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.
The US isn't at war with Iran, do you think our intelligence operatives and operations should be public knowledge?
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
unless good war hawks like yourself had nuked them first, totally destroying their capability of doing so
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.
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?
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.
And yes, you have misread my positions, as you consistantly misread the opinions of almost every poster on the board.
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.
.... 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.
You keep mentioning that I have made many posts that prove your point, but you have failed to point to a single one.
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.
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/ )
If you were to keep your posts to a reasonable length, you would get more answers for those towards the bottom.
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 against going into Lybia, and am against going into Syria.
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.
But I would certainly use all other force to prevent an avowed enemy like Iran to get them.
They should have just given it to George W Bush for stopping being US president.
They should have just given it to George W Bush for stopping being US president.That would have been equally ridiculous.
That would have been equally ridiculous.
Who was the last American to really deserve one? Dennis Rodman?
They should have just given it to George W Bush for stopping being US president.
Wilson was as much a pacifist as you could find in his campaign days. Roosevelt was antiwar. Nixon campaigned on ending the war.Bull.
Once you actually have the responsibility, you take a more realistic view of things.
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.
What was the US response when Saddam gassed the Kurds?
I see no evidence that either Wilson or FDR wanted to go to war when they were first elected. Can you cite any?
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.
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.
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.
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.
This is silly. You refuse to stick to the original discussion, while accusing me of that.
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]
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?
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 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.
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.
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
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.
So you think that if he switches parties, he would switch actions?
Harry Reid will come over if they promise to make him the majority leader.
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...Okay, drop DVD players too.
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.
Releasing it currently in theaters doesn't seem to be an option for Sony. Most theaters are refusing to show it.Other experts are saying that Sony is worried about what else got stolen and will be released if they proceed to distribute.
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.
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.
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.Poor taste, poor judgement, poor logic, poor morals, whatever you call it, if they hadn't been published, North Korea loses.
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.
Ethics is hardly a silly subject. And unethical actions are hardly silly actions.
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
an African American that was born in France.
.... an African American that was born in France.
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?
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 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.
Odd. Almost makes me more interested in Walker.
Is there a less appetizing matchup next year than Clinton-Bush? Just wondering.
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.
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?
Political comment sections are the only ones that make sports message boards look sane.
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.
Political comment sections are the only ones that make sports message boards look sane.What about political comment section ON a sports message board?
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.go to hell
go to hell
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."
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,..."
Since I don't speak English I will have to take your word on it...
Tis the season for giving, Jes. I gave you something to rant about. You're very welcome!
So is that chart supposed to be damning to gun ownership?
when did we start moving the crazy from bears over to here?Davep has always been here.
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.
I'm still totally mystified on how he's still on top of the polls
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.
The government shutdown was nothing more than a reckless act of self promotion on his part, and that automatically disqualified him in my eyes.
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.
I'd vote for Bernie before any of Trump, Cruz, or Clinton.
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.
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.
There is almost no way that the Democrats would nominate Sanders.]
]
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.
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.
Can anyone name an accomplishment from this one?
Before his nomination in 2008, can you name any accomplishments of Obama?
legally addled
So, you can't name one.
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
As far as political candidates are concerned, the United States of America has "jumped the shark".
Unlike the far left...
...who want health control...
...gun control...
...birth control...
...voter control...
...border control...
...control control...
Playtwo, to be clear I never said Obama is a Muslim, I said he is a so-called Christian, there is a difference.
Additionally, a quick check of Wikipedia will give you your desired answer on marco rubio or our President.
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.
He's gonna be the POTUS whether we like it or not.
Anyone but Hilary.
, I would gladly vote for Bernie over Hillary, Trump, and Cruz, because I think he is a truly decent man
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.
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/
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. 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.
Bold prediction: The Republican Party will NEVER AGAIN win a Presidential election as long as the United States of America exists.
Aside from that, he's the best Republican still running besides Kasich.
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/
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.
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.
So pitch framing is irrelevant now because umpires realize what's happening.
I guess this shows that I dont have you on ignore but I early voted dumbass.
Bold prediction: The Republican Party will NEVER AGAIN win a Presidential election as long as the United States of America exists.
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.
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.
I no longer care about "right" or "left". I'm looking for "sane".
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.
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.
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?
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.
"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.
How absurdly reductionist of you. Our current system does this already, and basically any viable candidate supports a progressive tax system.
That's like the old Jesse Jackson-Jesse Helms ticket. Let's offend Everybody.
Rubio is too far right to win,
"Republicans resist issues of gun control because it's a slippery slope to eviscerate the 2nd Amendment..."The NRA is toast.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Every once in a while, I peek beneath the ignored post banner
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.
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?
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?
I give the same amount to all campaigns of all parties.So, if I run, you'll send me money?
I give the same amount to all campaigns of all parties.
I realize that you used the term authoritarian. I did not use it because the term is meaningless psychobabble.
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.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.
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 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.
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.
Hard to disagree but I'd vote for Ric Flair over Hilary.
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?
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.
Look at the states where Ben Carson gets more votes than John Kasich. Those are states I will never move to.
Where do you live? 1933 Germany?
ruz to me is pretty much as bad as Trump
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.
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.
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?
