani, and Powell for $2.7 billion over their lies about voting machines:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/04/media/smartmatic-fox-news-giuliani-powell-lawsuit/index.html

Now do the same to Newsmax and OAN. And don't accept any kind of settlement--get all the money. And Dominion should jump board on too. Give these propaganda networks some real consequences and this kind of nonsense will stop.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on February 04, 2021, 02:09:12 pm
No dilusions.  No delusions either.  Yes, it is in disarray.  It's a train wreck.  But there are plenty of people in this country who do not agree with a far left agenda, including conservative Democrats.  The trick will be to find a means to unify them behind someone trustworthy, an anti-Trump.  Nobody said it would be easy.  Or possible.

I am not a Republican or a conservative. But I also believe in having a competitive two party system (without one of them being loony).  So I truly hope that principled conservatives find a way to create a new party, since I see no hope of them reclaiming the current version of the Republican Party.  But that will probably mean accepting a transition period in which they are losing elections while building a new party. I just don't see another path for them.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on February 04, 2021, 02:26:12 pm
response to br: I doubt it will.  Most people are unaware that no news organization is obliged to tell the truth, not even about the weather.  If the NWS says that 2" of snow with a 5 % chance of 6" , the lead will be "Up to six inches heading our way." They can twist and shade any story to their viewpoint .  I think lawsuits like this won't go far.  Lawsuits would be filed against all broadcasters sooner or later.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 04, 2021, 03:46:57 pm
What is the far left agenda?

Access to voting that isn't race-based, moderately progressive taxation, any environmental regulation, reproductive choice, and acknowledging that global warming exists.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 04, 2021, 03:47:34 pm
Socialism
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 04, 2021, 04:17:38 pm
Access to voting that isn't race-based, moderately progressive taxation, any environmental regulation, reproductive choice, and acknowledging that global warming exists.

Don't forget about widespread access to healthcare.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 04, 2021, 04:17:48 pm
Access to voting that isn't race-based, moderately progressive taxation, any environmental regulation, reproductive choice, and acknowledging that global warming exists.

No puppies and sunshine? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 04, 2021, 04:24:08 pm
No puppies and sunshine? 

And, point proved.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on February 04, 2021, 04:44:12 pm
I am not a Republican or a conservative. But I also believe in having a competitive two party system (without one of them being loony).  So I truly hope that principled conservatives find a way to create a new party, since I see no hope of them reclaiming the current version of the Republican Party.  But that will probably mean accepting a transition period in which they are losing elections while building a new party. I just don't see another path for them.
I am not a Democrat or a liberal. But I also believe in having a competitive two party system (without both of them being loony). So I truly hope that principled liberals find a way to create a new party, since I see no hope of them reclaiming the current version of the Democratic Party. But that will probably mean accepting a transition period in which they are losing elections while building a new party. I just don’t see another path for them.

(Yeah, just as I figured...makes total sense now, and probably even more so in 4 years...)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 04, 2021, 04:56:53 pm
Again, what is the far left agenda that is so problematic?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on February 04, 2021, 06:01:18 pm
I am not a Democrat or a liberal. But I also believe in having a competitive two party system (without both of them being loony). So I truly hope that principled liberals find a way to create a new party, since I see no hope of them reclaiming the current version of the Democratic Party. But that will probably mean accepting a transition period in which they are losing elections while building a new party. I just don’t see another path for them.

(Yeah, just as I figured...makes total sense now, and probably even more so in 4 years...)

Seriously, do you honestly think that the current nature of the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are in in any way equivalent?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on February 04, 2021, 06:22:49 pm
Seriously, yes. I find them equally repulsive, both in personalities and in policies...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 04, 2021, 06:31:27 pm
Ron, I feel your pain.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 04, 2021, 07:47:00 pm
And, point proved.

That listing a bunch of things in benign terms is really productive, sure.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on February 06, 2021, 08:06:05 am
I talked about it before but you need to sue liars out of existence. Fox will survive but they’ve got real problems. It’s about damn time.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 18, 2021, 10:19:28 pm
Man Ted Cruz has some nice friends.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on February 18, 2021, 10:20:21 pm
Yeah, clearly it's his friends who are the problem.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 18, 2021, 10:28:30 pm
Ted Cruz is a **** stain and even his “friends” realize this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 12, 2021, 11:10:36 pm
Tim Young
If the Cubs and White Sox canceled a game every time a black person was shot and killed in Chicago, they'd never play baseball again.

Kaycee Sogard liked this tweet during the Cubs game. I’ll be so glad when they are gone.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 13, 2021, 08:24:01 am
That seems like more of an indictment of Chicago than of Sogard.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on April 13, 2021, 09:02:03 am
Sounds like Shelby County (TN) and the state of Mississippi are both halting distribution of the J&J vaccine temporarily...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 13, 2021, 09:08:47 am
Sounds like Shelby County (TN) and the state of Mississippi are both halting distribution of the J&J vaccine temporarily...
Saw something about the CDC recommending it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 13, 2021, 09:50:07 am
It sounds like the same issues that the AZ vaccine has and it was temporarily stopped in Europe before it was restarted.  0.000088% developed a clot.

Here are some other ways to look at it.
Dr. Angela Rasmussen
@angie_rasmussen
For perspective, here are some numbers:

1 in 1,000,000: J&J vaccine
1 in 3,000: oral contraceptives
1 in 5: hospitalized COVID-19 patients

As someone who got the J&J vaccine 8 days ago, and who took oral contraceptives for 20 years, I’ll take these odds.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on April 13, 2021, 10:59:34 am
Just hopefully they can get to the bottom of things with the J&J vaccine soon.  Literally last night I was chatting it up with a guy in my building who said he wouldn't take the vaccine unless whoever might force him to do it guaranteed him $10 million if something went seriously wrong.  News like this can't help with people like that.

I'm more than 2 weeks out from my J&J vaccination, and haven't dealt with even the slightest side effect. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 13, 2021, 11:06:44 am
It sounds like it will be a matter of days.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2021, 01:14:23 pm
Cannot believe it's been halted. Absolutely the wrong messaging at a time like this, given comparative odds to contraceptives or, just, you know, GETTING COVID.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 13, 2021, 01:56:23 pm
Yeah, not great messaging. My parents are currently refusing to get their shots but I was hoping I'd be able to eventually convince them to get the J&J vaccine since it's not an mRNA vaccine. This kind of reaction and reporting won't help me with that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 13, 2021, 02:10:34 pm
Why would the fact that it's an RNA vaccine increased one's hesitancy?  I don't get that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2021, 02:11:17 pm
It's newer vaccine technology.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on April 13, 2021, 02:12:53 pm
That's a good thing.  I would expect fewer technology-related side effects with an RNA vaccine as compared to an adenovirus vector-based vaccine.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 13, 2021, 02:32:22 pm
Cause people don't remember or didn't take high school biology and have no clue what mRNA is or dose.  It just sounds scary and they think it will rewrite their DNA and make them a lizard or something.  I literally just drew a picture to try and describe how it works and how it won't rewrite their DNA for a patient.  No clue if she'll get it or not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2021, 02:32:46 pm
Agreed, P2. That said, for the population that is vaccine-hesitant, their reasons for being vaccine-hesitant are unlikely to cause them to be favorable to new technology.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 13, 2021, 02:32:54 pm
Cause people don't remember or didn't take high school biology and have no clue what mRNA is or does.  It just sounds scary and they think it will rewrite their DNA and make them a lizard or something.  I literally just drew a picture to try and describe how it works and how it won't rewrite their DNA for a patient.  No clue if she'll get it or not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 13, 2021, 02:35:33 pm
Here CBJ, maybe this will work for your patients:

https://t.co/jEZGvF5m3Z?amp=1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on April 13, 2021, 02:35:36 pm
Cause people don't remember or didn't take high school biology and have no clue what mRNA is or dose.  It just sounds scary and they think it will rewrite their DNA and make them a lizard or something.  I literally just drew a picture to try and describe how it works and how it won't rewrite their DNA for a patient.  No clue if she'll get it or not.

Wait, it doesn't turn you into a lizard???  *Mind blown*
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 13, 2021, 02:42:41 pm
Agreed, P2. That said, for the population that is vaccine-hesitant, their reasons for being vaccine-hesitant are unlikely to cause them to be favorable to new technology.

Yeah, this is the issue. It's easy for anti-vaxxers to scare people by saying "we have no idea what the long term side effects are" or "this technology is going to cause your immune system to turn on itself." It's harder to do that when it uses more traditional (and therefore less scary) technology.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 13, 2021, 03:23:02 pm
That seems like more of an indictment of Chicago than of Sogard.

Chicago had
Here CBJ, maybe this will work for your patients:

https://t.co/jEZGvF5m3Z?amp=1


I've seen that before, so good. 

Wait, it doesn't turn you into a lizard???  *Mind blown*

So there is the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) anyone can make a report and what a vaccine might or might not have caused.  It is basically a collection tool for looking for worrying signals that a vaccine might be causing and if it needs to be investigated further.  Anti-vaxxers like to site as a collection of things that viruses have caused, back in the 2000's a doctor got to sick of he reported that the flu vaccine caused him to turn into the Incredible Hulk and the government had to report it and it was listed until the he signed a form saying they could take it down.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on April 13, 2021, 05:25:33 pm
Both the fact that it’s been halted and the media coverage are absolutely appalling.  People will die because of this stupidity.

It irks me that there are so many people refusing to be vaccinated and spoiled for choice with vaccines, and I’m desperate for it and likely won’t get the chance until December if I’m lucky.  What a difference having a competent government.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on April 13, 2021, 09:00:30 pm
Just got home from Kroger, and they made announcements twice while I was there for shoppers to come to the in-store clinic and get a Covid vaccine...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 15, 2021, 08:25:01 am
ACIP is pushing JNJ vaccine out 1 week. They are looking to see if more cases will get reported with additional attention. The options will be pulling the vaccine, limiting the use or unrestricted access. Just from reading tea leaves in the meeting my guess is the pull vaccine or limit the use to where 2 shots would be difficult to give. There are enough Pfizer/Moderna doses for everyone.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on April 15, 2021, 05:24:32 pm
Over 24 hours since my vaccine and I havent felt a thing.

Not even a sore shoulder really.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 15, 2021, 05:59:37 pm
Over 24 hours since my vaccine and I havent felt a thing.

Not even a sore shoulder really.
  Dusty, that's bad.  If you don't feel anything, you're either paralyzed or dead.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 15, 2021, 08:01:57 pm
https://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/reduced-covid-19-risk-healthcare-workers-after-vaccines-real-world-evidence/

Discusses three studies with how effective the vaccine is in health care workers. The answer is really freaking effective.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on May 29, 2021, 02:12:03 am
Authoritarian minority rule on full display in the Senate after Republicans successfully “vote down” the Bipartisan Jan-6 Commission by a tally of... 35 to 54.

That’s right, R’s “win” with 35 votes.

Can you imagine what Fox News would be saying if, in some “shithole” country, a wanna-be-strongman had fomented a mob insurrection to seize power? And then, after the effort failed, co-conspirators “won” a vote 35-to-54 to sweep the matter under the rug?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on August 01, 2021, 09:11:46 am
(https://images.dailykos.com/images/967638/story_image/071921.Owningthelibs.jpg?1626667948)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on August 09, 2021, 06:02:25 pm
Authoritarian minority rule on full display in the Senate after Republicans successfully “vote down” the Bipartisan Jan-6 Commission by a tally of... 35 to 54.

That’s right, R’s “win” with 35 votes.

Can you imagine what Fox News would be saying if, in some “shithole” country, a wanna-be-strongman had fomented a mob insurrection to seize power? And then, after the effort failed, co-conspirators “won” a vote 35-to-54 to sweep the matter under the rug?


Aren't there 100 Senators?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 09, 2021, 06:40:25 pm
Aren't there 100 Senators?

https://www.npr.org/2021/05/28/1000524897/senate-republicans-block-plan-for-independent-commission-on-jan-6-capitol-riot
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on August 12, 2021, 01:22:02 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E16cK7AXMAI3lk2.jpg)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on August 12, 2021, 07:58:01 pm
There's gossip that she's Stan Lane from the Midnight Express wrestling tag team of the 80's daughter.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on August 12, 2021, 08:02:27 pm
There's gossip that she's Stan Lane from the Midnight Express wrestling tag team of the 80's daughter.

Wow, seriously?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on August 12, 2021, 08:59:34 pm
You mean from The Fabulous Ones…
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 12, 2021, 09:08:46 pm
Dusty does not disappoint, kinda of a wild take.


https://www.salon.com/2021/07/31/republican-star-lauren-boebert-spins-fables-about-her-childhood--but-the-real-story-is-better/


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on August 13, 2021, 04:29:21 am
You mean from The Fabulous Ones…

So the Midnight Express to you is Bobby Eaton and Dennis Condrey?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on August 13, 2021, 08:30:49 am
Absolutely, and Steve Keirn/Stan Lane are the Fabulous Ones
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on August 13, 2021, 08:45:46 am
Actually I didn’t know Bobby Eaton had died a couple of weeks ago until I started Googling about Stan Lane.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on August 13, 2021, 08:49:58 am
Norvell Austin was also in the first iteration of Midnight Express...
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 15, 2021, 10:04:46 am
Non-political geographical question:  The Haiti earthquake, wouldn't the Dominican Republic also get quaked?  It's the same island.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 15, 2021, 10:52:40 am
It is a pretty big island, so there is plenty of distance for the effects to decrease.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on August 15, 2021, 10:56:09 am
The length of the island is not too much different than the distance between LA and SF.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 15, 2021, 06:16:20 pm
The length of the island is not too much different than the distance between LA and SF.

Having lived in SF during LA earthquakes and SoCal during SF earthquakes, I can tell you that distance makes a pretty big difference.


That said, I don't know offhand how far it is from one side to the other but Hispaniola is only about 20% the size of CA (or Japan) in terms of square KM. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 15, 2021, 06:32:36 pm
A recent article explained that the fault line runs through the Haiti half of the island.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 15, 2021, 10:02:52 pm
Hati also has a bunch of concrete buildings that can’t withstand earthquakes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 29, 2021, 12:01:50 pm
MESSAGE TO ALL TRUMPERS IN THE NEW ORLEANS AREA:  Ida is a democrat hoax.  Stay put.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on August 29, 2021, 01:03:08 pm
We have a fairly regular poster who is in NOLA.  He has not been active since early Saturday afternoon.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 29, 2021, 02:55:40 pm
MESSAGE TO ALL TRUMPERS IN THE NEW ORLEANS AREA:  Ida is a democrat hoax.  Stay put.
Considering the number of people who are likely about to lose their lives and the hundreds or thousands of others about to lose everything, I guess this was funny. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: wmljohn on August 29, 2021, 04:07:04 pm
To wish death upon someone because they disagree with you politically is truly disturbing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 29, 2021, 04:19:32 pm
I suppose my jest was "too soon" like, other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?   I've had my fill lately of people at school board meetings claiming that COVID wasn't real, that vaccines aren't real, etc. etc. etc.  Talk about risking people's lives.

 
To wish death upon someone because they disagree with you politically is truly disturbing.
I agree, Bill.  Like those guys on January 6 marching through Congress chanting for Pence and Pelosi's death.  Gotcha.  I agree.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on August 29, 2021, 05:38:28 pm
Like anyone Curt. 75 million people voted for Trump. Should they all congregate in New Orleans to be removed from existence because you disagree with their politics or even their stance on vaccination? I don't care one way or the other who is vaccinated. It is a personal, medical decision in a free country. 

Freedom is truly put to the test when you disagree with those who exercise it. Either you believe in it or you don't. The totalitarian regime shouting down anyone who dares disagree is the real virus in this country. If we lose our freedom to disagree over all this, we will not recognize the country that emerges. In fact many of us don't recognize it now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 29, 2021, 08:00:13 pm
Holy crap.  You deduced that from my joke?  Robb, get help.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 29, 2021, 08:10:06 pm
75 million people voted for Trump. Should they all congregate in New Orleans to be removed from existence

Ive heard worse ideas.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 29, 2021, 10:48:39 pm
It is a personal, medical decision in a free country.

Yes. And if your decision is to spread disease due to preferencing a set of risks that are objectively *much* worse (aka there are millions of COVID-dead, and so many survivors suffering significant long-term disability; the same cannot be said of the COVID vaccines, not in the least) then do not be surprised if the rest of society creates legal boundaries around your deadly choice in order to protect the common good.

There is no right to perpetrate harm.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 30, 2021, 06:47:24 pm
The Republican Party is literally turning into a death cult, they don’t need to congregate in New Orleans.

Vaccine mandates in the USA started with George Washington during the Revolutionary War.  Founding Fathers like Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison have all played roles in a small pox vaccine mandate. The Supreme Court has upheld vaccine mandates. 

People’s medical “choice” is clogging hospitals and canceling “elective” surgeries. Elective surgeries are literally anything that won’t kill you immediately. Sorry Mr. X we can’t remove your colon cancer yet, maybe next week. We literally have laws like seatbelts, speed limits, stop signs that impede personal freedom for the common good.

I just can’t with people anymore. Maybe it is because the Republican governors of Iowa and Nebraska are making my job so much harder. Maybe it is right wing nut jobs trying to prevent school boards from protecting my kids. Maybe it is me having to still swab people outside after 18 months because of FREEDUMB.

Speaking of which here is a great T Shirt.

https://www.raygunsite.com/products/sorry-about-the-ricketts-family
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 30, 2021, 08:06:05 pm
The Republican Party should adopt the New Hampshire state motto.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 30, 2021, 08:50:37 pm
The number of right wing radio hosts dying off is staggering. I mean at least the Fox News guys are smart enough to actually get the vaccine. I’m not sure why they want to kill off there viewership though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 30, 2021, 08:55:01 pm
Always plenty more idiots to step in, and always will be.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 30, 2021, 09:02:15 pm
Vaccine mandates in the USA started with George Washington during the Revolutionary War.  Founding Fathers like Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison have all played roles in a small pox vaccine mandate. The Supreme Court has upheld vaccine mandates.


Sir, just look at what the 5th circuit filled with trumpersters is doing... the Supreme court is lost for 30 years, they will reverse vaccine mandates. its only a matter of time.

Putin and Xi love the polarization of this country, and it will never end.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 30, 2021, 09:29:50 pm
The last vaccine case in front of the 5th circuit was in 2020. The anti-vaxxer lost.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 30, 2021, 09:38:16 pm
And, the Supreme Court just rejected a vaccine mandate appeal case. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 30, 2021, 09:42:35 pm
I am not referring to just Vaccine cases, just all of the horsesh!t that is coming out of the 5th circuit now.

One excellent example is the 5th circuit not agreeing to have a hearing on Texas's 6 week abortion ban, one that comes with a right of any citizen to sue a medical service provider (without standing in normal circumstances) for providing an abortion.

Here is another - https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/01/the-trump-bench-kyle-duncan-the-fifth-circuit.html

and another - https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/21A21.pdf

Trumps two lasting legacies will be placing unqualified partisans as judges, and destroying the faith of the citizenry in public health agencies. Nothing will turn this tide in our lifetimes.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 30, 2021, 09:45:21 pm
BTW just like the fact that most Americans cannot comprehend Climate change while 50 million people in this country live in severe drought regions... NONE of these people will come back to understand the value of public health in their lifetimes. We live in too fractured and information catered society for it to change.

Plan ahead. Buy property where water exists, others are coming for it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 01, 2021, 07:36:37 pm
Looks like roe v wade is now a state by state issue.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on September 01, 2021, 08:00:40 pm
There may be some jurisdictional issues unrelated to the Roe issue causing the Court to refrain from entering a stay. Just speculating. If so, the Court will probably issue an explanatory order at some point.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 01, 2021, 08:12:50 pm
There may be some jurisdictional issues unrelated to the Roe issue causing the Court to refrain from entering a stay. Just speculating. If so, the Court will probably issue an explanatory order at some point.