I'm not particularly fond of Hillary. But I don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Trump to Hillary.
I'm not particularly fond of Hillary. But I don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Trump to Hillary.
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?
I'm not particularly fond of Hillary. But I don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Trump to Hillary.
Interesting juxtaposition of Trump and Goldwater:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/opinions/trump-vs-goldwater-zelizer/index.html
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 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.
Is there a bigger narcissist in the world than Donald Trump? Maybe Kanye West?
I'm not particularly fond of Hillary. But I don't understand why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Trump to Hillary.
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.
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.
What has the House passed other than a budget? Shutting down the government for months doesn't sound like an appealing option.
http://qz.com/634578/a-republican-confession-from-52-years-ago-has-a-lot-to-say-about-this-years-election/
JFK would have destroyed Mr. Extremist.
We all know it.
JFK would have destroyed Mr. Extremist.
We all know it.
Ah.... a government which does not do much.... and davep has trouble understanding how why intelligent, thoughtful people would prefer Hillary to Trump.
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.
Did I say that?
Can you point to the post?
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.
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.
Thanks. It certainly was, and is my belief, but I didn't remember posting it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
In hindsight, he should have focused on getting re-elected to the Senate instead of jumping the gun on running for President.
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.
yes many more lives would have been saved if we would have invaded japan...notThe military had ordered 500,000 body bags.
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.
If Rubio had been as eloquent in the debates as he was in his suspension speech, he might have won.
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).
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."
MSNBC has been calling out Trump pretty much all along.
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.
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.
If my options are Trump or Hilary then Im most definitely gonna write in Ric Flair.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Trump would make a horrible President. But not as horrible as Hillary, Sanders or Biden.Amen
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.
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.
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.
Trump would make a horrible President. But not as horrible as Hillary, Sanders or Biden.
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.
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."
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."
WTF?
Both of the options suck.
Ric Flair is defintely getting my vote.
It strikes me that Trump's intonation is reminiscent of Ralph Kramden.
It strikes me that Trump's intonation is reminiscent of Ralph Kramden.
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.
Christian Ponder is also on the 49ers roster...Sure gives you something to think about it, doesn't it.
hahaha
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."
Gotta wonder if he has exhausted other means of effecting change in the system...
Like contacting his representatives would do any good...
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.
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.
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.
Otto, of course Hillary knows Aleppo. She gave birth to it.
One of them is much, much worse than the other.I know, but I just can't vote for Trump either. ;D
Nate Silver has the election at essentially 50:50 as of today.
A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.
because that's what a grown man is supposed to do
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.
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.
Question. Who was the last President to have facial hair?
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.
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.
I don't know what all the commotion is about the latest revelation about Trump. What reason is there to be surprised?
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?
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.
Hillary will win in a landslide. Trump will be lucky to lose by 15 million votes. Why watch? This thing was over weeks ago.
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.
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.
Compared to Hillary, Trump is good.
Trump is good compared to the ebola virus at least . . .
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?
Donald Trump is the worst thing to happen to American politics in my lifetime. Maybe ever.
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...
Too bad he isn't a Democrat. That would be considered a resume enhancement.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.
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.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/07/opinions/navarro-republican-voting-for-clinton/index.html
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 that for propping up his candidacy during the Republican primaries.I've thought all along that CNN has seen covering Donald Trump as a huge ratings bonanza.
That was a classic case of building someone up early just so they could tear him down later once the general election started.
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.
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.
But you all watch and see.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.
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.
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/
But you all watch and see.
Our lives will change very little no matter who wins.
About 30% as of now.
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.
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.
Florida, Michigan, and NC and he wins. It's going to be really close. What a disaster.
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.
A Trump win would be a disaster. But at least a Trump win would be less of a disaster than a Hillary win.
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.
Trump is a racist and a demagogue. You own that when you vote for him.
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.
Let us not lose sight of the fact that the odds are still in favor of Hillary winning tonight.
The thing that's shocking for me is that Trump pushed normally Republican voters like br and me to Hillary..
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
To the list of things DUSTY does not understand, we can now comfortably add the meaning of the word "blasphemy."
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. @#&%.Is the killing of unborn babies that important to you?
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@#!
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.
you want fetus funerals
No, I believe George W. Bush had that a couple times.
He won't learn unless you define it for him.
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.
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.
Say goodbye to Roe v Wade decision.
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.
I still don't buy that Trump supporters were too embarrassed to tell pollsters who they were voting for.
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.
MAKE AMERICA HATE AGAIN!
It was just that Clinton wasn't inspiring enough to get Millennials off the couch yesterday, so she significantly underperformed the polls.
This is the first Democrat President who calls himself a Republican to have both Houses.
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?
You know how to stop these protests?
Tear gas, fire hoses, and shotguns.
You know how to stop these protests?
Tear gas, fire hoses, and shotguns.
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.
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.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?".
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.
Many of us think Hilary is an even worse person than trump.
Education is key - voters should be required to pass a TEST before being allowed to vote
Consider this hypothetical.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?".
All we know for sure--through the mounds of available evidence--is that he's a despicable human being.
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.
I just don't understand the "Hillary is worse than Trump" line of thinking.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Hillary was the Bob Dole of the Democratic Party. "Hey, she deserves it. Let her give a shot."
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.
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?
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 ended up posting and probably shouldn't have because no good will come of it.
If (Trump) does something stupid he'll lose the congress and grid lock will happen.
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.
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.
Here you go, Trump voters. Here's your chance to celebrate.
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...
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.
sorry, left out the purple again. Was being sarcastic.
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/
Are you really suggesting that more than 55 million Americans are racist idiots? .
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.
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.
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
I've been boycotting the Homecoming dance for 40 years.You weren't elected queen either?
Curt, if we were back to the basics of majority rule, Hillary would be President.That's why I said within our electoral system.
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:
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.
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 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?
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.
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.
Already hate crimes are up after Trump's election.
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.
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 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.
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.
And it really wasn't "scores of women."
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.
Thanks for the story Jes. If it wasn't so reprehensible, it might be funny.
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.
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.
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)
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?
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.
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.
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?
...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.
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.
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.
Truth is I've heard more Trump supporters say this is why they're behind him than for any other reason.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
Don't let the actual facts and a vulnerable view of humanity get in the way of bigotry, Dusty.
I see good and bad in both of them.
There's a reason I didn't vote.
I couldn't bring myself to watch, but I certainly hope that this is true.
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.
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?
Who is the alt-right, and what do they have in common with the NAZIs?
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.
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?
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.
"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.
Oh wait, I think I understand. Carry on the good work!
"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.
Who's offended? You are the only person who appears agitated
Of course the President requires a clearance.
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.
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.
And we get plenty of reminders - and annual refresher training
A lot has changed since the Walker family fiasco.
https://news.usni.org/2014/09/02/john-walker-spy-ring-u-s-navys-biggest-betrayalPowers Boothe did a great job in the movie
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.
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.
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?
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.....
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 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
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
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/
This can't be real, can it?If WWE's Linda McMahon can be nominated to head the SBA, why not?
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/
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.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.
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.
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/
Sessions should bring a nice dose of good ol boy racism which will certainly appeal to the Trump voters.
Pruitt is awful and Flynn is dangerous.
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.?
She actually seems like she could be qualified for the position she is taking over.
Does that mean you're going to be Sec of State.?
Sessions should bring a nice dose of good ol boy racism which will certainly appeal to the Trump voters.
Probably no worse than Shirley Temple as ambassador to the UN. Might as well give useless jobs to useless people.
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.
At least we'll have a good buddy of Putin's at State.
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
And in the Oval Office, too, according to the CIA.
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.
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"
Yo Jes, what about your exact phrase , "Global Warming nonsense"?
LOL...
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.
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.
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?
The claim of 'scientific consensus' on the causes and consequences of climate change is without merit.
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.
but man is full of himself if he thinks he's the big deal; man is a pimple on the butt of an elephant.
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?
this has become yet another right vs left battle with closed minds on both sides
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.
Scientific consensus: http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
I find it ironic that Rick Perry is going to head the Department of Energy.
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
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?
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
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?
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."
Wasn't that the one he could not remember the name of?
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.
Well, it's pretty clear what we're going to do now. Burn more oil and coal. That's sure to help.
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?
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.
American Physical Society (Leading American Physics, peer reviewed journal)It's decided!
https://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/201204/manheimer.cfm
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?
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?
We now have meteorologists, geoscientists and engineers all reporting that they are skeptics of an asserted global warming crisis....
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.
That might be the most naive thing I've ever seen you write.
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.
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!
There's a difference between scientific consensus and belief. Evidence drives scientific consensus, while faith drives belief. Evidence is objective, while faith is subjective.
But you're right, the science is settled.
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.
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.
Actually...I said the opposite. Typical Conservative response, attack the messenger.
Consensus is fact.
Claiming a consensus exists, does not make it so...
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.
consensus is fact.
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.
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!
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".
In other news, Jes challenges the notion that there is consensus on the fact that the world is indeed round.
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.
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 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.(emphasis added)
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!
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.
I think people need to be convinced that there is a possible problem before anything can be done.
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.)
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.
In other news, Jes challenges the notion that there is consensus on the fact that the world is indeed round.
Apparently jes missed FD's 17 pages of consensus links, and orgs like NASA are full of ignorant ****.
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?
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.
The scientific method doesn't fit everyone's tastes. Particularly when it contradicts their biases.
And some people don't understand it.
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?
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.
Well if you believe documents on Buzzfeed, Trump might makeDustyMoises Alou blush.
Anyone else see the problem here?
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/12/health/switzerland-citizenship-vegan-trnd/index.html
Anyone else see the problem here?
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/12/health/switzerland-citizenship-vegan-trnd/index.html
Say it in Swiss.
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.
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.
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.
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.
http://www.noaa.gov/stories/2016-marks-three-consecutive-years-of-record-warmth-for-globeGood! 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
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.
No one wants to listen to PhD scientists. They aren't telegenic and use big words and make your eyes glaze over.I are not.
People are stupid.
Other than Neil deGrasse Tyson.
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.
http://www.noaa.gov/stories/2016-marks-three-consecutive-years-of-record-warmth-for-globe
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.
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.)
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%.
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?
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.