This far-right Supreme Court has been searching for a way to kill Roe v Wade without literally doing so and handing the Ds a political WMD on a silver platter.  The Texas law was designed to do exactly that, and at this point it looks to be working.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on September 01, 2021, 08:26:54 pm
It seems like the Texas abortion law violates Planned Parenthood v. Casey doesn't it?  That seems like the decision that's really going be put to the test. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 02, 2021, 06:08:53 am
Court votes 5-4 to allow law to go into effect.


So much wrong, violates decades of precedent and create a new bizarre  and random private enforcement mandate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 02, 2021, 06:34:52 am
Thanks, Bernie Bros.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 02, 2021, 12:23:56 pm
https://mobile.twitter.com/RMFifthCircuit/status/1433450825691668481

SCOTUS couldn’t find a reason to grant a emergency stay…. Meanwhile Texas how makes it ok to sue people for what they “intend to do”.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 02, 2021, 06:42:33 pm
There may be some jurisdictional issues unrelated to the Roe issue causing the Court to refrain from entering a stay. Just speculating. If so, the Court will probably issue an explanatory order at some point.

ECF, if you have other thoughts on the ruling, I'd be curious to hear them. The notion that Roe v Wade could be circumvented by essentially turning private citizens into bounty hunters... and that SCOTUS would essentially go *shrug* at the notion... it's a surprising outcome, to say the least.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 02, 2021, 06:46:27 pm
ECF, if you have other thoughts on the ruling, I'd be curious to hear them. The notion that Roe v Wade could be circumvented by essentially turning private citizens into bounty hunters... and that SCOTUS would essentially go *shrug* at the notion... it's a surprising outcome, to say the least.

Given the current environment on the S.C. and in the country generally, I find it anything but surprising.

Roberts managed for a long time to soft-pedal the conservative rewriting of the constitution by putting the brakes on whenever things got too crazy.  The arrival of Kavanagh and Barrett basically made that impossible - he's a passenger on a runaway train now, and all semblance of normalcy is obliterated.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Eastcoastfan on September 03, 2021, 08:57:05 am
Tico, the Court's failure to put the law on hold is appalling, although not nearly so appalling as the law itself. The pattern of the Court's recent "shadow docket" rulings reinforces the perception--fanned by the previous president when he spoke of "Trump judges" and "Obama judges"--that what happens at the Court in the most politically charged cases is not "law" but rather simply another form of partisan politics. As I noted in my earlier post, there are some real questions about the procedural posture of this case. Courts will have to make new law in order to justify injunctions staying laws of this sort. And the majority gave that as a reason for not intervening and putting the law on hold. But there also were procedural questions in the cases a few months back involving whether certain state COVID restrictions violated First Amendment Free Exercise rights. And in those cases, the conservative majority that let the Texas law go into effect did not let those procedural questions stop it from putting the state COVID restrictions on hold. If this case had involved a law that, say, put bounties on those who aided or abetted enrolling students in religious schools or purchasing handguns for self-defense in the home, the conservative majority would have (imo) put such laws on hold so fast your head would spin. But not so here, even though the Texas law defies existing Supreme Court precedent just as much.

In the long run, I don't expect the Court to allow a law such as this--which was designed precisely to allow a state legislature to enact an obviously unconstitutional law and to insulate it from judicial review--to work. I expect, in other words, that the Court will develop doctrine that allows lawsuits to be brought to enjoin such laws from going into effect. The Court will act to preserve its power of judicial review. Sadly, though, I think that the majority would have put a similar law targeting a constitutional right that they "like" on hold while they let the case be litigated in the lower courts. And if I am right about that, the argument for respecting the Court as a place where what happens is "legal" rather than "political/partisan," becomes less and less convincing.

In my own career, I clerked for three judges appointed by Republican presidents and three judges who were appointed by Democratic presidents. At no time in my career did I ever think that one of my judges voted or ruled in the way that he did for political/partisan reasons. Based on my own experience, I always argued back against those who said that what happens in the courts is all politics. I still think this--particularly at the lower court level. But the Supreme Court's recent behavior in "shadow docket" cases such as this one--as well as in cases involving voting rights--is certainly putting my belief to the test. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 03, 2021, 01:01:02 pm
That law is just scary as a medical provider.  Somebody can report me to the states and then sue me for possibly helping someone get an abortion.  If they win they get $10,000 + attorney fees.  If the medical provider wins they get stuck with paying for their attorney.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 03, 2021, 02:09:11 pm
It would be a real shame if people sued the state reps responsible for this over and over and over. Make their lives miserable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 03, 2021, 06:23:27 pm
Thanks, ECF, appreciate the informed perspective.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 03, 2021, 07:10:12 pm
There's a movement to get lawsuits filed against unvaccinated and unmasked people under this law because they could be threatening the health of a fetus.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 03, 2021, 07:37:00 pm
Oh, I’m sure we’ll hear plenty of talk of suing the unvaccinated and suing those who sell and/or purchase assault rifles. I’d be surprised to see any blue state legislatures enact such laws, but the comparison/threat will be made, for sure.

I’d not be in favor of any such legislation. The courts should absolutely and unequivocally strike down any attempt by either party to circumvent traditional legislative process, precedent, and convention by making bounty hunters of the general population. I’m still in shock that such a nakedly *terrible* idea was effectively (if temporarily) rubber-stamped by SCOTUS.

Like you, ECF, I’ve long tried to preserve at least some notion of non-partisanship of SCOTUS, but this latest ruling *really* strains that belief…
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 03, 2021, 07:42:04 pm
The slant is obviously liberal, but I think the analysis here is pretty spot on:

https://modelcitizen.substack.com/p/republicans-finally-caught-the-car

From the article:

“Conservatives who approve of the outcome here know full well that the majority would have said exactly what the dissenting minority said if a right they valued had been at stake. Which is to say, conservatives know that their cherished SCOTUS majority is legislating from the bench in a transparently ideological, partisan way — and without even a pretense of principled deliberation. Chief Justice Roberts knows it. As his sober dissent makes clear, the majority’s refusal to pull back and carefully consider the legality and implications of Texas’ scheme of vigilante deputization makes a mockery of balls-and-strikes neutrality and prudent judicial restraint.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 03, 2021, 07:59:12 pm
The slant is obviously liberal, but I think the analysis here is pretty spot on:

https://modelcitizen.substack.com/p/republicans-finally-caught-the-car

From the article:

“Conservatives who approve of the outcome here know full well that the majority would have said exactly what the dissenting minority said if a right they valued had been at stake. Which is to say, conservatives know that their cherished SCOTUS majority is legislating from the bench in a transparently ideological, partisan way — and without even a pretense of principled deliberation. Chief Justice Roberts knows it. As his sober dissent makes clear, the majority’s refusal to pull back and carefully consider the legality and implications of Texas’ scheme of vigilante deputization makes a mockery of balls-and-strikes neutrality and prudent judicial restraint.”

I had an least a modest hope that Alito, as someone from the pre-Trump era, might have some lines he wasn't willing to cross (no such hope with Thomas).  But clearly that's not the case.  Roberts has to be miserable atm, seeing the precious reputation he pretended to be a moderate in order to try and preserve utterly in ruins.  The court is a joke, and there seems nothing he can do to stop it - there are five members of the court with no concern for anything but legislating right-wing ideology who consider him irrelevant.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 03, 2021, 08:35:18 pm
Surprised by your hope that Alito would rule differently. He’s seemed the most brazenly partisan of any of the conservatives, and therefore most likely to support right wing legal chicanery.

Though I may not agree with all the politics of ACB or Gorsuch, both have struck me as more principled, and therefore more likely to pump the breaks on the citizen bounty hunter nonsense. Hell, I would have expected Thomas to dissent before Alito.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 03, 2021, 08:43:09 pm
We're parsing some pretty fine hairs here, but that wasn't my read.  Gorsuch at least I would say seems to vote based on ideology rather than politics, but the problem is that the ideology is mostly 1936 Germany.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 12, 2021, 11:17:06 am
This family is a disgrace.

@atrupar: CHRIS WALLACE: To attend school in Nebraska, kids need to have all sorts of vaccinations. Why should Covid be different?

GOV. PETE RICKETTS: There's just a lot of people who don't know who to trust right now

WALLACE: It has FDA approval https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1437047503204061188/video/1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 12, 2021, 11:28:14 am
Spread the rumor that the microchips the CIA uses to track you is NOT in the COVID shot, it's in beer, brats, and chicken wings.  Rednecks will be demanding the shot.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 12, 2021, 11:55:14 am
I absolutely love the morons who complain about tracking devices by posting on twitter from their iPhones.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 12, 2021, 02:52:19 pm
Ricketts at the start of Pandemic was actually amazing. UNMC is a the state medical school and they have one of the few biocontainment units in the US. He was listening to them at the start. When that became a losing platform in the Republican Party he’s gone Desantis lite.

Questions I wished Wallace would have asked
1) You say that you are all about protecting hospital capacity, but a man from Western Nebraska had to be transferred to Des Moines, Iowa because there where no available ICU beds that where closer.  What are you doing to protect hospital capacity?  (He died BTW)
2) Your health department blocked a mask mandate from the city of Omaha, do you take responsibility for the death of guy from #1?  You say you encourage vaccines, but aren’t you actions actually casting doubt on them?
3) Your family business is mandating COVID vaccinations, why?
4) Why do you look like a cheap version of Lex Luther?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 12, 2021, 02:54:46 pm
His answer to #3 is that he isn’t involved with the Cubs. My follow up would be to ask so you divested from the family trust that owns the Cubs?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 12, 2021, 04:59:37 pm
It seems unlikely to me that people like Ricketts and DeStantis are as dumb as their constituents and it must be a bit galling to them that they have to debase themselves to appeal to morons like the guys on the Bears board. But, apparently power is more important than integrity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 12, 2021, 05:02:07 pm
It doesn't take integrity to promote policies that save lives in your state.  Simply common decency and concern for the welfare of the people you serve.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 12, 2021, 05:20:53 pm
It takes integrity to do the right thing even when it breaks against popular opinion especially when one’s job security relies upon lining up with popular opinion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on September 12, 2021, 05:27:11 pm
Ricketts (and his ilk) lacks integrity, but he also lacks something more fundamental to being a decent human being.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 12, 2021, 06:06:28 pm
Ricketts is term limited so this is all about the next office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on September 12, 2021, 06:21:08 pm
I guess he’ll be going for Sasse?  Which is a shame because he’s one of the few politicians I like nowadays.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 12, 2021, 07:24:19 pm
I guess he’ll be going for Sasse?  Which is a shame because he’s one of the few politicians I like nowadays.

He’s elite at expressing outrage and taking absolutely no action to do anything about it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 12, 2021, 07:53:47 pm
I guess he’ll be going for Sasse?  Which is a shame because he’s one of the few politicians I like nowadays.

He’s the worst.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 12, 2021, 08:49:17 pm
I guess he’ll be going for Sasse?  Which is a shame because he’s one of the few politicians I like nowadays.

He’s not an really great candidate, my guess would be Deb Fisher retires. Sasse has another 5 years before he is up for re-election. He was the only Republican I voted for.  For those wondering the Democrat sexually harassed multiple employees. To be honest I’m scared of what is coming after Ricketts. Until the end of 2020 he’s been a pretty generic conservative Republican. Lower taxes, nothing much really gets accomplished. The people running for governor this time are much worse and I don’t think the Democrats even have somebody interested in running.


He’s the worst.
Umm. Ted Cruz, Ron Johnson, Cotton, Hawley, Ernst, Blackburn, Paul, and Tommy Tuberville would all like a word with you.
There might be more, but I frankly don’t have the stomach to look into some of the names I don’t recognize. I won’t even get into the House of Representatives cast of worst people in the world.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 12, 2021, 09:02:47 pm
Sasse votes the same way as those people but acts like he’s different.  It’s that facade that makes him worse than the rest of the Republicans. He’s a less brash trump which is way more dangerous.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 12, 2021, 10:36:10 pm
He’s not an really great candidate, my guess would be Deb Fisher retires.

It's Fischer,  With a "c."  No relation, but get it right~
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 13, 2021, 07:28:39 pm
Sasse votes the same way as those people but acts like he’s different.  It’s that facade that makes him worse than the rest of the Republicans. He’s a less brash trump which is way more dangerous.

I am unaware that Hawley et al voted for the Jan 6 commission like Sasse.  Sasse is conservative so you won’t like him, but he isn’t the same as those that I mentioned.



He’s not an really great candidate, my guess would be Deb Fisher retires.

It's Fischer,  With a "c."  No relation, but get it right~


I am sorry about that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 13, 2021, 07:42:45 pm
I am unaware that Hawley et al voted for the Jan 6 commission like Sasse.  Sasse is conservative so you won’t like him, but he isn’t the same as those that I mentioned.


I am sorry about that.

He did cast one of this most useless votes ever when he voted to convict in the second impeachment.  But, when things actually mattered, his voting record lined up with trump supported polices 85% of the time.   And, he was part of the judiciary committee that didn’t exactly cover themselves with glory while trump was president.  He’s terrible.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/ben-sasse/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 13, 2021, 10:18:41 pm
Sasse’s Trump score ties him with Chuck Schumer.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 14, 2021, 02:25:33 am
Sasse’s Trump score ties him with Chuck Schumer.

ROFL, fake news that would do the GOP proud there.

For the record - Sasse 84.8, Schumer 23.3.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 14, 2021, 02:27:27 am
I am unaware that Hawley et al voted for the Jan 6 commission like Sasse.  Sasse is conservative so you won’t like him, but he isn’t the same as those that I mentioned.


I am sorry about that.


I'll given you the benefit of the doubt and assume that wasn't intended to be as hilariously condescending as it came off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 14, 2021, 06:51:40 am
If you made me go bill by bill from the link that was posted I would probably end up voting for a similar percentage of things that Sasse voted for. That doesn’t mean that I wanted Donald Trump as president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 14, 2021, 07:07:57 am
I quote: "Sasse’s Trump score ties him with Chuck Schumer."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 14, 2021, 07:25:23 am
Search the link by Trump score, they are both 0.1.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 14, 2021, 08:29:58 am
If you made me go bill by bill from the link that was posted I would probably end up voting for a similar percentage of things that Sasse voted for. That doesn’t mean that I wanted Donald Trump as president.

But it means you want Donald Trump’s policies which is not so good.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 14, 2021, 08:36:04 am
Search the link by Trump score, they are both 0.1.

You need a little help using Five Thirty Eight, clearly.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2021, 12:06:46 pm
Trump couldn't be bothered with, nor was he capable of, the function of the Presidency. All he cared for was the increase of his wealth and cult of personality, and the ability to exercise enormous power. Soulless conservative operators capitalized on Trump's narcissism to put the Presidential pen to conservative policies they favored. That Republican members of Congress largely voted with Trump should not be a surprise.

Whether or not one agrees with Sasse's conservative views, "did this member of Congress support the Big Lie and subsequent terrorist attack on the Capitol" is a tragically important and disturbingly relevant litmus test for elected officials these days. I appreciate Sasse's clarity on the matter. Yes, this is too-low a bar to clear, but such is the state of the Republican party.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 14, 2021, 10:17:35 pm
But it means you want Donald Trump’s policies which is not so good.

Trump/Republicans did a bunch of things normal conservatives do. I can get behind normal conservative policies. I suspect there are other posters on this board that are fine with that. Trump did a whole crap ton of things that made me vote against him 4 times. In 2016 I voted for the Libertarians for President and a Republicans below that. In 2020 I could no longer vote for the death cult. Sasse was the only Republican I voted for. I don’t really see that changing anytime soon. I still vote for sane conservatives, because I think having 2 competing parties is a good thing. I just don’t think I will run across many that will deserve my vote for awhile.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on September 14, 2021, 10:36:39 pm
The only Dumbocrat I ever voted for was Clinton (the second time…Dole was almost as bad as Biden).

I don’t see that ever changing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 20, 2021, 07:11:27 pm
Remember, according to Robb, racism is no longer a problem in this country.

Quote
Newberg High School students participated in virtual 'slave trade'

Black students at Newberg High School were targeted by a group chat called "Slave Trade," where other students joked about how much they would pay for them.

Screenshots obtained by KGW News show pictures of the students, followed by a discussion around their price, and private details of their lives. Participants also commented, "All Blacks should die" and "Let's have another Holocaust."

https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/nerberg-high-school-virtual-slave-trade/283-56462efe-4f35-47b1-a4ee-6670b2754dec
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on September 20, 2021, 10:40:42 pm
I thought this was what you where talking about.  Seems like a nice town.

https://pamplinmedia.com/nbg/142-news/522353-417465-newberg-school-staffer-shows-up-in-blackface-pwoff





Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on September 20, 2021, 10:44:43 pm
Good people on both sides.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on October 21, 2021, 06:47:23 pm
Just when you think it is not possible for the anti-vaxxers to reach a new level of being ridiculous, they prove you wrong.

Quote
A New Hampshire Republican who disseminated a document claiming COVID-19 vaccines contained tentacled creatures that enter the human body has resigned from two committees of the state's legislature.

https://www.newsweek.com/gop-rep-tentacled-creatures-covid-vaccines-quits-panels-new-hampshire-1637280
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 21, 2021, 07:51:29 pm
That's just what the tentacle creatures wanted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on October 21, 2021, 08:34:21 pm
Laughable, everybody knows the creatures have wings but no tentacles.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 21, 2021, 09:36:48 pm
I believe the same quack that first said mRNA was going to rewrite DNA is the source of the tentacle creatures. From what I understand she mistook a poorly done slide causing air bubbles as the creature. I haven’t dug into too much though.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on October 21, 2021, 09:51:04 pm
An understandable mistake.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 22, 2021, 07:06:48 pm
Well she is also the one you started the whole the vaccines are going to rewrite your DNA thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 27, 2021, 12:34:54 pm
But Robb said racism isn’t an issue anymore.

Quote
Cops Rarely Pull Over Drivers In Their Own Neighborhoods, Data Shows. Motorists In Black Neighborhoods Aren’t So Lucky

The unequal enforcement of traffic stops points to significant racial disparities. Of the 327,224 traffic stops made by Chicago police in 2020, about 62 percent of the drivers stopped were Black — and about 11 percent were white.

That means cops stop six times more Black drivers in Chicago than white drivers, despite only 30 percent of the city’s population being Black.

But even in predominantly white neighborhoods and areas where there were comparatively fewer traffic stops, Black drivers were disproportionately stopped, the data shows. That disparity holds true for the enclaves where many Chicago police officers live, like the neighborhoods in the 16th and 22nd districts.

In the 16th Police District on the Northwest Side, Black residents make up 1 percent of the population, according to Keefe’s analysis of census records. But Black drivers made up 11 percent of the traffic stops there in 2020, the data shows.

The neighborhoods making up the 22nd Police District on the Southwest Side are much more diverse by comparison, where Black residents make up 61 percent of the population. But Black residents are still overrepresented, making up 90 percent of all stops there.

“When you get pulled over, anybody can get out of a ticket. All you have to do is cooperate with the police,” Sposato said. “White people just know how to talk their way out of a ticket. They just cooperate.”

https://blockclubchicago.org/2021/10/27/drivers-police-firefighter-neighborhoods-least-likely-pulled-over-traffic-stops-black-white-disparity/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2021, 03:59:44 pm
So I recently found out that somebody I went to medical school with has gotten into the Invermectin grift.  Her social media is all about attacking doctors for taking pharma money for promoting the vaccine. 

The amount of money I have gotten for the COVID vaccine is $0.

On the other hand she charges
$290 for a prevention telehealth visit.
$490 for acute COVID telehealth
$990 for long haul COVID
$290 if your love one ends up in the hospital with COVID and she can't do anything for you.


Being a quack pays well I guess.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on November 08, 2021, 05:29:55 pm
Dude, do your own research. She's right!

Do not go to the Bears board... I think i might have caught covid just reading the content.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2021, 08:19:49 pm
I’d probably get banned if I went over to the Bears board.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 08, 2021, 09:18:30 pm
I’d probably get banned if I went over to the Bears board.

Probably not but you may get severely concussed from slamming your head against the wall.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 09, 2021, 07:48:53 am
Anyone know a reporter that might be interested in ties between a governor to a racist anti-vaxxer? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on November 09, 2021, 07:51:17 am
In many states, that would just be a way to increase his/her popularity.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 09, 2021, 08:03:58 am
In this case there is a large family investment in a state that it would do the opposite.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 09, 2021, 09:40:29 am
Anyone know a reporter that might be interested in ties between a governor to a racist anti-vaxxer?