Are you sure about that 97% number you keep throwing out? What studies are you referencing to get that number?
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?
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?
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
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
- 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).
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.
And by the way, warming has continued--you can only argue that it hasn't if you seriously cherry pick your date range.
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.
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.
The Obama White House would have archived the records rather than a scrubbing.
Also legally Addled Teaching Assistant
The Obama White House would have archived the records rather than a scrubbing.
56% of all statistics are made up
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.
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.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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Alternate facts.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.
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.
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.
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.
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"
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.
huh, didn't know China wasn't in the TPP.
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.
Baseball-reference is clearly fake baseball stats and can not be trusted.
You must not be looking very hard because Hillary received 3 million more votes than Trump.
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.
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?
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.
That (the fact China was not in the TPP) was kind of the point.
Because something works, does not mean it is the result of any particular brilliance. It just means that it works.
people were cussing Hillary like she was Hitler.
Rubes. It's why the lying works. A big chunk of his supporters are rubes.
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).
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?
Hillary was just a really bad candidate to be going against Trump.
I don't think it's all rubes.
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 remember when President Obama went around claiming proudly that he had a pen and phone for Executive Orders and people cheering him one.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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?
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.
At times, he says good stuff...
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.
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.
http://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/more-trump-deception-on-voter-fraud/
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.
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.
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.
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.
I'm not defending Trump's actions, but how exactly do citizens of a foreign country on foreign soil have constitutional rights?
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.I'm sure you were profoundly shamed when Jimmy Carter banned supporters of the Shiite Muslim regime in Iran from entering the country indefinitely.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Wow! Sorry, I think the incarceration of American citizens of Japanese descent at the beginning of WWII as topping this.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.
And all this time I thought it was the widespread enslaving of human beings because they had a pigmentation problem.
Wow! Sorry, I think the incarceration of American citizens of Japanese descent at the beginning of WWII as topping this.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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....
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.
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.
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.
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.)
Israeli's don't count Jes.
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 was as big a critic of Trump as anyone before the election, and I simply am not particularly bothered by the immigration ban.
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
Other problems with Trumps Muslim ban include the fact that he apparently did not vet it through any of the relevant legal agencies . . .
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.
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?
I didn't realize the vetting process for refugees was already that extensive. Thanks for sharing that tico.
if it leads to more permanent measures that target a religion, then it becomes a problem and I would not support such a measure.
Yes, you could legally shoot a Mormon in Missouri until 1976.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
you can always hang out on my 'sanctuary houseboat' at Lake Powell.
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.
This is unreal. From an actual tv show from the 50's. It doesn't actually seem to be dubbed in any way.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
I will... block you.
So we agree that if you believe it when you say it, it isn't a lie?
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.
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."
There are way too many alternative facts being tossed around here . . .
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.
There are way too many alternative facts being tossed around here . . .
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.
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.
How do you know what Obama knew about what would be central to the plan?
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?
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/
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.
How do I know? Because I am a sentient being.
Another post by you that many would find debatable.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
https://youtu.be/pZOF9q5fzfs?list=PLS_gQd8UB-hJ7QuactP--_Yc4KFWT5CBGBannon isn't that good looking.
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.
???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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The ACA has made a freaking mess of healthcare.
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.
Then why didn't the GOP propose something to try to improve it?
Then why didn't the GOP propose something to try to improve it?
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.
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
Drastically increase the penalty for not having insurance. Make it something like 120% of not having insurance with mechanisms to actually get the money.
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.
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.
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.”
I'm going to bite. How does being a constitutional lawyer qualify on for being a President?
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.
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, the reason you didn't know it is because it isn't true.
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.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.
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.
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.
without the Republicans doing anything
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
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.
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."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.
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
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.
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.
We have a better chance of jes beard acknowledging an error first.
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.
Yeah, that post is exactly where he equated them, asking which one is worse, and then being unable to give an answer.
Also, Obama is toast!
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
Can you give 1 example of where President Obama reached out to republicans in the health care debate?
then there will be a worse lefty version of Trump in 4-8 years.
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
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.
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?
The letter was read by other Democrats...who OBEYED the rules.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Honestly I don't think the far ends of either political spectrum needs any help hyperventilating at this point.
You are clamoring over distinctions without a difference.
...and so it begins...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-schlarmann/betsy-devos-orders-immediate-flattening-of-all-school-globes_b_14639376.html
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
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.
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.
But of course it is a subject of ridicule because context is needed and it is too easy to be lazy.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You know me. And I am not only not horrified by the confirmation, I applaud it.
Henceforth known as BTOAMB.
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.
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.
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.
Robb, characterizing the Federal court system and it's decisions as "laughable" usually isn't a good way to start a serious conversation.
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.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.
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.
“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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Future Trump tweet:Well, they are the only ones where the results are known ahead of time.
"The only honest sports are wrestling and roller derby."
Well, they are the only ones where the results are known ahead of time.
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.
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).
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.
You know Curt, and I believe his posts have indicated something 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.
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.
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.
Four judges have so far unanimously held that the Muslim ban is unconstitutional - two Bush appointees and two Democratic appointees.
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.
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
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."
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.
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.
Yeah, were Bannon to be kicked out, Trump ain't turning into no Theoden.
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.
Even Saruman is way, way too generous.
On the plus side, Trump is reportedly getting really pissed about the "President Bannon" meme.
Yeah, closest fantasy character that I can think of is Prince Joffrey.
Hopefully SNL takes Rosie O'Donnel up on her offer to play Bannon...
Wouldn't Bannon be Little Finger?
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.
Flynn might be the scariest one of the lot.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think Robb has been jabbed enough about the "laughable" comment.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 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.
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.
I consider the 9th circuit laughable for a host of reasons.
Well fortunately, calling judges laughable and a disgrace in no way contributes to an environment where they need protection from death threats, right?
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.
Say what?
What case are you talking about?
is this like the non-existent ban on children praying in public schools?
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.
Yes, that's right. There is no lack of uniformity at present.
The JV team needs a new player....
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.
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!
How long will it be before top Trump aides Sean Spicer and Kellyanne Conway have had enough and leave?
Deeg
The press didn't "bring down" Nixon. Nixon's actions as president did.
Flynn was fired because he got caught. He's not the sacrificial lamb - he's the tip of the iceberg.
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.
Meanwhile, Patreus, still on probation for lying to the FBI, is on the list of candidates considered to replace Flynn?
And the press found out about it.
jes
Why do all your responses to wrong doing by republic pols just consist of "ya but, somebody else did worse"?
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?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-communications-trump.html
High treason...
Keep fiddling, Nero.
The ice bucket in the Antarctic isn't gaining.
The great thing about satire is that it points out the idiots that believe it is true.
Keep fiddling...
Answer the assertion of ice loss in the Antarctic o'denier of science.
It's best just to pass on the answer jes and move on.
You just did.
And avoiding a challenging position defines your minutiae.
Just keep dodging the question...
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.
http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/02/20/dexter-fowler-reacts-to-travel-ban-some-cardinals-fans-react-badly-fowler-responds/
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.
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.
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.
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.
the president clueless child today explaining a policy move on healthcare by saying, "Obamacare very bad" while his solution will be, "very good".
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?
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.
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.
Much like advocating socialism despite its historic failure when tried anywhere else.
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.
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.
Robb
Is Sweden on your globe? Norway? Or China?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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®ion=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
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?
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.
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
We had that system in America for a long time jes.
It utterly failed.
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.
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.
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???
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.
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.
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?
You want to be taken seriously and at the same time are describing Trump as reasonable.
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.
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.
This isn't you making a point. It's you crapping your pants and posting how you feel about it.
it is an improvement over Obamacare
And which part of it do you dispute?
All of it. Its just an asinine statement by a libertarian intent on denying reality.
https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/cassidy-collins-introduce-comprehensive-obamacare-replacement-plan
This would be a better option than the House Republican plan.
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 would love to know where you can get a same day screening colonoscopy or vasectomy.
I believe that was a same day penectomy.
Which is the opposite of an Adadictomy.Reminds me of the generic names for V iagra: dyxafloppin and styfacox
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."
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?
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.
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.
So in other words, I need to take your word for it? Sorry.
Are you saying that was a good thing?
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?
Well the Tea Party conservatives ought to be happy. Obamacare is still in place.
Sounds great.. Then more stupid poor people can die. I think if you don't make over 500K you should just die already, right?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
Okay cubbiebird
Just how did the FDA regulate healthcare prior to 2010?
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.
Come on, Jes. Has Little Homo ever posted any data that refuted anything?
So addled where does that put Cuba?
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.
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?
It's on purpose. DaveP just wants to remind the world what a good christian he is.
jes
The question was about life expectancy and the Country of Cuba beats your libertarian concept government.
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.If anyone believes that I'll give them a great deal on some ocean front property in southern Illinois.
I've seen this at least 4 times now. Is this autocorrect, or is this on purpose?
Why is being a homo demeaning?
It is not otto who is demeaned by that nickname.
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?
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.
CubbiebirdHere is a 102 page PDF of DEA cases against doctors....
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.
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.
When the intent is to cause harm, it's not 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.
That's not the only time it's not cool, of course, but that's the time when it's least cool.
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.
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...
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.
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.
I don't use "gay" or "homo" as slurs.
Also, I did not marry a Pat Nixon, but rather a Hillary Clinton.
You don't have to be gay to "tea bag" someone Jes.
You should give it a try.
You may enjoy it.
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.
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?
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.
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?
Our popular vote loser president must be a little disappointed with the result.
Both parties nominated a flawed candidate. No matter what, we were getting a flawed President.
As Playtwo said, there are degrees of flaws. But two people seldom agree on the importance of various flaws.
So how bout Trumpy droppin classified intel on the Russians like a Snoop Dogg song?
Will he start his own "Lock him up!" chant?
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.
Imagine a Trump supporter taking shots at anyone.
Check out Facebook.com
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.
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 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.
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.
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?
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?
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
By the way tico, you really should be eating better than just ice cream and potato chips.
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.
Take 15 minutes to watch the videos and read the story. Seriously.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.
https://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9444417/gun-violence-united-states-america
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?
As a class or group, who has murdered more people than anyone else in each of at least the last 2,500 years?
Soldiers?
It is a multifactorial problem in the US and all aspects need to be addressed to fix it.