Im sure there is a reporter at your local paper (I assume we are talking about a Nebraska issue) who is on the covid beat and might be interested.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on November 09, 2021, 10:56:48 am
One of the local TV stations just ran a story presenting this anti-vaxxer as local mom who won't vaccinate her kids for COVID or any other disease so probably not.  Her social media account has plenty of pictures with her and Nebraksa's governor and other national politicians.  She is running a Koch brother's astro-turf org, so she gets in plenty of face time with these guys.  Let's just say her Telegram account would make the Bears board look like a Sunday school class.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on November 09, 2021, 01:43:06 pm
It sucks that so many people suck :(
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on December 19, 2021, 04:43:43 pm
More graciousness and respect for democracy shown by the avowed fascist defeated in Chile than in the U.S. election by the defeated candidate and party. Let that sink in.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 30, 2021, 11:17:11 pm
The current situation in the hospital I go to is as bad as the worst of winter on 2020. Get the vaccine and booster as soon as you can. Get it for your kids. Delta and Omnicron are nothing like the original virus.

The sickest patients are almost always unvaccinated. It is a horrible, horrible way to die.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on December 31, 2021, 12:47:57 pm
Vaxxed myself, booster was scheduled for Monday, just tested positive on 2 of 3 home tests this morning. my Ex wife is on her way to get the kids, and i'm heading to the county test site.

So far mild symptoms, but feels like i did leg day at the gym 5 days in a row... just zero muscle strength.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 31, 2021, 04:05:21 pm
I’m Moderna x3, if I don’t get it with all of my exposures it will be pretty amazing. If you have a rapid antigen test (home tests) that are positive you’ve got COVID and there really isn’t a need to get another test.  False negatives are really common with antigen testing especially earlier in the course.

Monoclonal antibodies can be helpful, but if you have Omicron only 1 of the 3 work and it is in limited supply. Things usuallly hit their peak awful about day 7. Luvox, an antidepressant, has some benefit at keeping people out of the hospital, but it can be difficult to tolerate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 31, 2021, 04:39:40 pm
Everyone in my house was fully vaxed - me and my wife 3x and kids 2x - and we all got it last week.  It was nothing more than an annoying 3-4 day cold for all of us. The kids had a little flu aches as well but, in general, it was very mid for everyone.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 31, 2021, 08:58:32 pm
I think I probably have it too despite being 3x Moderna vaxxed.  I haven't been able to get tested, but 8/11 of the people at my brother's house on Christmas have been sick this week. So whatever it is, it spread like Omicron.

It's basically an annoying light cold for me...something that wouldn't have slowed me down pre-COVID. But it seems like it's been rougher for other (unvaxxed) people who have had it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 31, 2021, 09:07:50 pm
I think I probably have it too despite being 3x Moderna vaxxed.  I haven't been able to get tested, but 8/11 of the people at my brother's house on Christmas have been sick this week. So whatever it is, it spread like Omicron.

It's basically an annoying light cold for me...something that wouldn't have slowed me down pre-COVID. But it seems like it's been rougher for other (unvaxxed) people who have had it.

Yes, what spread through my house and seemingly through the houses of everyone I know was something that we barely would have mentioned in 2019. But, we are also sensible and have the max vax protection.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on January 01, 2022, 10:31:14 am
Thanks to everyone for sharing their experiences with the virus. Your accounts are consistent with the reports that omicron is extraordinarily contagious but that for those fully vaccinated tend to experience very mild symptoms.  That's a pretty significant silver lining to a very dark cloud.  We are playing it very safe in our family, going out for long walks, grocery shopping, visiting our daughters, medical visits and not much else.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 01, 2022, 11:23:41 am
Thanks to everyone for sharing their experiences with the virus. Your accounts are consistent with the reports that omicron is extraordinarily contagious but that for those fully vaccinated tend to experience very mild symptoms.  That's a pretty significant silver lining to a very dark cloud.  We are playing it very safe in our family, going out for long walks, grocery shopping, visiting our daughters, medical visits and not much else.

Dang.  It turns out that my wife and I have been playing it safe for the last 20 years.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 01, 2022, 03:35:11 pm
Story of how COVID mostly spreads.

My 2 year old niece devolve an ear infection and sickness while my mother-in-law is watching her. Mother-in-law boosted devolve a cold. Brother-in-law says nothing to my father-in-law who his and his wife are immune comprised. They get sick after spending Christmas with them. Father-in-law’s wife tests positive for COVID. A cute 2 year old super spreader.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on January 06, 2022, 08:33:46 am
For those who are old enough to have read (and remember) the book Catch 22, we seem to be living through it now. 

There are currently treatments for Covid, one of which are the Pfizer pills approved by FDA.  My daughter was tested for Covid Wednesday morning.  On Saturday she was notified that she had Covid.  She then called her doctor to get treatment, and was told that they only prescribe it a maximum of 2 days after the onset of the symptoms, and they advise her to just "wait it out".  If she is hospitalized, they will treat her at that time.

To sum it up:  they will not prescribe the treatment unless you have been tested positive, and have had the symptoms for no more than two days, but it takes three days to get the test results.  (Rapid tests are NOT available in her area.)

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2022, 01:05:02 pm
For those who are old enough to have read (and remember) the book Catch 22, we seem to be living through it now. 

There are currently treatments for Covid, one of which are the Pfizer pills approved by FDA.  My daughter was tested for Covid Wednesday morning.  On Saturday she was notified that she had Covid.  She then called her doctor to get treatment, and was told that they only prescribe it a maximum of 2 days after the onset of the symptoms, and they advise her to just "wait it out".  If she is hospitalized, they will treat her at that time.

To sum it up:  they will not prescribe the treatment unless you have been tested positive, and have had the symptoms for no more than two days, but it takes three days to get the test results.  (Rapid tests are NOT available in her area.)



Paxlovid isn't really available anywhere the doses are really limited and it is only for super risk people.  Only 1/3 of the monoclonal antibody treatments is effective against COVID and it is the one that the US has the least of.  Getting the vaccine and booster when eligible is still the best prevention.  Upgrading masks to KN95 or N95 and avoiding large crowds.  Also don't have any other medical emergencies because there are no beds.

For the messed up testing situation in the US, it goes back to the beginning of pandemic...  The FDA has been an issue of late with regards to rapid tests, only 2 or FDA approved in the US.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: octagon on January 11, 2022, 06:58:13 pm
octagon, you're clearly living in your own alt-right parallel universe. the kid's entire social media profile is nothing but blue lives stuff. he practically fetishized law enforcement.

nobody brings an assault rifle to a protest to "aid the wounded." what the **** kind of injury is anyone going to fix with a gun? as the black-lives side knows all too well, you bring bandages, eye wash, etc.

whatever the "militia" said they "support" we're talking about a kid that drove from IL to WI with a rifle and then murdered people, which you called justified.

no, it wasn't. it was never justified. it was murder.

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/who-is-kyle-rittenhouse-what-we-know-about-the-17-year-old-arrested-in-kenosha-shooting/2329610/

Wrong on every count.  As I said after the defensive shooting, full exoneration. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on February 05, 2022, 03:42:50 pm
For a long time I was able to say I didn't have a friend or family member yet to have covid.

Now I can say me,my wife,and my son are the only ones who havent.

Im fully vaxxed but not boosted,my wife refuses to get it,and our pediatrician suggests not to get it for our 8 year old son.

Ive recently gotten a job with the school system and they flat out dont think covid exists even though there has been days where there werent enough substitute teachers and several kids out in every room with it.

There arent 10 people in the whole school in an average day who wears a mask.

The school nurse says that the kids are resilient and will be fine in 5 days and they all have been.

I truthfully think I have had it but if I indeed did it wasnt anything that was bad enough to even keep me out of work.

I lost my taste a couple weeks ago and told the school nurse and she asked if I felt bad and I said no and her response was ignore it then.

Whatever.

Its all above my pay grade.



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on February 06, 2022, 08:31:11 am
For a long time I was able to say I didn't have a friend or family member yet to have covid.

Now I can say me,my wife,and my son are the only ones who havent.

Im fully vaxxed but not boosted,my wife refuses to get it,and our pediatrician suggests not to get it for our 8 year old son.

Ive recently gotten a job with the school system and they flat out dont think covid exists even though there has been days where there werent enough substitute teachers and several kids out in every room with it.

There arent 10 people in the whole school in an average day who wears a mask.

The school nurse says that the kids are resilient and will be fine in 5 days and they all have been.

I truthfully think I have had it but if I indeed did it wasnt anything that was bad enough to even keep me out of work.

I lost my taste a couple weeks ago and told the school nurse and she asked if I felt bad and I said no and her response was ignore it then.

Whatever.

Its all above my pay grade.

You live near the place the Scopes Monkey trial happened, don’t you?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on February 06, 2022, 09:22:56 am
That's Dayton TN.

Im pretty much in Knoxville.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 10, 2022, 04:19:37 pm
It probably is safer to put this in the Politics topic, but Bernie Sanders just tweeted out he'll be introducing legislation to end MLB's antitrust exemption.  With as many Republicans threatening to do the same thing after MLB moved the All-Star Game, this seems like it might have a pretty good chance of passing after years of talk about it.

Quote
Bernie Sanders
@SenSanders

I’m delighted to see an agreement reached so that the MLB season can start. But we must prevent the greed of baseball’s oligarchs from destroying the game. The best way to do that is to end MLB’s antitrust exemption and I will be introducing legislation to do just that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on March 10, 2022, 04:35:41 pm
Good luck with that.  In the final analysis you'll never get enough Republicans on-board with holding their billionaire patrons accountable.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 10, 2022, 10:58:26 pm
Ricketts backed Governor candidate beat the Trump back governor candidate in Nebraska. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 11, 2022, 12:05:01 am
Ricketts backed Governor candidate beat the Trump back governor candidate in Nebraska. 
Yea!  The guy was a pervert.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 11, 2022, 12:49:00 am
Ricketts backed Governor candidate beat the Trump back governor candidate in Nebraska. 

The only Trump-backed candidate this cycle (out of 40) to lose so far.  No question who the dear leader is.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 11, 2022, 08:40:11 am
MAGA candidates really performed poorly in the Omaha area and Nebraska in general. Omaha and Lincoln are the only parts of the state that are growing and they are moving from purple to blue and Trump is only speeding that up. The Democrats really messed up their party though. During the Obama years they took a hard left turn and instead of having centrist Democrats they have been running people that have no chance.

For being a deep red state Nebraska is relatively MAGA free, especially when you compare it to Iowa which used to be more blue to purple.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 11, 2022, 08:58:49 am
Trumpers aren't being as successful as one might think.  Yes, the Trump backed candidate in Ohio won the governor's nomination, but it's a guy that used to criticize Trump.  Many feel he conned Trump into endorsing him.  Many of the people Trump calls RINOs are doing fine in their fundraising.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on May 15, 2022, 06:39:59 pm
What kind of world do we live in?

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/15/politics/nebraska-abortion-ban-roe-v-wade-cnntv/index.html

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 15, 2022, 07:16:43 pm
The Ricketts family is awful, and Pete has to be the worst of them. They make it hard to cheer for the Cubs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 15, 2022, 07:53:33 pm
Fortunately, not all Pro-Life people aren't as slimy as Pete Ricketts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on May 15, 2022, 08:06:32 pm
Why does anyone think they have the right to insist that a woman impregnated by **** must have the baby. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on May 15, 2022, 08:06:59 pm
r-a-p-e
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on May 15, 2022, 08:12:04 pm
What kind of world do we live in?

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/15/politics/nebraska-abortion-ban-roe-v-wade-cnntv/index.html



A God fearing one.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 15, 2022, 08:49:35 pm
I have a great many associates, mostly church members, that are pro life.  I know of almost none that believe that abortion should be banned in cases of reported r-a-p-e.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on May 15, 2022, 09:23:42 pm
It just seems so incredibly cruel.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on May 15, 2022, 09:42:19 pm
To the killed child or irresponsible mother?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on May 15, 2022, 09:44:00 pm
In what way is a r-a-p-e-d woman "irresponsible"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on May 15, 2022, 09:48:29 pm
To the killed child or irresponsible mother?

Just in case anyone was under the illusion that Dusty had matured even a little bit, this should remove any notion of that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on May 15, 2022, 10:13:13 pm
If I let you all shame me for my Christian beliefs then Im not much of one.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on May 15, 2022, 10:15:48 pm
And if a woman is **** then she should be allowed to get an abortion but whats stopping every woman who wants an abortion from claiming ****?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on May 15, 2022, 10:17:37 pm
Matthew 10:33
33 but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 15, 2022, 10:25:22 pm

It just seems so incredibly cruel.
As does the fact that as soon as the decision goes official, tens of millions of women will live in states where the penalty for having an abortion after being **** will be more severe than the penalty for r a p e.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on May 15, 2022, 10:34:24 pm
And if a woman is **** then she should be allowed to get an abortion but whats stopping every woman who wants an abortion from claiming ****?

This is bullshit, women should be able to choose to terminate a pregnancy for any reason.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on May 16, 2022, 09:03:36 am
To the killed child or irresponsible mother?

Dusty, what on earth could you ever mean by “irresponsible mother” here? We’re talking about ****. This is heinous.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on May 16, 2022, 09:59:23 am
I didnt mean it when it came to ****.

Just when they were being irresponsible.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on May 16, 2022, 10:12:55 am
Ok, so you're saying the "irresponsible" part didn't apply to ****.

What about the men?

Why is it your first instinct to label women who become pregnant but didn't want to be "irresponsible"?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on May 16, 2022, 11:47:59 am
It just hits a tad close to home folks.

My "irresponsible" mother had 3 abortions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on May 16, 2022, 03:07:35 pm
Dusty, I understand you feel a personal connection to the issue. I don't know your story, and I don't know your mother's story. Those stories have a weight that conversations with strangers on an internet message board fail to adequately hold.

But unless your mother was going to the sperm bank and then aborting those pregnancies, there were other people involved in each of those decisions. There's more to your mother's story than simply being an "irresponsible mother."

And whatever *her* story is, it's absolutely wrong to extrapolate from it a blanket statement about "irresponsible mothers."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 16, 2022, 04:38:13 pm
I'd like to mention that they tried passing this in the Nebraska Unicameral already and it was killed with a filibuster.  The bill was even worse that what was reported in that story.  It would have likely banned IVF treatment for infertility in Nebraska, possibly birth control (IUD's and the pill), Plan B and D&C for miscarriages.  I don't think the Nebraska bill would have made it illegal to treat ectopic pregnancies like either Missouri or Kansas was proposed, but I'm not really sure.

I've always consider myself pro-life, but the current Republican bills are scaring the crap out of me.   
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on May 16, 2022, 05:33:44 pm
I used to be a pro-life fundamentalist. Hadn't completely settled for myself whether I believed abortion was ever ok, even in the case of **** and incest.

Now I'm staunchly pro-choice.

It's useful to learn the history of abortion in our politics: a wedge issue purposefully inflamed by the Moral Majority wing of the Republican Party in the 70's as a means of consolidating power.

Having been deeply cloistered in fundamentalist echo chambers for a significant portion of my life, I'll say it's dangerous to underestimate what fundamentalists - and their manipulative handlers - are capable of. Those sounding the alarm on Obergefell and similar decisions are right to do so.

 

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on May 19, 2022, 05:32:51 am
R-a-p-e and incest account for less than 2% of all abortions. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/24/****-and-incest-account-few-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on May 19, 2022, 06:06:15 am
Yep.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 19, 2022, 09:23:48 am
Less than 1% of all abortions happen after 21 weeks of pregnancy in 2019, so why all the focus on late term abortions?

I mean it might be a focus for people out of sympathy from have a horrible crime happen to them.  I've seen enough patients that weren't pregnant from those crimes that have had to deal with a lot of mental health issues afterwards.  I can't imagine if they were forced to carry a pregnancy to term what it would do to those victims. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: davep on May 19, 2022, 06:37:22 pm
R-a-p-e and incest account for less than 2% of all abortions. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/24/****-and-incest-account-few-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/

Because the whackos on both sides will not compromise.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robb on May 19, 2022, 09:19:45 pm
My comment was dumb?  LOL. Facts are dumb? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on May 20, 2022, 05:47:59 pm
Less than 1% of all abortions happen after 21 weeks of pregnancy in 2019, so why all the focus on late term abortions?

I mean it might be a focus for people out of sympathy from have a horrible crime happen to them.  I've seen enough patients that weren't pregnant from those crimes that have had to deal with a lot of mental health issues afterwards.  I can't imagine if they were forced to carry a pregnancy to term what it would do to those victims.

Gallup has been polling on abortion for about 45 years.  Those saying that abortion should be illegal under all circumstances polls at about 20% year in and year out. 

That tells us that there is an overwhelming majority who don't support denying abortion rights to r a p e victims.  It's a fringe group who have that point of view.  There are probably all kinds of crazy and looney things on a variety of subjects that poll at near 20% support. 

Saying "what's the big deal about 2%" is ridiculous.  That's like saying if "only" 2% of folks are victims of a homicide, what's the big deal about having police department divisions who deal with homicides.

There are somewhere between 650,000 and 850,000 abortions yearly in USA.  So, even 2% caused by r a p e is about 13,000-17,000 yearly.  From my perspective, that is a shockingly high number of terrible ordeals.  To minimize that with a "what's the big deal" type of comment is telling about the source of a comment like that. 

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on May 20, 2022, 07:13:11 pm
It should be allowed for r a p e or incest.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 20, 2022, 07:44:13 pm
A recent study revealed that 0% of people have changed their opinion on the abortion issue because of discussions on social media.  Shocking.

It's also been verified that very few people who are avidly pro-life or pro-choice have ever actually read Roe v Wade, so they don't actually know what it says.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 20, 2022, 10:19:40 pm
My views are certainly not the same as they where pre-Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on May 21, 2022, 03:39:40 pm
I’m in the same camp as CBJ, and, believe it or not, connecting via the internet with others who had a different point of view had a lot to do with it.

I think posture - whether you’re seeking to listen or debate - has a lot to do with one’s experiences on the web.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on May 25, 2022, 09:29:40 am
Let's protect the lives of the unborn and do nothing to protect the lives of the born from gun violence.  Makes sense.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 25, 2022, 12:23:56 pm
On the same day this happened, the Iowa GOP passed a bill that will allow people to hunt deer with an AR-15. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 24, 2022, 09:51:52 am
After the last 3 days. Guns now have more rights in America then women.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 24, 2022, 12:58:20 pm
Trigger Laws are truly terrifying.  After the Supreme Court decision I took to google to see if Iowa had one and I would be at risk for prescribing birth control. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 24, 2022, 01:00:42 pm
Clarence Thomas made it clear in his opinion that he (and likely 4 other justices) think contraception and marriage equality should be next.

Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1
Clarence Thomas writes, in a concurring opinion, that the Supreme Court should reconsider Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell — the rulings that now protect contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 24, 2022, 01:11:49 pm
Thomas was alone in going after the other cases from what I gathered.  Kavanaugh said it didn't and I think Roberts signed off on that.  I don't know where Alito and Barrett stand.  I would sure seem if they are going to be consistent that a challenge will come. 

I'd love for some state to ban all guns except for a single loaded, smooth barrelled musket just to see Thomas jump through hoops to get away from the historical context of gun laws in America.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 24, 2022, 01:26:32 pm
I wouldn't put much stock in anything Kavanaugh says at this point.

A month ago, there was an article in The Washington Post where Clarence Thomas seriously said he was worried respect for institutions is eroding, as if he doesn't realize that he's the biggest reason why the Supreme Court has all-time low approval ratings right now. I had to double check to make sure it wasn't satire.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/06/clarence-thomas-abortion-supreme-court-leak/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on June 24, 2022, 01:35:15 pm
"Let's protect the lives of the unborn and do nothing to protect the lives of the born from gun violence.  Makes sense."

Well said, P2.