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.
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.
Absolutely yes to an all-of-the-above approach. That MUST start with gun control before we attempt the long remedy of culture.
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.
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?
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.
I still believe in strict gun laws.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
And the total number of murders and **** have climbed and climbed sharply in Australia since the gun confiscation.
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.
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/
when large numbers of citizens are armed and resisting, not enough drones or hellfire missiles exist to deal with them
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)
Japan in WW2 would disagree....
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.
I don't think banning guns will help.
The problem needs addressing, not the symptoms.
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.
I agree with all of Tico's posts.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.
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.
Japan in WW2 would disagree....
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 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."
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.
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.
It's fear, br.
Also, ALL politicians reap benefits from keeping their constituents ignorant and afraid.
Fixed it
Sure, in a shades of gray kind of sense, but it is demonstrably more true for one side.
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 you dont care for gun violence step one is voting against candidates that accept NRA funds.
This is exactly what I was inferring in my previous post Tico, Curt just said it better.
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.
verb (used with object), inferred, inferring.
Infer..... imply.... ah, what the heck, they most start with "i" and have two sulables.
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.
Did the officer pistol whip her Jes?
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.
In the future I'll use simpler words for your sake, Jes.
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.
Also, some politicians reap benefits from keeping their constituents ignorant and afraid.
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?
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?
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.
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.
This has to be one of the most absurd suggestions I may have ever seen. Clearly someone who has not thought this suggestion through.Why does she have to wait?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
As I already said, the right to bear arms can conflict with the right to public safety.
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.
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.
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.
Even if Roe vs Wade gets over turned it won't make abortion illegal. It will just return the issue to the states.
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.
What did he say that makes him homophobic?
Being gay is a choice not something you're born with like a heart murmur.
Being gay is a choice not something you're born with like a heart murmur.
Being gay is a choice not something you're born with like a heart murmur.
I am in no way homophobic, have several gay friends and a gay sister, yet do not support the gay lifestyle.
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.
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."
Maybe one of the dumbest things you've ever posted,
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.Compare the two statements and note which is hateful and backwards.
You say homophobic.
I say Christian.
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?"
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.
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.
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?
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.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.
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 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.
I was a very confused young man with attraction to both genders.
...and because of my own experience do believe it is a choice.
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.
You say homophobic.
I say Christian.
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 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.
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
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.
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.
No. It is never ok to have thoughts and feelings to take advantage of other people. Sexually or otherwise.
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.
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.
Even an ignorant redneck understands this.
Even an ignorant redneck understands this.
Genesis 19...
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.
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.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.
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.
What did Daniel Murphy say that was wrong? He said he didn't support the gay lifestyle.
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?
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?
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?
Please give me examples of bigotry, abuse and hatred toward Christians in this country, starting with comments on this board.
.... 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... And when statements are made unequivocally that God is against homosexuality that isn't a matter of having personal beliefs
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.
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....
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.
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.
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
What did Daniel Murphy say that was wrong? He said he didn't support the gay lifestyle.
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?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism_in_the_United_States
Are you gay Brjones?
You seem to be awfully invested in this conversation for someone who dont have a dog in it.
Are you gay Brjones?
You seem to be awfully invested in this conversation for someone who dont have a dog in it.
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.
blindly following a set of rules
I dont see how its stupid.
I may not agree with their choices but I have never mistreated one.
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.
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.
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.
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.
.... With that said Im done with this thread.
Ezekiel 2:1
And he said to me, “Son of man, stand on your feet, and I will speak with you.”
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....
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.
Oh. That’s as banal as I’d expect from a real Christian.
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.
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 don't recall ever being bullied.
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.
WJ, how do you stand up to a bully that hides behind the anonymity of the net?
My comment was directed at the maga moron squealing about “snowflakes”
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.
No he meant maga, and he nailed it.
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.
Stand up to the bully and DON'T be a victim. Refuse to be a victim.
Victim blaming...always a go to move. Nice.
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?
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.
Maga = Make america great again.
maga moron = a trump flake. so like i said, he nailed it.
This is why there are school shootings.
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.
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.
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/
Unless they support your point of view.
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.
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.
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
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.
They are making it very difficult to support the cubs.
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/
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!
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.
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.
90% of welfare recipients are single mothers.
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.
Slavery began in this country in 1619 and was not abolished until 1865.
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.
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.
(a white candidate for President will literally never be asked to produce their birth certificate
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 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.
"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.
And, btw, long before either whites or blacks were in America, Indian tribes took vanquished tribe people as slaves.
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."
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.
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?
But, using the word "proud" to characterize any of this is a curious use of words.
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?
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?
"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."
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.
"Raised under a roof" is a vile euphemism for the conditions in which slaves lived. Try "**** and murdered in the cotton fields" instead.
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.
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.
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.
I don't think we're not in basic disagreement.
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.
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!
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.
I don't remember reading that. Can you provide a link to a post?
Racism has to exist in order to enslave someone in the first place.
^
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.
"Slavery was far less disruptive to family than the welfare state." "Many treated more like family members than anything else."
"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.
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.
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.
So if a fan boos Jason Heyward for making 160 million dollars and hitting like Ryan Theriot does that make him racist?