It's fitting that Thomas and Alito wrote the majority opinions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 24, 2022, 01:39:35 pm
Sodomy laws and persecution of lgbtq is going to come back in the Bible Belt. Things like What happened in Laramie will return.

A religious minority is now enforcing its views on the entire country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 24, 2022, 01:52:37 pm
One more thing… this has been a long planned act to “the right to privacy” the implications are tremendous.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 24, 2022, 03:23:37 pm
Sodomy laws and persecution of lgbtq is going to come back in the Bible Belt. Things like What happened in Laramie will return.

A religious minority is now enforcing its views on the entire country.

Amen Brother. Amen.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 24, 2022, 04:00:05 pm
Job 22:23

“If you return to the Almighty, you will be restored;
If you remove unrighteousness far from your tent."
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 24, 2022, 04:26:14 pm
Sodomy laws and persecution of lgbtq is going to come back in the Bible Belt. Things like What happened in Laramie will return.

A religious minority is now enforcing its views on the entire country.

This is still one nation under God.

The ungodly heathens are and always will be the minority.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 24, 2022, 05:11:19 pm
US percentages of people identified as Christian has dropped a lot. It used to be around 80% and is know in the low 60’s. Unaffiliated has increased close to 30% with the bigger increases in the younger generations. 

Maybe it is because I’ve been watching Obi Wan the last few weeks, but that last post just made me think of Princess Leia talking to General Tarkin.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 24, 2022, 05:18:24 pm
If its still in the low 60's its still the majority.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 24, 2022, 05:27:31 pm
Pew’s most recent polling was 63% Christian.

Exactly same percentage (63%) favor banning assault-style weapons.

61% say abortion should be legal in all or most instances.

LBJ got 61.1% of the popular vote against Goldwater in 1964 in his landslide win.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 24, 2022, 05:56:11 pm
In just the few hours since abortion has been banned president Biden announced that there's now a nationwide shortage on metal clothes hangers.

They're selling them for 100 dollars a piece in California.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 24, 2022, 07:17:49 pm
Rescinding the ban on concealed carry in NY the same week as rescinding Roe v Wade is quite the look from SCOTUS.

Guns > women for the McConnell Court.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 24, 2022, 08:13:43 pm
If its still in the low 60's its still the majority.

I don’t think everyone that identifies as Christian would be in lock step with your version of Christianity. 

I grew up Catholic. I’d probably answer that I’m Catholic, but I have zero interest in going to any type of church.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 24, 2022, 08:22:07 pm
This is still one nation under God.

The ungodly heathens are and always will be the minority.

**** you. Bluntly. **** you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 24, 2022, 10:21:50 pm
Clarence Thomas made it clear in his opinion that he (and likely 4 other justices) think contraception and marriage equality should be next.

Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1
Clarence Thomas writes, in a concurring opinion, that the Supreme Court should reconsider Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell — the rulings that now protect contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.


I’d be surprised if a majority of the conservative justices went this far.

Quite fascinating - to put it nicely - that, of all the decisions rooted in the 14th amendment/due process clause that Thomas talks of overturning, he makes no mention of Loving v Virginia.

Why, oh why, could that be?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on June 24, 2022, 10:32:44 pm
Loving v Virginia.  That's one Dusty should like
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 24, 2022, 10:37:25 pm
Gotta wonder if the same hysteria would have been present when Roe v Wade was announced if social media was a thing.  Can you imagine.

Dusty, your sick joke doesn't work, because abortions were not banned.  The decision was just returned to the states.  And California won't be a pro-life state.

Please read Roe v Wade.   Jes, an proclaimed atheist, was solidly opposed to Roe v. Wade.  Read it and find out why.  As a matter of fact, I know a number of non-Christians and gay people who were opposed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on June 24, 2022, 10:47:16 pm
birth control is next
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Robert L on June 24, 2022, 10:53:16 pm
jes wanted to force **** victims carry the baby  Jes did not care about states rights he wanted all abortions banned
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 25, 2022, 12:46:41 am
Gotta wonder if the same hysteria would have been present when Roe v Wade was announced if social media was a thing.  Can you imagine.

Dusty, your sick joke doesn't work, because abortions were not banned.  The decision was just returned to the states.  And California won't be a pro-life state.

Please read Roe v Wade.   Jes, an proclaimed atheist, was solidly opposed to Roe v. Wade.  Read it and find out why.  As a matter of fact, I know a number of non-Christians and gay people who were opposed.

You don’t do your side any favors by referencing the legal acumen and reasonable perspectives of Jes :)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 25, 2022, 07:24:30 am
There are legitimate fears that Republicans are going to pass laws that put women who have miscarriages at risk for death from being unable to get proper treatment or at risk for murder charges.

1 idiot Missouri tried to make it illegal to treat eptopic pregnancies which aren’t viable and could kill mothers.

Depending on laws passed in Iowa to I might be scared to ask women when there last period is.

Whatever you think of Roe v Wade this is really a scary time for women and healthcare.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 25, 2022, 07:37:32 am
You don’t do your side any favors by referencing the legal acumen and reasonable perspectives of Jes :)
tico, I did not mark your comment as "dumb" and I don't appreciate whoever did that.

But in real response, I mentioned Jes as a non-Christian opposed to Roe, not his legal opinion.  I know many Christians who are pro-choice and many non-Christians who are pro-life.  That was my point.  Lumping people automatically isn't appropriate.

Secondly, "my side?"  Hard to pick sides when there are nuts on the right who want, as CBJ says above, make ALL terminations illegal.  What's changed is the narrative.  We went from the scare of Population Bomb (Paul Ehrlich) to when does life begin to women's rights.    Few people know that abortions weren't even an issue until the last century.   Neither party supported abortion rights at the time Roe was rendered. 

I like, for "my side" some of the comments being made that Roe made things worse because civil discussions couldn't be made and that, perhaps now that it's back to the states some meaningful solutions to these issues can be found. 


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 25, 2022, 08:25:40 am
https://theindependent.com/epaper/page-4a/page_f64d0b20-2626-5b20-ad07-036543f344cd.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 25, 2022, 01:08:04 pm
Curt- that op-ed is a classic male-centric perspective on the topic. To say that “very few” of us affected by abortion when close to 25% of women will have an abortion in their lifetime——that’s like saying “very few” old guys will die by heart attacks. Actually, it’s a lot except for those not in the subject group.

The “very few” is then coupled with the “third trimester” shibboleth when less than 1%  of abortions are third-trimester. Very rare and almost always when there’s a terrible health problem going on.

Finally, Roe did not interrupt some kind of reasoned discussions in the States about abortion pre-Roe. There was already a furious Catholic church campaign going on and the topic itself was a centerpiece in Republican party drive to divide the country on social issues. So, it was the subject itself and not a judicial decision that is the source of social division. Highly recommend piece linked below:

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/Faculty/Siegel_BeforeAndAfterRoeVWadeNewQuestionsAboutBacklash.pdf
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 25, 2022, 02:15:29 pm
Reb, I posted that as an example of the sentiment, nothing more.  Thanks for sharing.

25% is lying with statistics because it includes spontaneous abortions.  It also includes abortions that are "legitimate" because of medical reasons.  The Republican centerpiece?  It was n both party platforms for years.

Reb, I'm sure you've read Roe.  What does it say, really?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 25, 2022, 04:11:52 pm
Curt-whatever % you find most accurate, it’s not “very few.” That’s the most male-centric part of the op-ed.

Read the linked piece on how it became a social issue, political talking point for the new post civil rights Republican party era that started before Roe. This was becoming a social fight, and would have continued so, irrespective of the judiciary. Not saying Roe is beside the point—it is important obviously—but this was never going to be a rational experiment in legislative compromise within the states. It was a furious fight as the Republicans latched on to it to form the “new” base of the party.

Roe is basically a privacy case——keeping the government away from intruding on very personal body and health issues. As abortion only directly affects women, is also an empowerment of women and moving away from second-class legal status.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 25, 2022, 04:17:04 pm

Marcus Stroman chimes in.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1522339798115094528/HrdoPHSZ_bigger.jpg)
Marcus Stroman
@STR0

The strength of our women is unmatched. We must protect them all at costs. Unimaginable to see their rights taken away. Men should never be allowed to make laws about women’s bodies. Those of you who disagree need to realize you’re a direct part of the problem. Change is needed!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 25, 2022, 05:01:40 pm
Curt

How are we to have a conversation about things when so many states are passing flat out draconian laws about what is going on. The court has called open season on due process laws. They have gutted Miranda rights. They have openly signaled that sodomy laws are welcome back. End of same sex marriage and even the right to birth control are on the chopping block.

I bet if Governor Abbot's grandkids need/want an abortion or birth control, they will travel out of state on the sly and get what their family needs while taking those rights away from poorer Americans in his state.

What happens when nutso's in the bible belt get rid of things like birth control and allow for people to be prosecuted based on who they choose to have sex with?

This is not the opening of conversations, but a signal that we are rolling society back to 1792.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 25, 2022, 05:26:19 pm
One last comment on this...

I am pretty confident Jewish people and the torrah recognize life from your first breath to the last one. Cannot wait for an avalanche of challenges to these laws on grounds of religious freedom. Then the SCOTUS will show its true colors as not care for the constitution but to their ideology.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 25, 2022, 06:15:24 pm
Method...I have faith in how the states will shake out over the long run.   Most people don't realize or remember that there weren't many laws banning abortion in the early years of the last century.  Many doctors felt that it was part of their oath to do no harm so there wasn't much need, but so many women were suffering and dying from Lysol and backroom abortions that some oversight was finally needed.  One of my best friends, a doctor, told me that some of the butchery he witnessed when he was a resident altered his opinion on abortion.  When Roe was determined, 16 states already had limited abortion rights and 4 had total abortion on demand.  States were already trending toward tolerance.   I think the battle that was waged has probably encouraged the 30 states that did not allow it to become even more determined to be ridiculously restrictive.  I'm hoping that open discussion can begin to temper the situation and return us to rational discourse.

BTW: The Democratic Party was opposed to abortion until 1976 when it softened its stance to suit Carter and up and coming Democrats like Clinton.  When the Equal Rights Amendment started to struggle, the Party latched on to "A Woman's Right to Choose" as a means to recapture female support.  Smart.  But that phrase does not appear in Roe v Wade.

Reb is correct, it is primarily a privacy issue, but here's the rest of the story.  Basically Roe v Wade says it is society's (government's) right to choose when life begins and when it should end.   That's why the first decade of arguments were about when does life begin was so prevalent.   But that last part should scare the bejesus out of everyone.

Unless you are as old as me, Reb, Davep, one forgets that the Population Bomb that I alluded to earlier was taken more seriously than Climate Change.  People were panicking all over.  We were all going to starve in the 80's.  China and other countries restricted couples to one child.  In our colleges and universities couples pledges to just replacing themselves and no more.   We all were going to live on property the size of postage stamps.  Some days I wonder if that isn't why some older folks scoff at climate change which is far more real.

The last 50 years have been hell in Congress because somebody slips in a rider to a law about guns or drugs or abortion.  Hopefully some of that may change.

I will repeat.  I am not taking sides as long as their are radicals on both sides who are frickin nuts.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 25, 2022, 06:18:26 pm
some states will lend them selves to tolerance and finding a good medium... half will be draconian.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 25, 2022, 06:34:13 pm
My wife and mother wonder where I come up with some of the bullshit I hear because I dont watch the news and follow politics and the majority of it that I hear is here.

One thing Ive learned all the way back to Trump,covid,etc. is that some of you all flat out lie.

I just read a story out of the Tennessean that said that if the womans health is in danger an abortion would be allowed so all this really did was stop harlots from being harlots but you all are willing to lie to make your side look like the "right" side.

Some of you dont have morals period so you dont give a **** if they deliver a full term child and cut its throat on the delivery table.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 25, 2022, 06:36:16 pm
Pot meet kettle.

So you dont watch the news have no idea how restrictive some of these laws are... but are here to give your sage advice. thanks!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 25, 2022, 06:39:48 pm
No I dont watch the news but I have heard enough to know I like what I heard yesterday and havent met anyone yet around these parts in God's country that dont.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 25, 2022, 06:54:04 pm
Your god.. please be aware thats just your personal belief... others have different ones.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 25, 2022, 06:55:29 pm
The funny thing is Dusty's been on a self improvement mission and have in the last year or so went back to school and you all would be surprised at what I do for a living and just how well respected and trusted I am.

Ive learned that I dont like ungodly and immoral people and dont care one bit if they like me.

I answer to one person only and that person said the world would turn from God and become immoral so none of this surprises me.

My job is to rise above it,fight the good fight,keep the faith, and bring forth good fruit and Im 100% sure I am.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 25, 2022, 06:55:36 pm
Curt

How are we to have a conversation about things when so many states are passing flat out draconian laws about what is going on. The court has called open season on due process laws. They have gutted Miranda rights. They have openly signaled that sodomy laws are welcome back. End of same sex marriage and even the right to birth control are on the chopping block.

I bet if Governor Abbot's grandkids need/want an abortion or birth control, they will travel out of state on the sly and get what their family needs while taking those rights away from poorer Americans in his state.

What happens when nutso's in the bible belt get rid of things like birth control and allow for people to be prosecuted based on who they choose to have sex with?

This is not the opening of conversations, but a signal that we are rolling society back to 1792.

Indeed, some are already calling it "The Great Regression".  America is an international laughingstock at the moment.

https://twitter.com/djrothkopf/status/1540666924249387008
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 25, 2022, 06:56:56 pm
Your god.. please be aware thats just your personal belief... others have different ones.

And I dont give one damn about what those people like or believe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 25, 2022, 07:00:09 pm
Jeremiah 1 1
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." "Ah, Sovereign LORD," I said, "I do not know how to speak; I am only a child."

God knew you in the womb.

Thats all I need to know.

We dont need to get into Sodom and Gamorrah's fiery fate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 25, 2022, 07:02:18 pm
Dusty is kind of a self-deflating balloon - his arguments are so vile and cruel that they refute themselves to all but the most deranged true believers.  The really insidious ones are the ones who fall back on the false equivalency myth and rave about "extremists on both sides", trying to make their own extremism look moderate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 25, 2022, 07:13:11 pm
The funny thing is Dusty's been on a self improvement mission and have in the last year or so went back to school and you all would be surprised at what I do for a living and just how well respected and trusted I am.

Ive learned that I dont like ungodly and immoral people and dont care one bit if they like me.

I answer to one person only and that person said the world would turn from God and become immoral so none of this surprises me.

My job is to rise above it,fight the good fight,keep the faith, and bring forth good fruit and Im 100% sure I am.

Just because someone doesnt believe in YOUR god, doesnt make them ungodly... i realize that is probably earth shattering news to you... but your god is not the only one people believe in. Lots of folks are very moral and godly, but do not prescribe to your faith.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 25, 2022, 07:16:48 pm
How many God's are there Brother?

I dont think the God that they speak about in the pledge of allegiance is the one who believes in killing babies and homosexuality.

If it makes you feel better to think they are then by all means you do you.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 25, 2022, 07:17:15 pm
Just because someone doesnt believe in YOUR god, doesnt make them ungodly... i realize that is probably earth shattering news to you... but your god is not the only one people believe in. Lots of folks are very moral and godly, but do not prescribe to your faith.

Or any faith.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 25, 2022, 07:20:15 pm
How many God's are there Brother?

I dont think the God that they speak about in the pledge of allegiance is the one who believes in killing babies and homosexuality.

If it makes you feel better to think they are then by all means you do you.


In my religion... 3 main ones. All are better then yours. And far less judgmental and manipulative from my study.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on June 25, 2022, 07:22:17 pm
"My God has a bigger dick than your god." - George Carlin
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 25, 2022, 07:28:17 pm
And it's circumcised!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 25, 2022, 07:40:37 pm
tico, I did not mark your comment as "dumb" and I don't appreciate whoever did that.

But in real response, I mentioned Jes as a non-Christian opposed to Roe, not his legal opinion.  I know many Christians who are pro-choice and many non-Christians who are pro-life.  That was my point.  Lumping people automatically isn't appropriate.

Secondly, "my side?"  Hard to pick sides when there are nuts on the right who want, as CBJ says above, make ALL terminations illegal.  What's changed is the narrative.  We went from the scare of Population Bomb (Paul Ehrlich) to when does life begin to women's rights.    Few people know that abortions weren't even an issue until the last century.   Neither party supported abortion rights at the time Roe was rendered. 

I like, for "my side" some of the comments being made that Roe made things worse because civil discussions couldn't be made and that, perhaps now that it's back to the states some meaningful solutions to these issues can be found. 


Curt, I was attempting to be playful, but it seems my tone did not translate. I apologize.

Fully agree that "lumping people together isn't appropriate."

Funnily enough, I was originally going to post "your argument" instead of "side," but "argument" somehow seemed more inflammatory, and so I changed to "side."

Born in the early '80's and raised in the Evangelical church, it was only a few years ago I learned how Republican power brokers transformed the question of abortion from a rarely-discussed matter into the engine of decades worth of conservative political strategy. (For those unfamiliar with this history and generally interested in an accessible, scholarly take on the relationship between the church, conservatism, and Trump, do yourself a favor and pick up a copy of Jesus and John Wayne. Phenomenal book, written by a white American evangelical.)

At one point in my life, I was dogmatically pro-life (including doubting whether abortion should be allowed in the cases of ****/incest). I am now pro-choice, and believe reproductive rights are civil rights deserving federal protection. That said, as my views on the subject have traversed the majority of the spectrum, I am deeply familiar with how fraught this issue is, and am able to see the humanity in the majority of arguments, even those approaching the extreme.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 25, 2022, 08:43:41 pm
My wife and mother wonder where I come up with some of the bullshit I hear because I dont watch the news and follow politics and the majority of it that I hear is here.

One thing Ive learned all the way back to Trump,covid,etc. is that some of you all flat out lie.

I just read a story out of the Tennessean that said that if the womans health is in danger an abortion would be allowed so all this really did was stop harlots from being harlots but you all are willing to lie to make your side look like the "right" side.

Some of you dont have morals period so you dont give a **** if they deliver a full term child and cut its throat on the delivery table.

Dusty, I’m not familiar with the likely direction of abortion legislation in TN, but I’ll take you at your word that abortions for the sake of the mother’s health will likely still be permitted. If that’s indeed the case, you should know that means the ***overwhelming*** majority of late-term abortions will still happen in TN, and in ***none*** of them will a baby’s throat be slit on a delivery table.

And as you talk about people not having any morals, since you are now a Christian, please look up the things that Jesus said about judgement, post those verses here, and let us know how your behavior squares up.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 25, 2022, 08:49:19 pm
If a womans health is in danger I believe she should be allowed to have an abortion.

Thats not the same as having an abortion because you dont like condoms.

As far as judging I know I shouldnt and dont think I am.

Im discussing the issues at hand.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 25, 2022, 09:06:05 pm
Just in case anyone got lulled into the belief that Dusty had matured in any meaningful way in recent years.  Don't need to read this trash so he's going on ignore.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on June 25, 2022, 09:07:18 pm
Loving v Virginia.  That's one Dusty should like

Isn't it fascinating that Thomas left that off the list of decisions he thinks the court should overturn?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 25, 2022, 09:16:23 pm
Just in case anyone got lulled into the belief that Dusty had matured in any meaningful way in recent years.  Don't need to read this trash so he's going on ignore.

Like I said before.

I dont like people who dont see it my way so I dont care if they dont like me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 25, 2022, 09:22:06 pm
Because you dont like condoms.


This is not why most people get abortions. You can actually read about this stuff and learn.

As far as judging I know I shouldnt and dont think I am.

Dusty, you apparently don’t even know the definition of the word. You’d do best to learn it before further “discussing the issues at hand.”
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 25, 2022, 09:24:31 pm
I dont like people who dont see it my way…

Again, you might want to double check what Jesus has to say about stuff like this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 25, 2022, 09:28:47 pm
Seeing that Im married to an Asian girl not quite.

Dusty, Loving v Virginia is the decision that protected inter-racial marriage at a federal level. Before that decision, you could not have married your wife in many states.