I give up. Who DID say "anything about paying anybody for anything"?
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!!!!!"?
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.
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")
Umm... ...
“and why should the rest of us have to pay for it if any were?”
- Jes “some-slaves-were-treated-like-family” Beard
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It was nice while it lasted.
What? Our nice country?The lengthy period where there were no posts in this topic.
The lengthy period where there were no posts in this topic.
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.
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
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.
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.
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...
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 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.
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 have no problem with people sleeping with whoever they feel like sleeping with.
My wife's best friend is a gay veterinarian.
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.
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.
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.
No reason to have any problem with gay veterinarians.
Gay vegetarians, on the other hand....
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.
They’re blaming video games again. Jesus Christ
They’re blaming video games again. Jesus Christ
Japan is lucky they don’t have any video games.
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.
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.
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.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.
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?
A fully automatic weapon is going to do jack squat against the US military.
The automatic weapon loopholes have also existed for quite some time.
The people around here that support guns dont give a **** how many people have to die as long as they get to keep theirs.
We need extremely strict gun control as in one per home that never leaves the home...
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
*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.
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.
Jes I'm picturing you in the Abrams tank you're saving up for hunting down otto and Cletus.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
C The new amendment can be written in such a way that changes the wording of the first amendment, as well as the second.
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.
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.
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.
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 demise of Deadspin (and all of Gawker media especially Splinter) is very sad.
I thought AJ Daulerio killed Deadspin and Gawker a long time ago.
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.He loves to argue I will leave it at that.
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.We definitely do not think alike thank the Lord.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 have a feeling that next fall this topic will be toxic.
I love Chicago. I wouldn't move back, however.
It’s not ok.
What a surprise, a white supremacist thinks a white supremacy symbol is no problem.
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.
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?
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
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.
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.
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?
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?
Can you imagine the difference it would have made for both Clinton and Trump had there been 3 or 4 major parties?
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.
and really it isn’t close to the worst.
Name two in the last 100 years.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?I believe the term is unicameral.
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.
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.
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.
Both political parties use Gerrymandering to protect incumbents
Elimination of the electoral college immediately disenfranchises 70% of the states or more.
People are in Iowa well after the caucuses and if the electoral college didn’t exist no national politician would care.
This is the solution.
https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
Totally agree, Curt. The Framers did not fully anticipate the emergence of political parties and the nature and intensity of partisanship.
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.
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.
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.
I agree. Federal Government spending is the greatest threat to our country, our economy and our welfare that exists today.Dave, Dave, Dave. If such a candidate existed, he'd get impeached.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
I heard the same thing near the end of the terms of Clinton, Bush and Obama.
LOL.
Trump is an idiot and that at least keeps him from doing serious harm.
I’ve for other people twice already and plan on making 4 votes for other people so try again.
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.
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 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.
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
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.
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?
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!
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.
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.
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.
Everyone thinks that their particular tin-foil conspiracy theory is actually reality.
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.
Tico, you may have mistaken my meaning, I am not a Trump lover, but I know many. They love the guy.
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.
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.
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?
I haven't given $1 to Trump or voted for him, how exactly am I supporting him?
It isn't a binary choice between Trump and an open border.
Exactly
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*
For most or at least the most vocal democrats it is, but I take it you are in favor of enforcing existing immigration laws.
I'd also add in a guest worker program to help protect people coming over here to work.
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.
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.
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.
Pretending shi* didn’t occur is certainly one way to go about it.
I can only assume you must feel as strong about the trumps and Jared Kushner
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.
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.
Yeah.
Jefferson would be shocked to learn he had a duel with Aaron Burr. Was it before or after Burr killed Hamilton?
Stickler for details, eh?. It put a burr in my saddle.
https://twitter.com/mattgertz/status/1225012237737320448?s=21
Love when people ITT tell on themselves.
No place for thoughtfully evaluating the evidence and moral courage in the GOP, I guess.
Im sorry for all of the folks who want a free ride in a non Christian country full of illegal aliens.
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.
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.
Maybe not but he's much more Christian than the democrats.
Do I think Trump will successfully remove term limits?
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.
Hey, ECF. What do you think the Framers would have thought of Fox News?
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....
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.
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...
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?
We have to agree with you politically to make a trade with you?
Wonder if he pocketed that money.
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.
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 trumpsIvanka maybe, but no thanks on the rest.
Now do the trumps
Anyone trying to claim the Obama economy was better than the last 3 years better check into the hospital.
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.
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.
Yeah, the bottom 20% are doing great. What nonsense.
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.
I guess you didn’t read the article that started this.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It is the Democrats burden to nominate someone who can beat Trump.
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.
Trump Cuts Scheduled Federal Pay Raise, Citing “Serious Economic Conditions” in the Country
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.
"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.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.
Thank you for your amazing restraint.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.
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
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.
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.
Also, across the board his policies are working is ludicrous. Gtfo
Thank you for perfectly illustrating my point.
Thoughts on this WSJ article?
https://twitter.com/michaelcbender/status/1228335868202672129?s=21
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?
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
Why did no Democrats vote for the civil Rights act? Racism? I could go on and on.