The same legal logic that says Roe v Wade is unconstitutional would also say Loving v Virginia is unconstitutional.

Therefore, if you think Roe v Wade is unconstitutional, you also think your marriage is unconstitutional.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 25, 2022, 11:57:42 pm
Condom effectiveness against with perfect use 98%, but that means you read and followed directions.
Condom effectiveness against pregnancy 85% in the real world use.

Vasectomy is much more effective but to get to 100% you need to do a post vasectomy sperm count and yearly sperm counts there after.

Tubal ligation 99%.

Pill 99% without missing 1 pill, taking it at the same time everyday, and avoiding any medications that decrease effectiveness. Typical use is 91%.

Zero babies have had their throat slit after delivery in the US. IF a doctor did that they should lose their license and go to jail.

Late term abortions are extremely rare. The largest majority of them will have a baby that is incompatible with life. Without having the ability alof a later term abortion you are asking a women to deliver a dead baby with hours and of labor. That should 100% be a womens choice to wha they want to do.

Tennessee law will make it a class C felony for a doctor to perform an abortion except in the case of a mother life being at risk. This would mean up to 15 years in prison. If a case goes to trail the doctor has to prove that the mother life was at risk or serious bodily injury.  So if a female has a miscarriage and a doctor performs a D&C and say a boyfriend or husband gets angry the doctor is risking 15 years in jail if he can’t prove the female’s life was in danger. That is a lot of risk for a doctor to take to provide medical care. Just think if you went to your job and a decision you make could result in 15 years of prison. Are you going to the right thing or the thing keeps you from going to jail?  Most people are going to pick the skip a possible jail sentence. Throw in the fact that most doctors risked life and disability with substandard personal protection for a year. The doctors that are trained to do this are going to leave states like Tennessee and go to states where they won’t go jail for providing medical care.

So I guess this is my way of saying I hope Dusty’s wife can’t get pregnant and that he doesn’t have any daughters because this is a whole lot more complicated than women using abortion as birth control.

Like I finally get the whole personally opposed to abortion,  if I’m pro choice argument. Women who aren’t having abortions will die in red states because of this.  Couples that IVF to have a baby won’t be able to get that done in red states.  I guess I just want people like Dusty to know life is more complicated than you want it to be. I remember my mom telling me I use to see things as black and white, but sometimes there is grey areas. I didn’t get it then. I do know. Stupid parents imparting knowledge.


Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on June 26, 2022, 02:30:51 am
CBJ, thanks for sharing your expertise.

I can relate to the idea of being personally against abortion but supporting Roe. After leaving behind my fundamentalist views of abortion, that was my position for many years. Then my wife and I thought she was pregnant with our third child. That experience led me to fully support a woman’s right to choose.

My wife has a rare genetic disorder that usually goes undiagnosed, but when diagnosed, is normally only uncovered later in life. We became aware that something was wrong after she gave birth to our first child. Postpartum, rather than recover from pregnancy and delivery, my wife became weaker and weaker. Her chronic pain grew until she lost the ability to walk. Between her feebleness and the overwhelming pain, she could barely stand, let alone move under her own strength. Our baby was a few months old, and out of nowhere my wife was effectively paralyzed. I was bewildered and despondent. 

We saw doctor after doctor, specialist after specialist, trying to uncover what was happening. Finally, after so many excruciating months, each more hopeless than the last, we got a diagnosis: a genetic disorder without remedy, and most likely a very poor quality of life leading to premature death.

(Cutting quickly to one of the “ends” of this story: before becoming disabled, my wife was a highly-specialized medical massage therapist, working with olympic and professional athletes and cutting-edge physical therapists and chiropractors. Her medical training and experience have enabled her to live a dramatically different life than most with her condition, though having a hidden disability presents a host of different challenges.)

Once we learned of my wife’s diagnosis, we knew we had to carefully consider whether or not it would be responsible to have more children, which we desperately wanted. 

But then a condom broke, and she became pregnant again, before we’d arrived at an answer. Three months into pregnancy, something else ruptured: my wife’s appendix. Because of her genetic disorder, my wife’s pain tolerances are extraordinarily high. So much so that, when we went to the hospital, convinced she had appendicitis, the attending staff told us that was impossible: appendicitis is so painful that, if she had it, she would not be able to sit upright in her chair and have a composed conversation.

And so we waited, and sat, and waited, as the ER staff attended “more urgent” patients, ran some tests, then some imaging. Hours upon hours later, one of the nurses sheepishly entered our room and admitted my wife *did* have appendicitis and needed to be admitted for surgery immediately. The surgeon told me that, even though she was pregnant, the procedure would still be fairly routine, and, in the greater scheme of things, I didn’t need to worry. Within about an hour, she’d be out of the operating room and on the road to recovery. My wife and I held hands and quietly cried. The anesthesiologist put her under, and I was escorted to the waiting room. 

I sat alone and watched as the clock counted down the minutes, trying to trick myself into not feeling terrified. At 1 hour 15 minutes, the worry began to fray my projected calm, but I told myself that it was just 15 mins past the time the surgeon suggested, nothing to be concerned about. At 1 hour 30 minutes, I began to lose my nerve, and the fear began an unassailable advance against my psyche. 2 hours passed. 2 and a half. 3 hours. I was hysterical and doing everything I could not to emotionally combust, so overwhelming was the terror. Finally, at about 3 hours and 30 minutes, the surgeon came out to meet me. Preempting my panic, from across the room he said both my wife and our unborn child were ok, but that her appendix had ruptured, and we narrowly missed much more serious complications. The surgeon showed me a picture of her uterus, which he said looked very good, and declared the baby inside strong and healthy.

Not yet fully recovered from her first pregnancy and delivery 2 years earlier, my wife was on bedrest for the next six months until she delivered our son. She remained on bedrest for another 6 months postpartum, and she required substantial care for another 6 months after that, to say nothing of our newborn son, or then-3-year-old daughter.

I got a vasectomy almost immediately. We knew there was no way we could ever subject my wife’s body to pregnancy again; doing so could risk her ability to walk, even her life, to say nothing of the potential complications for our children.

Fast forward 2 years, and my wife - whose menstrual cycles had all the precision of a Swiss watch - was late for her period. Significantly. And she noticed her body changing in subtle ways that were, in her prior experience, unique to the early stages of pregnancy.

Beside ourselves with shock - I had a vasectomy! - we confronted a grim reality: not yet knowing for sure if she was pregnant, we had to decide what to do if she was. After her last pregnancy, the doctor said becoming pregnant again could lead to permanent paralysis. And she could pass on the disorder to our child.

We were already under so much stress for so many other reasons that our marriage was in tatters. There was no way our family could emotionally, physically, financially, or mentally support another life. Even if both she and the baby were to beat the odds - my wife avoid paralysis and our baby not inherit the condition - she would still require many months of dedicated care postpartum, and we already had 2 children under 5. There was no way we could hold it all together.

We felt we had no choice. If she was pregnant, we would have to abort. Inundated by equal measures of grief and conviction, we sat together in the living room of our tiny apartment, cuddled on our broken couch. Though we did not yet know if she was pregnant, we held her belly in our hands. Would we name the child we were prepared to abort? Remember him or her with a secret, annual, not-a-birthday ceremony? How could we communicate our deep love to the growing life we were prepared to deny?

The next morning, she called the local Planned Parenthood and set up an appointment to determine if she was pregnant and discuss next steps. A few days before the appointment, my wife experienced a very heavy menstrual cycle. To this day we don’t know if she was pregnant and had a very early miscarriage, or just an extremely rare, late period.

Either way, we were forever changed by the experience. I cannot express how relieved we were to avoid making that final decision, but I made my cosmic peace with the necessity of it, and realized that I had no right to project my beliefs or values onto other people as they contemplate the same devastating choices.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 26, 2022, 05:56:36 am
And Tico like I said before if the womans health is in danger she should be allowed to have an abortion.

Im done with this topic.

I wont click back on it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on June 26, 2022, 06:42:29 am
Dusty if you read this Tico’s wife likely wouldn’t qualify in a lot of states.

In some of the states she would have to see 2 doctors to try and get them to agree that her life was in danger and risk their careers and prison on it.

Thanks for sharing your story Tico.  I never had to face anything close to that in my personal life and as I’ve gotten older and wiser I’ve learned I can’t always predict what I would do. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 26, 2022, 08:39:55 am
Thanks for sharing your very moving story, tico. I cannot begin to fully grasp just how hard all of that must have been for both of you. I hope you, your wife and kids are doing well now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 26, 2022, 02:11:43 pm
Sarah Huckabee Sanders quote: "We will make sure that when a kid is in the womb, they're as safe as they are in a classroom"

https://twitter.com/fred_guttenberg/status/1541122421058568197

It's impossible to satire modern Republicans. The Onion, SNL, The Daily Show, Last Week Tonight, etc....they'd all reject that as a joke because it is too on the nose.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 26, 2022, 03:08:59 pm
https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on June 26, 2022, 03:17:36 pm
The new GOP.

https://twitter.com/TheTattooedProf/status/1541093881630138369/photo/1
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on June 26, 2022, 03:49:25 pm
More.

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/26/1107710215/roe-overturned-mary-miller-historic-victory-for-white-life
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on June 28, 2022, 03:29:17 pm
Today's January 6 testimony was absolutely damning. I'd like to think it would make some Republicans decide to throw Trump and others under the bus (or at least stop defending him so vociferously), but that's probably wishful thinking.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on June 28, 2022, 05:30:34 pm
As Liz Cheney recently stated, "I say this to my Republican colleagues, who are defending the indefensible: there will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain."

Probably time to re-think supporting that bum!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Bennett on June 28, 2022, 06:53:34 pm
This is one of the key pieces of testimony BR is referring to

According to Hutchinson, Ornato recounted Trump screaming, "I'm the f**king President. Take me up to the Capitol now."


Trump then "reached up toward the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel," Hutchinson remembered learning. She added that, according to Ornato, Trump used his other hand to "lunge" at Engel.


https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/28/politics/trump-lunge-secret-service-january-6-capitol/index.html

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on June 28, 2022, 08:00:40 pm
He belongs in the middle of hell with Hitler.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dihard on June 29, 2022, 01:28:10 am
As one of the only women who frequents this board, and one of the only gay people who frequents this board, I want to say thank you to the men on here who seem to understand what a terrifying time this for so many. Who are hurting with us. Who are frightened with us. We need you. Now more than ever.

Deeg, tico, CBJ, and others, I am grateful for your thoughtfulness, empathy, and concern. tico, I cried reading your story and really appreciate your vulnerability in sharing that here.

I am heartbroken and scared right now, for my friends, for all women (especially in red states and in poor/minority/underserved communities), and for all those who will be affected by whatever they go after next.

Scary, scary times.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dihard on June 29, 2022, 01:39:36 am
From a newsletter I subscribe to (typically not related to abortion or politics), written by a man. I read it after posting here and it felt pertinent. (I had refrained from responding to Dusty’s heinously ignorant comments.)

“A male reader said that he supports abortion, but found it mind-boggling that so many women are "careless," get pregnant, and need an abortion. Here's what I think about that ignorance:

Does he not know about all the women who are bullied and manipulated by men into not practicing safe sex?

I've been married to one woman for years, but before that I encountered numerous women who thanked me profusely for offering to use condoms—because their experience had always been that the men they'd had sex with hated to use condoms and tried to coax them to not use them.

Another important point is that taking birth control pills can wreak havoc on a woman's body and even on her psyche. Some women have a torturous relationship with those drugs as a result.

Plus, with birth control pills, YOU HAVE TO TAKE A PILL EVERY SINGLE DAY. Missing one day could make it possible for you to get pregnant.

+

Condoms are mostly effective, but a lot of men don't like them, and resist using them. It's also true that condoms with spermicides, which are the most effective condoms, can be irritating to the **** and also make women susceptible to infections.

Women who endure the painful procedure of having an IUD implanted may have heaver periods and more intense menstrual cramps. Their periods may be irregular, and they can bleed between periods.

A diaphragm is at most 88% effective. A sponge is at most 88% effective, usually less. A cervical cap is between 71-86% effective. Spermicide is 71% effective. A birth control implant is 99% effective but can cost as much as $1,500.

An internal condom is 79% effective, and costs no more than $3. Outer condoms, worn by men, are just 85% effective—hardly a foolproof way to avoid pregnancy.

A birth control patch is 91% effective and has to be replaced weekly; can cost up to $150.

A birth control shot is 94% effective and cost up to $100 every three months.

A birth control vaginal ring is 91% effective and can cost up to $100 every month.

All the above comments are meant to address those people who wonder—without having done any research or talked to actual women—why abortion is even necessary given the fact that "there are so many birth control methods."

+

I appeal to men who might be reading this to be well-educated about why it's so important for women and people with wombs to have the right to decide what happens with their own bodies.

Be well-educated about the various forms of birth control that are available, and about how most of them are imperfect and/or problematic in some way—which is why we need to have abortion to end pregnancies that weren't prevented by birth control.

If you have personally experienced an abortion with a partner, talk about that with your male friends. Also, talk with your male friends about the importance of us being more involved with abortion rights.

+

Read about the possible long-term side effects of hormonal birth control for women: https://tinyurl.com/czzrj5nx

+

Lance Wilburn writes: To be clear: The irony of so many discussions about abortion is the complete lack of male inclusion. Women do not magically become pregnant. There is a man attached to every abortion.

Why are men not being included in the Texas law's jail time for abortion? Because this isn't about abortion, it's about men controlling women.

It's an easy topic for white men to flex their power over to remind the womenfolk that they will always have to kneel to them.

If it were actually about abortion, we would be discussing early and continuing sex education, free birth control, healthcare for all, making childcare financially feasible, mandatory parental leave, increasing WIC, hard sentencing for ****, fixing the foster care system, and making adoption more accessible.

This is not about abortion. Don't fool yourself.

— Lance Wilburn

+

Planned Parenthood is the most helpful and inexpensive source of information about various birth control methods, but that organization is being harassed and defunded. So it's getting harder and harder for women to get access to its information.

+

Many women tell me that when they hear me talking about my experiences with abortion, it's the first time they have ever heard a man even talk about abortion, let alone advocate for it and describe his experiences with it. That's appalling to me. Men should be fully engaged in every aspect of these issues.”

Again, thank you to those of you who clearly are.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 29, 2022, 10:32:56 am
How is it that more people who support the jerk haven't seen this?  I guess I'm a RINO, but I've seen this idiot's ego run amuck for some time.  Trump is a child.

 Former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson isn’t a big Donald Trump fan.

In an interview with NBC News, Simpson called Trump, among other things, a “spoiled brat” and said that “this guy is so full of himself that he would overturn every kind of rule of law or Constitutional process because of his own ego, which is twisted.”

Simpson, a Republican, acknowledged that he voted for Trump in 2016 but noted that “I’ll never vote for him again – that’s for goddamn sure.”

Simpson is speaking out against Trump even as he appears in a new ad for Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, who faces long odds of winning a primary fight later this summer against Trump-endorsed challenger Harriet Hageman.

In the ad, Simpson, who spent 18 years representing Wyoming in the Senate, is identified simply as “Al.”

“Join me in voting for Liz Cheney on August 16th,” the former senator, who is 90, says at the conclusion of the Cheney ad.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on June 29, 2022, 10:34:02 am
Di, thanks for your comments and input.  I may not agree with all of your points, but I do agree with some.  Thank you for sharing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on June 29, 2022, 10:57:53 am
Simpson is a real profile in courage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on July 01, 2022, 09:25:42 pm
10 year old **** victim on Ohio… had to travel out of state for the procedure.

There are people out there that think 10 years should carry a pregnancy to term.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2022/07/01/ohio-girl-10-among-patients-going-indiana-abortion/7788415001/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 01, 2022, 09:56:27 pm
method, the whole abortion issue has been emotionally charged because of extremes like this.  Tomorrow some right winger will post how some woman had 5 abortions last year but refused birth control measures.   And, yes, there are some who would want her to take to term, but I hope there aren't enough that think that way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 01, 2022, 10:20:16 pm
Ah, the sweet music of false equivalency.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 01, 2022, 11:09:14 pm
The current Republican Party will make the laws that are the absolute worst when it comes to abortion. I have seen multiple reports of ectopic pregnancies that instead of being treated are being monitored until the mother condition worsens. Catholic hospitals prior to these laws would treat this without a question.

I am also seeing reports of female patients with rheumatoid arthritis that are in child bearing age that are having to switch from methotrexate because it can cause an abortion.

There are now but the other side arguments. Women’s health is being endangered because one political party is a bunch of idiots that couldn’t pass a freshman high school biology class.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on July 01, 2022, 11:20:11 pm
It was never about "life is precious," it was about control. I believe in X and you must too. And where we are at is called checkmate. Decent fair minded people are f)$@ed.

Enjoy the next few months as best as you can bc a $&@&ing inexorable cliff is coming our way. Democracy in the US is DONE.

But don't fret. All you religious folk will be left with a wasteland of guns and ignorance. The smart humans will get the )&&* out. I know a sinking ship when I see one and America hit an iceberg called religious extremism.

One quick point, It's not your gods will a woman dies from an ectopic pregnancy; it's six religious bullshit artists who did it. AND it's YOU being ok with that. Hey, remember how the Astros won a World Series by cheating? Same $hit. That's how we got here. You own that death. Bury your head in sand all you like.Willful ignorance. Cognitive avoidance. I don't care what you call it; You are a killer you self-ascribed pro-lifer.

I hope your god comforts you. When you have no tech or money or hope bc all the smart people said $@&* this $hit and left. I hope you find a semblance of comfort. Send me a post card from your dark ages, will ya? By fu(king carrier pigeon.

You reap what you sow, and you sowed bull$hit. America is now the 2022 Cubs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 01, 2022, 11:28:05 pm
Bear in mind the next thing the SC is going to do is effectively end democracy by giving total control of elections to gerrymandered state legislatures.  It's called Moore v. Harper - read up and be terrified.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 04, 2022, 12:00:22 pm
Appreciate Romey's sobriety here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/mitt-romney-republican-denial-biden-election/661468/

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 04, 2022, 01:17:04 pm
Biggest issue is that both sides seem to prefer seeing the country fall than surrender control to the other.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 04, 2022, 01:31:05 pm
Appreciate Romey's sobriety here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/mitt-romney-republican-denial-biden-election/661468/



This is quintessential Mitt Romney.  He attempts to differentiate himself from his Trumpian Republican colleagues through hollow statements, doing so with false equivalencies.  To lump climate change and the threat to our democracy with inflation and illegal immigration is absurd. Whatever positions one holds regarding inflation and illegal immigration, they are of no where near the order of danger to our way of life as climate change and the potential loss of our democracy.

The suggestion that some other would-be president waiting in the wings (who, pray tell?) could provide the "leadership" to "break through our national malady of denial, deceit, and distrust" and "rise above the din to unite us behind the truth" is either absurdly naïve, disingenuous or dishonest.

And by the way, while Romney criticizes Congress for its failure to act on these topics, exactly what has Romney himself done in the Senate to support efforts to mitigate climate change or to protect our democratic institutions?  Other than one vote to convict Trump on impeachment (and one vote against), nothing that I can think of.  He has stood by robotically with his Republican colleagues to oppose efforts to fight voter disenfranchisement and other measures to protect democratic institutions as well as opposing initiatives that would fight climate change. Oh, and then there are his votes on the Supreme Court.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on July 04, 2022, 02:08:00 pm
Well said, Ron.  I'd certainly put Romney at least a rung above the vast majority of Republicans in the Senate (or, certainly, in the House), but you are correct to point out the false equivalencies he raises. 

What does Romney really think about climate change?  Why isn't he the Senate's version of Liz Cheney re Trump?  Clearly, he knows she's 100% spot on in her assessment of our former Mafia-boss "President."

As for the budget deficit, Trump's "administration" certainly helped us dig a much deeper deficit hole, too (particularly when his financial interests were involved).

I appreciate the overall tenor of what Romney says in the article and, granted, he's shown WAY more integrity than other Senate Republicans.
However, that's an incredibly low bar.  It would be nice if Romney led at least somewhat more re the most critical issues we face today - threats to our democracy and climate have to be at or very near the top!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 04, 2022, 02:49:56 pm
This is quintessential Mitt Romney.  He attempts to differentiate himself from his Trumpian Republican colleagues through hollow statements, doing so with false equivalencies.  To lump climate change and the threat to our democracy with inflation and illegal immigration is absurd. Whatever positions one holds regarding inflation and illegal immigration, they are of no where near the order of danger to our way of life as climate change and the potential loss of our democracy.

This is more than just a false equivalency. It's also very disingenuous to portray illegal immigration and the deficit as problems that are unique to the left.

What has been the right's solution on illegal immigration? All they do is talk about building an ineffective wall, treat people in need of humanitarian aid as if they are criminals, and demonize people coming across the border as drug mules even though we know that most dangerous drugs get to the United States through legal points of entry (marijuana is an exception and gets smuggled across illegally more often).

What has been their solution to the deficit? Can anyone point out tangible deficit reduction steps Congress passed between January 20, 2017 and January 20, 2021? They did push through an unpopular tax cut bill that helps increase the deficit, and they're perfectly happy to spend on their pet projects when they control Congress.

If Romney wants to both-sides the issues of the deficit and immigration, then maybe there's something to talk about--both sides could do better in those areas. But as Ron said, there's no equivalent on the left to attacking democracy and denying climate change.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 04, 2022, 03:12:45 pm
Responding to Ron and ben's posts: it does not matter one way or another, but my personal politics (depending on the issue) generally range between far left and extremely progressive. Warren was my preferred D candidate during the primaries. I could not agree more that issues of climate change and the preservation of our democracy are significantly more consequential than the southern border or deficit spending.

But here's the thing: somewhere between 45-50% of the voting population disagrees. Whether they disagree in good faith or bad faith, from an informed perspective or a brainwashed one, it matters not. This is simply how the electorate mobilizes. Further, the Republican Party is hell bent on exploiting every last measure to maintain their shaky hold of the center, and have been frighteningly successful in their attempts thus far. Even as demographic change would promise to forever sink the detestable political careers of the likes of Ted Cruz or Jim Jordan, the Republican Party is somehow ascendent in this moment, and has a realistic chance to take the House in the midterms and the Presidency in 2024.

Do you believe for a moment that Speaker McCarthy, Majority Leader McConnell, President DeSantis, or - *shudder* - Trump, emboldened by their new power, would refrain from further eroding our democracy? No. Of course not. They'll seize the generational opportunity to further entrench minority rule by any means necessary.

In this moment - as American conservatism so terrifyingly embraces Orwell's final, most essential command - we cannot afford ideological purity tests. I'll take every last Kinzinger, Cheney, and Romney that will stand on the side of sanity and decency. We can argue about borders and budgets as policy issues another time.

This is existential.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 04, 2022, 03:19:48 pm
Biggest issue is that both sides seem to prefer seeing the country fall than surrender control to the other.

Curt, this doesn't work either.

The entire platform of the Republican Party is Jan 6 was a non-event.

"Surrender[ing] control to" Republicans leads directly to the kind of "soft" authoritarianism we observe in Orban's Hungary. There is no compromise there.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 04, 2022, 03:31:27 pm
This is more than just a false equivalency. It's also very disingenuous to portray illegal immigration and the deficit as problems that are unique to the left.

What has been the right's solution on illegal immigration? All they do is talk about building an ineffective wall, treat people in need of humanitarian aid as if they are criminals, and demonize people coming across the border as drug mules even though we know that most dangerous drugs get to the United States through legal points of entry (marijuana is an exception and gets smuggled across illegally more often).

What has been their solution to the deficit? Can anyone point out tangible deficit reduction steps Congress passed between January 20, 2017 and January 20, 2021? They did push through an unpopular tax cut bill that helps increase the deficit, and they're perfectly happy to spend on their pet projects when they control Congress.

If Romney wants to both-sides the issues of the deficit and immigration, then maybe there's something to talk about--both sides could do better in those areas. But as Ron said, there's no equivalent on the left to attacking democracy and denying climate change.

Fair and salient points, all.

But raising these issues is akin to inviting your ideological opponent over for a drink to discuss serious matters.

You're making a Manhattan. They're making a Molotov.

You're trying to have a conversation. They're trying to burn down the house.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on July 04, 2022, 04:18:20 pm
Immigration is perhaps the key example of Republican mischief.

Immigration was once, for the most part, an issue with reasonable bipartisan approaches. Comprehensive immigration reform came relatively close to happening. The ways to do it are pretty well known for those who want to balance thorny competing interests.

But, Republicans discovered immigration is a very effective wedge issue.

And have exploited it relentlessly. It’s a great issue for scaring white folks that their culture, jobs, safety, political power, and more will disappear if too many non-whites become Americans. So, any notion of comprehensive reform is dead. Republicans are far more interested in exploiting the issue.

Some on the Left are not helpful either when unwilling to emphasize that no country in the world tolerates “open” or the like borders. That’s one of the primary components of comprehensive immigration control—to control the borders in a humane way while recognizing the realities on the ground.

Immigration is an issue that can be solved if folks really wanted to solve the problem. But, it’s too valuable a wedge issue. Emblematic of our messed-up and dangerously divisive politics driven by those far more interested in their partisan political future than the interests of the country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 04, 2022, 05:12:59 pm
Biggest issue is that both sides seem to prefer seeing the country fall than surrender control to the other.

With all due respect, this is nonsense, and I cannot believe you mean this.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 04, 2022, 05:23:49 pm
Ron, the opposite of what I said is compromise.  On what issue do you see the opposing sides willing to compromise? 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 04, 2022, 05:31:28 pm
Abortion?  Guns?  Environment?  Immigration?  Economy?  You have nuts willing to try to overthrow the government in support of a childish moron.  You read all kinds of rubbish to continue to support the jackass.  We are constantly given horrible choices in our elections.  Respect?  Our court system?  Our elected leaders?  On social media.  Please show me hope.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 04, 2022, 05:42:35 pm
With all due respect, this is nonsense, and I cannot believe you mean this.

I can.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on July 04, 2022, 05:55:03 pm
Do we have anyone from the board in Highland Park? Sincerely hope not. Not even going to try to put words to the shooting.

Meanwhile, the Republican candidate for IL gov has already put out a statement in which he spent more time talking about the plight of parade organizers than the victims and their families and calls for people to "move on and celebrate freedom.”



Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 04, 2022, 06:34:01 pm
Do we have anyone from the board in Highland Park? Sincerely hope not. Not even going to try to put words to the shooting.

Meanwhile, the Republican candidate for IL gov has already put out a statement in which he spent more time talking about the plight of parade organizers than the victims and their families and calls for people to "move on and celebrate freedom.”

You do - lived there for about a decade in my teens and 20s.  Unfortunately it’s a reality in the US of NRA that inevitably there’s going to be a mass shooting that intersects with your life.  Liam Hendriks has the right idea on this, but then he comes from a place that’s dealt with the issue in a non-insane way.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 04, 2022, 07:02:13 pm
Here’s the Highland Park shooter attending a Trump rally last year:

https://twitter.com/theeunfluencer/status/1544085608167088129?s=21&t=GhkPNhQCruwKq_CpcsHBHA
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 04, 2022, 07:06:37 pm
tico, that doorknob was "supported" by the Democratic Governors' Association.  They ran ads stressing his anti-abortion, pro-NR, pro-Trump stands.  Sarcastically they were baiting Republicans and cross-over Democrats to vote for him because they felt he was no threat to Pritzer whereas the other candidate a progressive Black guy was more of a threat.  They ran negative ads against him.

Two things: I'm not sure I like either party taking that strategy.  Both parties have a tough time already nominating good people.   Second, I have seen "Pritzer Sucks" signs plastering Southern Illinois and Illinois has had plenty of Republican governors.  It's dangerous.  This guy is as unhinged as Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 04, 2022, 07:14:09 pm
tico, that doorknob was "supported" by the Democratic Governors' Association.  They ran ads stressing his anti-abortion, pro-NR, pro-Trump stands.  Sarcastically they were baiting Republicans and cross-over Democrats to vote for him because they felt he was no threat to Pritzer whereas the other candidate a progressive Black guy was more of a threat.  They ran negative ads against him.

Two things: I'm not sure I like either party taking that strategy.  Both parties have a tough time already nominating good people.   Second, I have seen "Pritzer Sucks" signs plastering Southern Illinois and Illinois has had plenty of Republican governors.  It's dangerous.  This guy is as unhinged as Trump.

Curt, by “this guy” I assume you mean Bailey and not Pritzker?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 04, 2022, 07:33:44 pm
Yes, sorry.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on July 04, 2022, 07:44:21 pm
Yes, sorry.

No sweat, just making sure.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 04, 2022, 09:13:38 pm
Abortion?  Guns?  Environment?  Immigration?  Economy?  You have nuts willing to try to overthrow the government in support of a childish moron.  You read all kinds of rubbish to continue to support the jackass.  We are constantly given horrible choices in our elections.  Respect?  Our court system?  Our elected leaders?  On social media.  Please show me hope.

Curt - I am hoping you simply have not been closely following news about legislative initiatives.  There have for years been instances in which the Democrats have compromised in order to obtain Republican support for legislation only to find it pointless. The most famous is when Obama asked Grassley, after ongoing efforts to find a meeting place on health care reform (what became the Affordable Care Act) whether there was anything that result in his and Republican support, and Grassley's response was no. This was no outlier.

For you to paint both parties with an unwillingness to compromise is grossly inaccurate. Yeah, some on the left are dogmatic in their approach, but the Democrats as a whole are consistently amenable to some form of compromise. And particularly on climate change and preserving democracy, the Republicans have been consistently unyielding.  One doesn't have to agree with every position Dems have had or the behavior of all Dems to acknowledge the astonishing difference between the two parties' willingness to support legislative efforts on each of these issues.  This includes immigration by the way, and in case you haven't noticed the national debt has consistently risen under Republican presidents and declined under Democratic presidents. For the Republicans to complain about the national debt is hypocritical to an extraordinary degree.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 04, 2022, 09:24:07 pm
tico, that doorknob was "supported" by the Democratic Governors' Association.  They ran ads stressing his anti-abortion, pro-NR, pro-Trump stands.  Sarcastically they were baiting Republicans and cross-over Democrats to vote for him because they felt he was no threat to Pritzer whereas the other candidate a progressive Black guy was more of a threat.  They ran negative ads against him.

Two things: I'm not sure I like either party taking that strategy.  Both parties have a tough time already nominating good people.   Second, I have seen "Pritzer Sucks" signs plastering Southern Illinois and Illinois has had plenty of Republican governors.  It's dangerous.  This guy is as unhinged as Trump.

I don't like either party trying to sabotage the other party's chances for success by supporting a lesser candidate in the primary either. But it was Republicans who chose to nominate this guy, not Dems. In any event, this sort of thing pales in comparison to the efforts by Republicans to suppress opposition participation in elections, much less the more recent efforts to provide state legislatures the ability to reject election results they don't like.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 04, 2022, 10:39:25 pm
Ron:But it was Republicans who chose to nominate this guy, not Dems.   ???   Bailey nominated himself, as did the Mayor of Aurora.  He had to receive the final nomination at the ballot box.



Actually, Ron, I have been following the decline of civility very closely.   I would tend to agree that there are more reputable and honest Dems right now than Republicans, but both party more together over the weekends then they do on the Hill.   It's all about power and who has it.  You look at what constituencies will deliver you votes, and you cater to them: women, minorities, gun owners, alphabet groups, military, farmers, dentists, whatever.   You have a lot of cowards catering to Trump right now.   Most will do whatever it takes to get power, even kissing Trump's butt.  Going back to my original post which you challenged, most people who consider themselves a member of a party refuse to see the crap in their own party.

For power, party members will even turn on their own.  Rodney Davis was a Trumper whose district got merged with another.  The other a MAGA Trumper, actually won on the idea that Davis wasn't Trumper enough.  She ran lying ads, claiming Davis was best buds with Pelosi.  Nonsense.   

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 04, 2022, 11:30:14 pm
Curt - I am hoping you simply have not been closely following news about legislative initiatives.  There have for years been instances in which the Democrats have compromised in order to obtain Republican support for legislation only to find it pointless. The most famous is when Obama asked Grassley, after ongoing efforts to find a meeting place on health care reform (what became the Affordable Care Act) whether there was anything that result in his and Republican support, and Grassley's response was no. This was no outlier.

For you to paint both parties with an unwillingness to compromise is grossly inaccurate. Yeah, some on the left are dogmatic in their approach, but the Democrats as a whole are consistently amenable to some form of compromise. And particularly on climate change and preserving democracy, the Republicans have been consistently unyielding.  One doesn't have to agree with every position Dems have had or the behavior of all Dems to acknowledge the astonishing difference between the two parties' willingness to support legislative efforts on each of these issues.  This includes immigration by the way, and in case you haven't noticed the national debt has consistently risen under Republican presidents and declined under Democratic presidents. For the Republicans to complain about the national debt is hypocritical to an extraordinary degree.

President Obama poisoned the well with Republicans when they had their first meeting about healthcare reform and dropped the elections matter line. Affordable Healthcare Act could have been a good idea, but it was mucked up from the beginning. Imagine trying to convince people to do a colonoscopy and telling them it could be free unless the find polyps if they find polyps it will be a lot more.  It could be fixed, but neither party wants to.

Pre-Trump both sides arguments had some merit. Post January 6 they don’t. I don’t really have a political home. I’m not into the Warren wing of the Democrats, but I’m certainly not into voting for Republicans at this point. I really don’t have any choice but to vote for Democrats at this point. They have flaws and do a lot of stuff in bad faith, but they aren’t actively trying to burn down democracy either.

Romney, Chaney and Kinzger may not be your political cup of tea, but they don’t need attacks coming from the left at this point.  They are a small island of conservatives that are trying to not let the bad people win. Just leav them alone for right now.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 05, 2022, 08:23:30 am
Romney, Chaney and Kinzger may not be your political cup of tea, but they don’t need attacks coming from the left at this point.  They are a small island of conservatives that are trying to not let the bad people win. Just leav them alone for right now.

Romney does not belong in a list that includes Cheney and Kinzinger. 

Though I have huge public policy differences with those two, I have enormous respect for the integrity and courage they both have displayed. Neither simply occasionally gave or wrote "both sidesism" speeches or arguments. They put their careers on the line in their votes and other actions. I applaud and honor them for what they have done and are doing. Period.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 05, 2022, 09:44:59 am
Ron, when it comes to Romney, it comes down to the enemy of my enemy is my friend.  Trump hates him, that means I'll give him a pass.  I'm guessing his article will get condemned pretty heavily from the right on a conservative (Bears) board.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on July 05, 2022, 09:54:58 am
Politicians do have to take into consideration their electorate.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 05, 2022, 11:02:06 am
Romney voted for impeachment.  That takes guts in this version of whatever the Republican party is supposed to be. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 05, 2022, 11:29:36 am
Romney voted for impeachment.  That takes guts in this version of whatever the Republican party is supposed to be. 

Yeah, he did, for which he deserves some credit. I mentioned that in my earlier post.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on July 05, 2022, 11:43:00 am
Thanks to Trump, as well as Fox News/Newsmax etc. and GOP politicians who've put their careers WAY above their country for many years, it seems to me that the GOP - and most of its supporters - have become SO radicalized and unwilling to compromise, the Dems may as well just take the gloves off and forget Biden's stated goal of bringing the two parties together somewhat.  In hindsight, that goal seems quite naive.

Thus, I'm hopeful there will be MORE ads like Newsom’s that ask Americans whether they REALLY want what the GOP is offering today: (e.g.)
* Trump and/or those who would enable a person like Trump,
* assault weapons terrorizing this country virtually w/o limitation,
* a SCOTUS that seems bent on further locking down a radical right-wing political agenda under the guise of “Originalism,”
* women NOT in control of their own bodies,
* state legislatures that can overcome the popular vote,
* one legal impediment after another to leading on/slowing down Climate Change,
* “nationalism” vs NATO etc etc etc.

I've leaned Democratic, but voted for both sides of the aisle in national elections.  At this point in time, I'm over that.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 05, 2022, 12:54:15 pm
Remember Mikhail Gorbachev?   Right after the fall of the Soviet Union, he wrote an article for a major magazine...New Yorker, Atlantic, Playboy, Rolling Stone?  Can't remember.  In his article, Gorby made the claim that the same thing would happen in the United States by 2050.  He cited differences in religious and civil values.  He even provided a map, states up the middle from Texas to North Dakota, with Utah, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming tagging along.  Arkansas, Missouri, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida probably going along.   Isolated were Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin.   West Coast blue states plus Nevada and New Mexico.  East coast blue states.  Can't remember where he had Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, South Carolina, and North Carolina.  But it was interesting.   The reason I mention this is because of the recent defection of UCLA and USC to the Big 10.   I find it humorous that the SEC and Big 10 seem to be leading the way to Gorbachev's America.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on July 05, 2022, 02:08:46 pm
Romney voted for impeachment.  That takes guts in this version of whatever the Republican party is supposed to be. 

Romney is less bad than most Republican Senators now. So are the other Republican Senators who voted to convict Trump after the second impeachment. But refusing to overturn democracy is a very low bar to cross.

There is more to being a principled Senator who is willing to work across the aisle than just opposing Donald Trump. Politicizing the Supreme Court might be more damaging long term than anything Trump and his allies can do. Romney and his friends were more than willing to go along with McConnell's fake "precedent" on Garland in 2016. And they were happy to go along again when McConnell ignored his own "precedent" on Amy Coney Barrett in 2020.

I'm sorry, but I just can't give too much credit to Senators who had the power to stop the extreme politicization of the Court but decided to get in line with McConnell anyway.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 05, 2022, 02:50:24 pm
Romney is less bad than most Republican Senators now. So are the other Republican Senators who voted to convict Trump after the second impeachment. But refusing to overturn democracy is a very low bar to cross.

There is more to being a principled Senator who is willing to work across the aisle than just opposing Donald Trump. Politicizing the Supreme Court might be more damaging long term than anything Trump and his allies can do. Romney and his friends were more than willing to go along with McConnell's fake "precedent" on Garland in 2016. And they were happy to go along again when McConnell ignored his own "precedent" on Amy Coney Barrett in 2020.

I'm sorry, but I just can't give too much credit to Senators who had the power to stop the extreme politicization of the Court but decided to get in line with McConnell anyway.

The Court has been politicized for a long, long, long time.  Both sides have played games with nominations to the Supreme Court and Federal Court.  McConnell just took it to the next level. 

If you think Romney is a less bad Republican that is a perfectly fine thought to have.  Utah isn't going to elect a Democrat most likely and I'd much rather have Romney in the Senate than say a worse version of Mike Lee.  Same goes for Fisher and Sass in Nebraska.  Sending fire towards the less bad Republicans is only going to get worse Republicans elected.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 05, 2022, 02:55:30 pm
The Court has been politicized for a long, long, long time.  Both sides have played games with nominations to the Supreme Court and Federal Court.  McConnell just took it to the next level. 

If you think Romney is a less bad Republican that is a perfectly fine thought to have.  Utah isn't going to elect a Democrat most likely and I'd much rather have Romney in the Senate than say a worse version of Mike Lee.  Same goes for Fisher and Sass in Nebraska.  Sending fire towards the less bad Republicans is only going to get worse Republicans elected.
Fischer.   She spells her last name the same way I do.  No relation.  None wanted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on July 05, 2022, 03:17:36 pm
Why can't you just have nice easy to spell Eastern European last names.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on July 05, 2022, 09:59:44 pm
Jennifer Rubin, a long-time conservative (who since Trump's ascendency no longer identifies with that term) effectively calls out Romney for his both-sidesism, and for his failure to live up to his own admonishments. Rubin had been a strong and vocal advocate for Romney's 2012 campaign for the presidency.  This is an excerpt.

"Romney, who voted against cloture for voting rights reform and has yet to condemn the GOP’s systematic assault on honest election administration, has not come out against Republican election deniers on the ballot in the midterms. He gives no indication of concern that the next House speaker could well be the spineless House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who tolerates the most extreme members in his party, including those who sought out pardons for their roles in the Jan. 6 insurrection, and attacks the House Jan. 6 select committee, from which he pulled his Republican members.

"Romney would do well to acknowledge that the primary threat to democracy and the belief in objective reality is his own party. To the extent he advocates its return to power and refuses to denounce its most insidious elements, he contributes to the problem. Like too many in the mainstream media, his reflexive retreat to moral equivalence winds up normalizing his own party, thereby disguising its authoritarian impulses.

"Romney, like many other “good” Republicans, exaggerates and inflates Democrats’ faults as a means to justifying his continued participation in a malign party. But Romney has another option: to follow the example of his longtime friend, Evan McMullin. The Utah Senate candidate is running as an independent against incumbent Sen. Mike Lee, who eagerly sought to pressure state legislatures to send fake groups of electors. Like McMullin, Romney and like-minded Republicans can start anew. They can make common cause with independents and Democrats on the overriding issue of our time: preservation of democracy. They can refuse to contribute to Republicans’ return to power."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/07/05/sorry-mitt-romney-denial-is-not-an-equal-opportunity-offense/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on July 05, 2022, 10:31:35 pm
CBJ, I don't think we're going to get Ron to vote for Romney.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 08, 2022, 08:33:02 pm
;)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 09, 2022, 06:58:02 pm
CBJ, sounds like Facebook turned over a Nebraska teen's private messages with her mother to the police, so that they can prosecute the teen for an abortion.

Is that a sensationalized version of the story? Or does it hew close to the facts as you know them?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 09, 2022, 07:03:26 pm
It's a weird story, tico.  It's more about what they did with the aborted fetus than the actual late term termination.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on August 09, 2022, 07:44:42 pm
CBJ, sounds like Facebook turned over a Nebraska teen's private messages with her mother to the police, so that they can prosecute the teen for an abortion.

Is that a sensationalized version of the story? Or does it hew close to the facts as you know them?

So Nebraska has not changed their abortion laws since Roe v Wade thanks to the Unicameral legislature and the Republicans although they have a large majority do not have the votes to override a filibuster.  This case actually predates Roe v Wade being overturned.  Abortion was illegal in Nebraska after 20 weeks unless the mother’s health is at risk.

That being said I wouldn’t say it a fair description at all from what I have read. The girl was 28 weeks pregnant and the mother somehow purchased medication for a medical abortion. The medication is only meant to be given in the first trimester, which the girl clearly wasn’t in. They then burned and disposed of the body after the girl miscarried. The mom is being charged with practicing medicine without a license and disposing of a body. The daughter is being charged with concealing a dead body, concealing a death and false reporting.  A male is also charged with helping them bury the body.

So the I think all the charges are completely legit. Had the gone to a hospital or called 911 after she miscarried there likely would have been no charges. This all started when the police got a tip they sue miscarried and buried the body on a relative’s property and the police found a body in a bag that was partially burned. The only charges added after the Facebook info was against the mother.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 09, 2022, 08:32:22 pm
Told you it was weird
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 10, 2022, 01:54:35 am
Thx to you both, appreciate it.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on August 11, 2022, 08:12:04 pm
Docs on nuclear **** weapons.

And his cultists attacking FBI offices with nail guns.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on August 12, 2022, 08:11:04 am
Docs on nuclear **** weapons.

And his cultists attacking FBI offices with nail guns.

You should gander over to the bears board. Its a full blown Epstien linked conspiracy to take down Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on September 05, 2022, 01:30:22 pm
Canadians beginning to debate knife control.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on September 09, 2022, 11:31:58 am
If anyone wants to see how incredibly effective Russian propaganda is in the US, go read the last 30 odd posts by Pekin on the Bears board. (click on his name, then "show posts" on the left hand side)
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 09, 2022, 12:20:37 pm
If anyone wants to see how incredibly effective Russian propaganda is in the US, go read the last 30 odd posts by Pekin on the Bears board. (click on his name, then "show posts" on the left hand side)

Pekin’s descent into madness has been remarkable to watch.  Bill Sharp is a great example of how the YouTube algorithm can be very dangerous in the wrong hands.  There is no right wing conspiracy video too outrageous for him to post and believe.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 06, 2022, 04:23:39 pm
Ben Sasse is resigning to be the Senate to be the University of Florida president. Ricketts is term limited and gets to appointment his successor until a 2024 election. I wonder who it will be?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 06, 2022, 08:36:16 pm
Ben Sasse is resigning to be the Senate to be the University of Florida president. Ricketts is term limited and gets to appointment his successor until a 2024 election. I wonder who it will be?
Probably some MAGA lunatic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 06, 2022, 09:01:05 pm
I think it will be Ricketts. Nebraska Republicans have an internal fight going on.  The MAGA/Q took over the state party and Ricketts was on the losing end of it. His handpicked successor won the nomination while the MAGA guy lost. It will be interesting to see how it plays out. By interesting I mean possibly terrifying.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 06, 2022, 09:17:34 pm
Much ado about nothing.  Sasse is nothing but a bag of hot wind who loves to paint himself as principled and independent and in the end always votes the MAGA party line.  If expressing outrage is your thing, he’s your guy.  Apart from that no difference between him and whatever other nutbag pays Ricketts off enough to get the seat.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 11, 2022, 10:03:10 pm
Ricketts is definitely sounding like he wants it. He is floating that if he wants the position the next governor (the guy he backed) will be the one to appoint Sasse’s replacement.

Sasse was in the bottom tier of Republicans voting with Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on October 11, 2022, 10:54:36 pm
ROFL.  Yes, Sasse only voted with Trump 84.8% of the time.  Why, that’s almost 2% less than Josh Hawley!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 12, 2022, 03:40:04 pm
A majority of what they are voting for is boiler plate Republican stuff, so it isn't shocking.  Sasse stuck his head out, when it would have been easier for him politically to not to.  Sasse took a lot of flack in Nebraska for doing what he did. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 12, 2022, 05:45:44 pm
A majority of what they are voting for is boiler plate Republican stuff, so it isn't shocking.  Sasse stuck his head out, when it would have been easier for him politically to not to.  Sasse took a lot of flack in Nebraska for doing what he did.

Too bad he didn’t stick his head out during the first impeachment when it could have actually mattered.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on October 12, 2022, 10:05:40 pm
I wish he would have, but he would have been unelectable in Nebraska if he did.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on December 06, 2022, 09:08:01 pm
If Raphael Warnock has any interest in being president, he'd be a great candidate in 2024 if Biden doesn't run. Or in 2028 regardless. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on December 06, 2022, 09:25:45 pm
Dude from Florida will be the next president.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on December 06, 2022, 09:35:40 pm
If Raphael Warnock has any interest in being president, he'd be a great candidate in 2024 if Biden doesn't run. Or in 2028 regardless. 

Would Warnock have won if he was running against somebody that was competent?

Dude from Florida will be the next president.

He has strong Scott Walker vibes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 07, 2022, 12:44:44 am
In his concession speech, Walker said he was disappointed that he wouldn't  be able to serve the people of Texas
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 15, 2022, 02:17:17 pm
Anyone see Trump's "MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT"? It's so perfectly on-brand, peddling NFTs of himself dressed as superheroes, after the NFT market has completely collapsed and the majority of crypto has been revealed as fraudulent. Hopelessly incompetent, he can't even grift well.

https://www.collecttrumpcards.com
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on December 15, 2022, 02:27:03 pm
He’s doing a great job of grifting. It’s a excellent cash grab.  You have to admire his ability to steal from those who support him.

“It’s hard to steal a million dollars from one person, the con is stealing a dollar from a million” said someone smarter then me.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on December 15, 2022, 02:32:03 pm
He’s doing a great job of grifting. It’s a excellent cash grab.  You have to admire his ability to steal from those who support him.

“It’s hard to steal a million dollars from one person, the con is stealing a dollar from a million” said someone smarter then me.
I never said that, but I wish I had.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on December 15, 2022, 02:59:46 pm
He’s doing a great job of grifting. It’s a excellent cash grab.  You have to admire his ability to steal from those who support him.

“It’s hard to steal a million dollars from one person, the con is stealing a dollar from a million” said someone smarter then me.

Agree with Curt, it's a great line, and he's certainly going to make plenty of money.

But whatever money he makes, it's less the result of him begin a great grifter, and more the result of a lot of people being, well, dumb.

It's not charitable to say, but it's the truth. His entire persona, right down to the golden toilets, is comic-movie-villain, but somehow he pulls it off.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on February 04, 2023, 10:26:53 am
Republicans posing with AR-15’s acting like they can shoot down a ballon that is 100,000 feet in the air just reminds me how poor science and math education in the USA is.

The Target store that was shot up in Omaha was the one that my family and I shop at.  Our lovely US House of Representative member Don Bacon was more concerned with clarifying that an AR-15 is not a full automatic weapon and Antifa.  It was over 24 hours before he could even be bothered with making a statement thanking the cop that ran into the store without any protective gear and shot the guy.

It is also a reminder of how messed up our guns laws are.  The guy that did was a Schizophrenic who was had the police called on him multiple times, the family has attempted to have law enforcement (local and federal) disarm him and he was able to into a sporting goods store and buy an AR-15 with 13 magazines of ammo with no questions asked.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on February 04, 2023, 11:38:20 am
Citizens need to protect themselves from the government.  Gotta accept the collateral damage.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 05, 2023, 06:29:42 pm
Quote from: CurtOne on Today at 06:11:59 pm

    Two points: this discussion should go to Politics and Religion

    2. The Roman historian Josephus and a number of Hebraic scholars describe Jesus and his impact of the Roman Empire.  You make choose not to believe in him as a religious figure, but he isn't fictional.

The Jesus story is a real thing that had an obvious effect on the world. The subject of the story may have been a real person but there is no way to know since pretty much everything attributed to this figure was said well after the fact. And, of course, the details of the story are obvious myth and did not happen.  It’s embarrassing that in 2023 this last part is still in dispute. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on March 05, 2023, 08:42:03 pm
So you're saying Jesus was real but the stories we read in the bible aren't?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 05, 2023, 09:11:46 pm
What he is saying is that there is historical evidence that a man named Jesus and John the Baptist existed.  The extent that the book has been altered is up for debate about at least one of the two passages that mention Jesus.  The passage about John the Baptist differs from what is written in the Bible.

The nature of Jesus is a matter of faith, much like if he could hit a curve ball or not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 06, 2023, 07:05:01 am
So you're saying Jesus was real but the stories we read in the bible aren't?
I think it is doubtful that the character in the bible existed but it’s possible there was some guy that was used as the outline for the character in the book.  There is a zero percent chance that the story told with all the miracles and whatnot happened.  That stuff is pure myth that was aimed at people who had little to no understanding of the way the world worked (not to mention that a lot of it was lifted from other myths so it’s not even an original story).  It’s all nonsense and, in the 21st century, it’s time to let it go.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 18, 2023, 11:22:47 am
https://theindependent.com/business/billionaire-joe-ricketts-plan-for-exclusive-resort-in-wyoming-hits-a-snag/article_088857a9-8c28-5152-a02e-e6ac9eae2f69.html#tracking-source=mp-in-article
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JeffH on March 18, 2023, 04:18:31 pm
Doug Vickrey = John Dutton?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 20, 2023, 11:06:51 pm
Can you say "Gold Digger"?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/20/media/rupert-murdoch-engaged-ann-lesley-smith-intl-scli/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on March 30, 2023, 04:58:00 pm
To celebrate today, I’m going to drink a tasty Manhattan.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 30, 2023, 07:18:17 pm
Celebrate what?  That the liar has already conned his followers to contribute to his defense fund?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on March 30, 2023, 07:21:47 pm
Yeah unless the charges are very serious and aren’t just about some garden variety hush fund payments, I think Trump’s position is only stronger now and only improves his chances of being the Republican nominee.  I can’t stand Trump, and I even think this just reeks of being a political hack job.  Not worth celebrating to me at all.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 30, 2023, 07:28:13 pm
I think he's a crook and deserves to be indicted.  I'm not sure if the outcome will be a positive one in the long run.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on March 30, 2023, 07:40:03 pm
I doubt this would've gotten this far if Bragg wasn't pretty sure he could get a conviction...but it's easily the least serious of the things he's currently being investigated for.

I just wish he'd gotten indicted for one of his other crimes first. The classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, the attempts to bully Raffensperger (and others) into changing the votes in Georgia, January 6th...those are all much more serious, dangerous, and difficult for an average person to dismiss. On the surface, it's pretty easy for Carlson, Hannity, and other propagandists to downplay hush money payments as not being especially serious.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 30, 2023, 08:29:44 pm
I agree.  Love to see the Feds, DC, Florida, Georgia, all indict him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on March 30, 2023, 09:12:49 pm
Desantis is now saying he won’t hand over Trump to New York.  He’s probably trying to change the story after getting owned by Disney with his silly replacement/take over of the Reddy Creek Improvement District.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on March 30, 2023, 09:20:05 pm
Yeah unless the charges are very serious and aren’t just about some garden variety hush fund payments, I think Trump’s position is only stronger now and only improves his chances of being the Republican nominee.  I can’t stand Trump, and I even think this just reeks of being a political hack job.  Not worth celebrating to me at all.

It may be the “least serious” of the charges against him, but there are very good reasons for our campaign finance laws, woefully soft as they are.

Trump broke those laws knowingly and then attempted to cover it up.

All this to say, the indictment is not a political hack job in the least. Having committed more serious crimes does not absolve one of “lesser” infractions.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on March 30, 2023, 11:39:50 pm
I doubt this would've gotten this far if Bragg wasn't pretty sure he could get a conviction...but it's easily the least serious of the things he's currently being investigated for.


Al Capone went to prison for tax evasion.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on March 31, 2023, 08:53:05 am
We're a Nation of Laws or we're not.

I just wish the Justice Dept. had moved first (on one or more of Trump's federal crimes).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on March 31, 2023, 09:45:05 am
As far as timing goes, it would have been nice if Trump had gotten indicted on one of the more substantive offenses he committed. But the Stormy Daniels events occurred way in advance of the Georgia,  January 6 or Maralago records events. And the any January 6 prosecution is going to be way, way more complex and difficult. 


Hopefully this is the first of several prosecutions and hopefully they will all be successful.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on March 31, 2023, 10:14:06 am
Agree Ron, but it seems to me that the Justice Dept was following - not leading - the crucial investigations (e.g. pressure in GA on Secy of State, Jan 6 Committee).

The Justice Dept has WAY, WAY, WAY more investigative resources and clout than Fani Willis or even the Jan 6 Committee AND the JD probably has THE BEST trial attorneys, overall, of any prosecutorial agency in the world.

Oh well.  We are where we are in the process.  For the sake of our democracy, I'm pleased it's now clearer that NO ONE is above the law in our country.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 31, 2023, 10:27:51 am
But the right wingnuts are already pointing out that Bill Clinton was never investigated for his hush money deals or sexcapades.  It seems they can pull up any number of excuses for continuing to blindly follow the jerk.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 31, 2023, 10:30:11 am
Just go to the bears board. They are already celebrating it as this proves the “liberal witch hunt” and how this will propel him to another term.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on March 31, 2023, 11:54:47 am
The most self-destructive thing possible for the Republican Party could do is to nominate him in 2024.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 31, 2023, 12:03:30 pm
You are vastly underestimating how much of this country wants a strong authoritarian ruler to tear down the liberals. The electoral college makes it very possible for him to win and beat Biden. folks on the right think Biden is a bigger threat then Trump.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on March 31, 2023, 12:08:53 pm
You are vastly underestimating how much of this country wants a strong authoritarian ruler to tear down the liberals. The electoral college makes it very possible for him to win and beat Biden. folks on the right think Biden is a bigger threat then Trump.

There is clearly a frighteningly large percentage of the country that wants that. No question. Reasonable people can disagree, but I am certain that Trump would have significantly less support in a general election than he did in 2020, and that his nomination would be extremely harmful to the Republican Party. Consider how he much hurt the Republicans in the most recent mid-term elections.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 31, 2023, 12:09:31 pm
It's unclear to me whether indicting Trump will strengthen or weaken him politically.  But I fear the former.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on March 31, 2023, 12:10:20 pm
I dislike Trump as much as anyone but you folks have no clue how much he's loved in the South.

According to folks around here Biden is senile,supports faggotry and child molesters,and he's killing the economy.

I personally prefer him to Trump and think if someone would kill him [Trump] they'd be doing us a favor.

Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on March 31, 2023, 12:11:24 pm
Oy veh.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 31, 2023, 12:15:56 pm
If we don't hear from Dusty again, we'll know why.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on March 31, 2023, 12:16:31 pm
Why?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on March 31, 2023, 12:19:06 pm
The people knocking on your door are in the Secret Service.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: guest405 on March 31, 2023, 12:19:36 pm
Lol
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on March 31, 2023, 12:34:24 pm
I think this could strengthen Trump in the Republican primary. But I can't imagine this would convince any independents to come back to him. If someone is on the fence about Trump, it's because of the chaos and corruption he brings. Indictments seem like they would just further motivate those people to go in a different direction.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on March 31, 2023, 12:47:01 pm
There is clearly a frighteningly large percentage of the country that wants that. No question. Reasonable people can disagree, but I am certain that Trump would have significantly less support in a general election than he did in 2020, and that his nomination would be extremely harmful to the Republican Party. Consider how he much hurt the Republicans in the most recent mid-term elections.

It comes down to a few swing states. The south will 100% vote for trump. so will states like Ohio and a lot of the middle of the country. Florida is now a deep red state, its no longer purple as it used to be, California is losing electoral votes to to Texas (which will stay red). there is 100% a path for trump to win the electoral college, The right is also going to be very engaged to come out and vote due to the state of the economy. Few realize that the economic pain is coming from over seas and from the Fed. They simply blame the president, and Biden will take the hit for it. If biden were to be smart, and step aside, Trump loses. If its Trump v Biden again, i think Biden loses.

Trump just needs 37 electoral votes to win, GA and VA give him 29, so the math exists to get him there. AZ was barley won by Biden, razor thin victory there.

I would love for the Right to fail, however they have subverted fair election laws in many states where they control the governments to suppress votes and help themselves in future elections.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on March 31, 2023, 01:10:20 pm
Who knows how impacts primary voters but getting criminally indicted can’t be a good thing if you want to be elected to office.

But, this is a peculiar case to pursue on state level. Michael Cohen went to prison after copping a plea in federal court on similar charges but feds ultimately decided not to pursue charges against Trump on this matter after he left office. So, now state picking up on this as to Trump and apparently (indictment details not publicly disclosed yet) will base felony on federal election law that feds decided not to pursue. On top of that, lead witness (cohen) is an admitted perjurer. Yikes!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on March 31, 2023, 04:59:53 pm
Georgia went for Biden in 2020 and Warnock in a pink environment in 2022.  The trend there is clear and I fully expect Georgia to go Biden in '24.  And Virginia is no longer even a swing state at the federal level.  The notion of a "100% for Trump" south is absurd on the face of it.

I think this could potentially help Trump in the primary, and it's probably neutral in the general.  Persuadable voters are pretty much baked in with him.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 01, 2023, 08:30:33 am
Guess you have not paid attention to the new restrictive voting laws in Georgia… it won’t go blue again.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on April 01, 2023, 09:20:05 am
Dude allegedly paid six figures to a sex worker to keep her quiet before the election. He allegedly had sex with her several months after his wife gave birth. If you don’t think that information could have changed the result of the election you are nuts. THATS why he paid her.

Then he allegedly hid the payment by paying his attorney back “legal fees” (Cohen was actually given around 420K).

He’s a c**t and this is NOT a nothing burger. The difference between Clinton being president and c*** being president was 70K votes in a few states. He was likely president in part bc of this coverup (also, $@$@, you, James Comey).

The next con is No Labels or another third party (or Joe Manchin) running to siphon enough votes to put that c*** back in office.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on April 01, 2023, 09:34:11 am
What feds didn’t pursue this charge? Bill Barrs DOJ? No $hit. Barr played interference all-of-the-time. And golly gee, I wonder why Garland didn’t pursue this? Did anything else take center focus in 2021?

Also, the nice thing about state charges is a Republican president can’t pardon that $hit.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on April 01, 2023, 02:28:20 pm
What feds didn’t pursue this charge? Bill Barrs DOJ? No $hit. Barr played interference all-of-the-time….

Detailed report in NYT that no-prosecution decision—after Trump left office—was made in Southern District of NY office, not DOJ headquarters. (That’s routine when a no-prosecution decision). If office decided to go forward, headquarters might review.

When Trump still in office, longtime DOJ policy about not charging sitting president. NYT piece said NY office felt Cohen’s lack of credibility made case against Trump too weak to go forward.

Obviously, Manhattan DA felt differently. We’ll see. Maybe he can win.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on April 03, 2023, 05:16:07 pm
Barr pressured SDNY to dismiss the Cohen case. When they refused, he tried to get the case transferred to EDNY so his pet Donoghue could get rid of the problem. But that didn’t happen; doesn’t mean SDNY wasn’t still handicapped by other considerations, like the fight over the c**nts taxes.

For more background, the FEC general counsel recommended charging “Individual-1.” The Republicans on the FEC said “nah, Cohen is already guilty, let’s move on to ignoring every other violation…phew, we a super busy ignoring s$it.”

At the end of the day, the c**t would have been fine if he paid the hush money with his own cash, but criminals gonna crime. So, he likely had the enquirer pay off McDougal and his company pay off Daniels. Oops, now it’s a crime.

What should happen now is he should be convicted the same way his corporate person was.

The most important piece is that this was all done just before the election. I guess we can ignore the part where he floated a pardon to Cohen to keep quiet?

The c**t is as corrupt as the day is long.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 03, 2023, 07:28:10 pm
Ya'll are naive. Hes going to win the presidency again. IF you dont think so, i implore you to read the Bears Politics thread.... its a slam dunk right now, unless Biden steps aside.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 03, 2023, 07:47:46 pm
Remember, he's 76, he is getting up there with Joe.  His age could be explaining his irrational behavior.  I believe he will do something egregiously stupid to hurt his chances during the campaign.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 03, 2023, 08:25:19 pm
Ya'll are naive. Hes going to win the presidency again. IF you dont think so, i implore you to read the Bears Politics thread.... its a slam dunk right now, unless Biden steps aside.

I don't think we should take the Bears board as representative. I've browsed it occasionally, and most of those posters only get their information from fringe sources that make Tucker Carlson look impartial.

He has his base of 30% of the population who love him no matter what for some reason (he certainly doesn't share their values). But he has to win more independents (and keep the Republicans who haven't gone off the deep end) if he's going to win in 2024. I just don't see the path to getting anyone who doubted him in 2020 if he's been indicted multiple times.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on April 03, 2023, 08:38:29 pm
Either of these buffoons getting re-elected would be a damn disgrace…
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on April 04, 2023, 03:28:40 pm
I think the c**nts chances of getting re-elected are better than 50-50. Between voter suppression and Joe Manchin or someone similar running as a third party to dilute the democratic vote, the fix is in and this country is going full authoritarianism. And the cucks on the bears board are circle jerking every minute of democracy’s decline.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 04, 2023, 03:46:51 pm
On CNN, it was discussed that one thing we all get wrong is that we don't want to lose democracy.  We don't have a democracy.  We have a republic.  Don't want to lose that either.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ticohans on April 04, 2023, 03:57:03 pm
At this point the nature of our republic seems to reinforce minority-rule dynamics and to prefer rural whites over every other demographic. Gross.

It's all in need of an update, but we can't get Republicans to agree to common sense gun reform laws favored by an overwhelming majority of Americans, so I certainly don't see R's agreeing to dismantle the broken power structures that supercharge their influence.

But yeah, I certainly wouldn't mind losing this version of our republic.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Dave23 on April 04, 2023, 04:35:24 pm
https://babylonbee.com/news/bible-scholars-believe-that-on-top-of-everything-else-job-was-also-a-cubs-fan


[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Tuffy on April 04, 2023, 08:26:36 pm
Didn't Job live long enough ago that the Cubs were the swaggering, world-beating scourge of the league back when he was alive?
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: JR on April 04, 2023, 08:55:00 pm
Quote
Jeff Greenfield

@greenfield64
Almost consensus skepticism and disappointment about the strength of this indictment on CNN, including among highly "non-Trumpers."

Still sounds like a hack job that does nothing but make Trump stronger.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 05, 2023, 02:04:30 pm
Still sounds like a hack job that does nothing but make Trump stronger.
It didn’t make John Edwards stronger when he got caught doing the same thing.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: ben on April 05, 2023, 02:14:58 pm
Trump's real problem is that the indictment he's received won't be the last...or the strongest!

Accountability is just getting started for that bum!
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on April 05, 2023, 11:51:43 pm
On CNN, it was discussed that one thing we all get wrong is that we don't want to lose democracy.  We don't have a democracy.  We have a republic.  Don't want to lose that either.

Our republic has been called a “sober” form of democracy: checks and balances, separation of powers, independent judiciary, a free press, and the protection of the minority (rights). It’s a form of democracy but without absolute majority rule. We don’t have a public referendum on every issue. We have representatives and a majority can vote them out of office if don’t like what they’re doing. It’s a democracy but with safeguards that hopefully steers us away from chaos.

Don’t think the chaos we have now too often is because of the nature of the republic/democracy. It’s because people fill essential roles and if they’re totally partisan and even a bit crazy, the system won’t work and eventually could fall.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 06, 2023, 11:01:48 am
Our republic has been called a “sober” form of democracy: checks and balances, separation of powers, independent judiciary, a free press, and the protection of the minority (rights). It’s a form of democracy but without absolute majority rule. We don’t have a public referendum on every issue. We have representatives and a majority can vote them out of office if don’t like what they’re doing. It’s a democracy but with safeguards that hopefully steers us away from chaos.

Don’t think the chaos we have now too often is because of the nature of the republic/democracy. It’s because people fill essential roles and if they’re totally partisan and even a bit crazy, the system won’t work and eventually could fall.
I generally agree.  That's why this allegiance to a tyrant and liar puzzles me.  My faith in our "democracy" is shaken by the reluctance and refusal to believe their own eyes.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 08, 2023, 01:09:25 pm
The mifipristone ruling out of Texas is kinda scary.  It could basically allow any doctor to sue the FDA for removal of any drug or vaccine for having to side effects.  There are plenty of quacks out there that will be jumping at the chance to due just that. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on April 20, 2023, 05:29:12 pm
The $hit storm raining down on the republicans in the TN state legislature is *chefs kiss.* Couldn’t happen to more deserving scum.

I don’t see how Sexton survives alleged fraud, residency questions (well, more like answers bc he doesn’t live in his district), and multiple affair allegations, let alone kicking out members over decorum while he knew his Republican colleague was sexually harassing an intern.

Karma’s a b*tch.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on April 20, 2023, 05:38:47 pm
The problem is this is still Tennessee, and they’ll pay no price for it at the next election, when the GOP will be returned to overwhelming majorities in the legislature they made a mockery of and all statewide offices.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 20, 2023, 05:49:35 pm
check out what Desantis just signed today... and the fact that Florida is now starting its own "military force" to fight illegal immigrants. If my custody agreement didn't require my kids stay here. I would FLEE immediately.  Personally looking to buy property in OR. Its a Death with dignity state, and Portland is much different then anywhere in Florida.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on April 20, 2023, 05:55:27 pm
check out what Desantis just signed today... and the fact that Florida is now starting its own "military force" to fight illegal immigrants. If my custody agreement didn't require my kids stay here. I would FLEE immediately.  Personally looking to buy property in OR. Its a Death with dignity state, and Portland is much different then anywhere in Florida.

It’s going to be interesting to see whether RD pays any price in Florida for his full-on fascist escapades after Trump trounces him for the nomination.  Florida is a shithole but electorally it’s not Tennessee - in a big turnout year it’s still relatively purple.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 20, 2023, 05:57:15 pm
It’s going to be interesting to see whether RD pays any price in Florida for his full-on fascist escapades after Trump trounces him for the nomination.  Florida is a shithole but electorally it’s not Tennessee - in a big turnout year it’s still relatively purple.

Used to be, but due to immigration from Red states, its solidly red now.   Sumter county has added something like 90% red voters in the villages, that goes a long ways in state wide elections.

Same with Tampa, LOTS of red tech workers that could work remote after covid, and not pay state taxes and enjoy Tampa weather.... all moved here en masse... Thats why property values in Tampa have exploded and are not slowing down even with current interest rates.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 20, 2023, 06:06:52 pm
This is who is on the GOP.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/anti-abortion-activist-10-old-201500389.html#:~:text=Laura%20Strietmann%2C%20Cincinnati%20Right%20to,Ohio%20state%20House%20this%20week.

These people are monsters. and DeSantis has support of 100% of them in Florida.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on April 20, 2023, 06:11:39 pm
Florida is slowly sliding into North Korea territory. Hyperbole aside, that state is irredeemable and is a lost cause. The legislature is a rubber stamp - like all republican legislators- up to and including attacking Disney.

F$&$ing Disney? Florida is f$&$ed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on April 20, 2023, 06:35:29 pm
Used to be, but due to immigration from Red states, its solidly red now.   Sumter county has added something like 90% red voters in the villages, that goes a long ways in state wide elections.

Same with Tampa, LOTS of red tech workers that could work remote after covid, and not pay state taxes and enjoy Tampa weather.... all moved here en masse... Thats why property values in Tampa have exploded and are not slowing down even with current interest rates.

It still only voted for Drumpf by a couple of points in 2020.  It’s not Tennessee or West Virginia, is my point, and theoretically not a place where a fascist can go completely unchecked as in states like that.  RD is going to come out of ‘24 looking like a loser, and I think it’s a valid question whether that will matter at home.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 20, 2023, 06:43:09 pm
It still only voted for Drumpf by a couple of points in 2020.  It’s not Tennessee or West Virginia, is my point, and theoretically not a place where a fascist can go completely unchecked as in states like that.  RD is going to come out of ‘24 looking like a loser, and I think it’s a valid question whether that will matter at home.

Ahh look at the State vote for state house/senate/governor....

Those tell a very very different story. The presidential vote, was more a reflection of moderate republicans not voting for Trump, then overall state vote.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on April 20, 2023, 07:42:22 pm
Desantis won Miami/Dade county.

Not purple for the foreseeable future.

Beyond that, things can change but not anytime soon it appears.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on April 20, 2023, 08:26:03 pm
2022 looked like it did in Florida because of turnout, not demographics.  Turnout was disastrously low in D areas across the state (and there are some).  It doesn’t help that the Florida Democratic Party is totally incompetent, but turnout can make it purple if it reverts to something closer to what you’d consider normal (which 2022 decidedly was not).
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 20, 2023, 08:32:59 pm
Desantis is going to be term limited as governor, so unless he goes after Scott’s senate seat he’s going to be frozen out of politics.  My BIL who had fallen off the ledge with politics is finally starting to see the light with Trump and Desantis.

I think a lot of Desantis’s appeal was he went hard against COVID restrictions, even though it killed a ton people, people bought into his vision.  The fact that he kept falling off the deep end is going to hurt the Republican Party in the suburbs.  The culture wars don’t play as well, it might not matter in Florida, but it will hurt them in other states that haven’t had the influx of nutballs.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on April 20, 2023, 10:38:14 pm
He might sit out ‘26 with an eye on running for Gov again in 4 years.  That’s the drawback for politicians in a state where one party controls everything - unless you want to start a civil war and primary an incumbent, there are no openings unless someone retires.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: method on April 21, 2023, 07:07:16 am
Texas just passed a law for school prayers…. This will go to SCOTUS and they will now overturn Engel v Vitale. God help us all. This country is going backwards in a hurry.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on April 22, 2023, 10:18:43 pm
I hope Belgium understands, this means war.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/22/europe/belgium-destroys-beer-champagne-intl-hnk/index.html
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on April 24, 2023, 11:35:44 am
Tucker Carlson has been fired by Fox News. Love to see it, finally some actual consequences for his constant lying, fearmongering, and bigotry.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 24, 2023, 11:52:33 am
Fire Laura Ingraham next....
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on April 24, 2023, 12:44:37 pm
He might sit out ‘26 with an eye on running for Gov again in 4 years.  That’s the drawback for politicians in a state where one party controls everything - unless you want to start a civil war and primary an incumbent, there are no openings unless someone retires.

If his goal is the presidency he almost has to run this year.  He's term limited so the earliest he could run for governor again is 2030.  If we are looking at Biden vs Trump again (yuck) that means 2228 will be an open presidential election.  DeSantis is going to have a tough time being the Republican front runner if he hasn't done anything for 2 years.  If he run for governor again in 2030 and wins, he would have to resign to as governor to run in 2032 (assuming a Democrat wins in 2028).  If a Republican wins in 2028, then he can't run until 2036.  That is a long time to keep presidential momentum going, especially when your base voters are boomers.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Reb on April 24, 2023, 12:56:13 pm
Reagan was elected Governor in 1966 and served 2 terms thru 1974/5. Then elected President in 1980.

Nixon out of power after VP ended in 1960-61 and elected President in 1968.

In both cases, they were very active in the interim periods supporting other candidates, raising money for them, and the like.

DeSantis, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to like being around people much and doing basic retail politics and, therefore, might actually have a problem being out of office. Is he capable of ingratiating himself to the political environment nationally when out of office (or anytime for that matter)? Perhaps not.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 16, 2023, 11:13:52 pm
Funny how important turnout can be.  A Democrat wins the mayor’s office in Jacksonville for only the 2nd time ever.  And it wasn’t all that close.  Obviously not a good sign for DeSantis, but I think it puts the notion that Florida is now a deep red state to the lie.  Turnout was terrible for the Ds in 2022 in FL, and they got massacred.  This time, in a light red city, they won comfortably.

Trump will still win Florida in any election that’s really close nationally, but the Ds would be dumb to write it off altogether.  Keeping it close will help a lot of candidates down ballot, and FL is one of the only states where they have even a remote chance to pick up a Republican Senate seat in ‘24.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 17, 2023, 02:59:03 am
Meanwhile, in Colorado Springs - one of the most conservative cities in the country historically - Democrat-aligned independent Yemi Mobolade won the mayoral runoff.  By 14 points.  Mobolade is a Nigerian immigrant and the first person of color to be mayor of C.S., and the first Democrat (effectively) in generations.

Two takeaways here.  First, Colorado is getting bluer at a faster rate than just about any state in the country.  And the Trump brand is still a massive albatross around the Republican party’s neck.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 17, 2023, 09:28:20 am
Republicans going down there current course are going to have a huge suburb problem.  Even in red states there is going to be a large city vs rural division and the rural population is the one that is decreasing. 
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 17, 2023, 04:32:40 pm
They already have a huge suburb problem.  It's why they effectively lost a midterm with an incumbent president of the other party at 42% approval.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 17, 2023, 05:09:18 pm
What I'm seeing is that older more sophisticated educated Republicans are voting against Trumpers and election deniers.  Not enough of them yet, but it's a start.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 17, 2023, 05:54:22 pm
The issue has been summarized quite elegantly as “suburban voters hate weird shlt”.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on May 17, 2023, 06:39:05 pm
Might want to check out Simon Rosenberg who was a voice in the wilderness (along with Tom Bonier) leading up to the 2022 elections. Instead of focusing on polls, he (they) focused on early special elections and registration trends. 

Here's a most recent example. 
https://simonwdc.substack.com/p/a-big-night-for-democrats?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1223483&post_id=122020513&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email&fbclid=IwAR1kGI-HmRZNMwrBgpXIxSGot8S0CuCrLN6ohMfe_IuPN8l6KDLOli0wNhc
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on May 17, 2023, 06:53:18 pm
Might want to check out Simon Rosenberg who was a voice in the wilderness (along with Tom Bonier) leading up to the 2022 elections. Instead of focusing on polls, he (they) focused on early special elections and registration trends. 

Here's a most recent example. 
https://simonwdc.substack.com/p/a-big-night-for-democrats?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1223483&post_id=122020513&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email&fbclid=IwAR1kGI-HmRZNMwrBgpXIxSGot8S0CuCrLN6ohMfe_IuPN8l6KDLOli0wNhc

And they’re not the only ones.  Special election and off-cycle results are very ominous for Republicans indeed, and I think in the current dynamic they would be in big trouble nationally (8-10 point loss in presidential popular vote and generic house two-party vote in contested seats), though they’d probably still take the Senate based on the map that could hardly be better for them.

The problem is the dynamic of 18 months from now is a total unknown.  Maybe Biden has a severe health scare or worse (and I don’t know anyone with much confidence in Harris as a candidate), maybe the debt ceiling fiasco leads to a recession, maybe there’s a spike in global inflation or another pandemic outbreak.  Certainly no reason to be overconfident that Trumpism is doomed.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CUBluejays on May 23, 2023, 03:40:53 pm
Tennessee is doing something that will be interesting to follow.

They are going to allow international medical graduates (IMG) to practice medicine in the USA without completing a US residency.  It might seem sort strange, but doctors who graduate from foreign countries and have been practicing in their home country need to complete a US residency to be able to practice in US and be board certified.  Board certification is required to get on insurances and bill medicare as well.  They will require that the work in a Tennessee hospital for 2 years before they are practice medicine. 

The stated reason for doing this is to increase providers in rural Tennessee.  I'm not sure how well a doctor from India is going to fit in rural Tennessee.  There have been a lot of changes in residency since I graduated.  I was the first class who had an 80 hour work week limit and they have since limited residence work further.  Hospitals that have residency programs use residents as cheap labor and the cynic in me sees this as a way for hospitals to try and replace some of that cheap labor that residents use to do with a different source of cheap labor.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on May 23, 2023, 05:59:11 pm
Dusty will welcome them with open arms.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Ron on June 17, 2023, 03:57:11 pm
Turns out Curt Schilling is even crazier than I had imagined. Holy ****!

https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-curt-schilling/
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 01, 2023, 05:08:25 pm
Trump is now the first President to be indicted on Opening Day and the first to be indicted on Trade Deadline Day.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 01, 2023, 05:11:33 pm
And the first indicted President to be re-elected on the day of Game 7 of the World Series
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Playtwo on August 01, 2023, 05:22:17 pm
As much of a Cub fan as I am, I couldn’t accept the devil’s bargain this season  that I did in 2016.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: CurtOne on August 01, 2023, 05:30:10 pm
Trump is now the first President to be indicted on Opening Day and the first to be indicted on Trade Deadline Day.
And the first indicted President to be re-elected on the day of Game 7 of the World Series
Didn't say that's my hope, Deeg.  Just the opposite.  Fear.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 01, 2023, 05:41:05 pm
All these indictments are bitchin’, but I remain skeptical of a conviction.  The guy is more slippery than a greased pig.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: Deeg on August 01, 2023, 06:14:25 pm
As much of a Cub fan as I am, I couldn’t accept the devil’s bargain this season  that I did in 2016.

A chain of thought surely held by millions of Cub fans after that momentous November.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 01, 2023, 07:06:09 pm
The secret word for today is INDICTMENT

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

RIP Pee Wee
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 03, 2023, 07:44:22 pm
Sounds like the Georgia indictments are coming next week. Super excited to see who gets indicted there - I’m anticipating a ton of Georgia GOP members.

EDIT - Damnit, might be end of next week or following week. Waiting is the hardest part.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 14, 2023, 05:42:01 pm
Seems as if former president c**t is pushing for pre trial incarceration in Georgia. I can’t believe they would do it, but what’s the end game for him doing what he’s doing (telling a witness not to testify)? I can only guess that it’s violence bc he’s already playing the martyr card.

OR he knows they’ll never detain him so he’ll do whatever he wants, per usual.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: bitterman on August 14, 2023, 07:32:11 pm
Voting is happening in Fulton County now - burn the GOP to the ground.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: otto105 on August 14, 2023, 09:00:49 pm
10 new indictments from GA.




Still no ham sandwich indicted.
Title: Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
Post by: brjones on August 14, 2023, 09:06:55 pm
I voted by mail in the Atlanta area in 2020, so I'm especially happy to see this one happening.