Can the President pardon someone convicted on state charges, or can he only do so (as I suspect) for Federal charges?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
And as I say that Knox Co. has its first confirmed case.
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.
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.
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
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.
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 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.
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.
What the ****
https://twitter.com/jackmjenkins/status/1244739744992563200?s=21
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.My bad, I should have said holdover.
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.
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.
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.
https://twitter.com/thetnholler/status/1246847132717416450?s=21
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.
If I were at an advanced stage of the disease, I would be willing to try just about anything. Why not?
This would sure be a nice development. https://abc7.com/coronavirus-drug-covid-19-malaria-hydroxychloroquine/6079864/
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.
Best video I've seen on how to make a face maskDon'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.youtube.com/watch?v=9YLXEhSjVsw
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.
Tells you a lot about those people that white knight for him.
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 :)
Now do the president old man
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.
Theres simply no denying that he and the administration didnt react appropriately or in a timely manner. Then he went on TV and to his jackass rallies and Maralago and acted a moron.And its cost lives. Spin it how you want.
*****
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...
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Speaker of the House John Boehner showed them all how to do it.
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
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 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 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"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.
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.
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.
Now address that he thinks racism isn’t an issue, lol.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yes. It’s the new normal here. They took the robes and hoods off
https://twitter.com/yamiche/status/1249834557593001989?s=21
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.”
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/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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
Pretty sure he also fired the IG that would have been in charge of investigating if anything was going on...
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.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.
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.
The worst peopleWorse than the scammers who send emails saying "I can help expedite your stimulus check"?
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1250977991871602689?s=21
The worst people
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1250977991871602689?s=21
Complete POS
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1251170178945052672?s=21
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1250927187827572736
Just straight make it up as you go along.
https://twitter.com/existentialfish/status/1251260593107021824?s=21
These are very fine people, right?
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.
Actually I would love that, including the assault rifles. Guess how many mass shootings occur in gun free zones?
Commentary on that study.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.
https://medium.com/@balajis/peer-review-of-covid-19-antibody-seroprevalence-in-santa-clara-county-california-1f6382258c25
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..
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
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.
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.
Keep safe, Robb.
Grand old party
https://twitter.com/willdizard/status/1251671034115342340?s=21
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..
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..
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.
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.
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.
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..
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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 ****.
Yeah, you don't like informed people.
I guess I don’t find racism tourism cool.
Holy ****.
You don't find critical thinking, mature discussion or rationale cool either. Who cares.
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 guess I don’t find racism tourism cool.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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
Historically awful regime.
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1253061064511459329?s=21
It's too bad. It would make a huge difference if we could find an approved drug that actually prevents deaths.
"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."
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.
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.
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.
He is literally going to get people killed. There is prob some dip **** injecting bleach into their veins right now.
Bet OANN is on it
https://twitter.com/tvietor08/status/1253674230333403137?s=21
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.
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.
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.
Tico has stopped taking the bait for the most part, he acknowledges its a waste of time.
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.
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.
There seems to be a lot of rudeness on this thread lately. It might feel good, but it accomplishes nothing else.
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.
Fact-based discussion of policies related to the many issues our country faces. Without resorting to personal attacks/pejoratives.
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.
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
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.
Absolutely absurd. Racism doesn’t exist.
https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1255966109142069255?s=21
Absolutely absurd. Racism doesn’t exist.
https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1255966109142069255?s=21
Laura Ingraham retweets article from white nationalist group VDare blaming immigrant workers for coronavirus hotspots
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
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://twitter.com/davidbegnaud/status/1257737290786443266?s=21
No charges filed, no arrests made. No racism.
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.
Trump is on to something. He says there would be fewer Covid cases if there were less testing.
Trump is on to something. He says there would be fewer Covid cases if there were less testing.
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 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.
I hope it’s true and I hope it destroys his heart.
Trump is a tough guy, right? He can fight off the bad guys.
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.
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.
But her emails.
Its not emails this time around, its the actual mail, billions of fake mail in votes.
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.
Shocker... so... a drug used by some to induce heart arrhythmias for sucide, increases risks of heart arrhythmias....
Add me to the list of people who believe Trump was never really taking hydroxychloroquine
Do I even want to check out the Bears forum?
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.
Study is wrong, it requires zinc to work, hit job against trump.
Saved you the time.
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.
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.
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.
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
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???
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.
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.
Trump is being xenophobic by calling it the "China virus" again.
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".
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
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.
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.
Y’all really respond to that jackass? Why? That’s wild.
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.
That youve had children is a damn shame.
Tragic video highlights systemic problem: Minneapolis police kill black people 13 times more than white people
lets hope that doesn't happen to his son someday by a racist cop
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?
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?
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....
Ah so there are more than one? Damn shame. Surprised you’re still alive tbh.
I dont understand the struggle of non whites anymore than non Christian's will understand the struggle of Christians.
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.we
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.
Please do not encourage him to vote.
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)
Amazing.Fu ck the police. Those who seek order more than justice are part of the problem.
https://twitter.com/harikondabolu/status/1266570082903261185?s=21
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.Same as Ferguson and other places.
https://twitter.com/Freeyourmindkid/status/1266598693647638528
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."Some of them are probably good people"
https://twitter.com/Freeyourmindkid/status/1266598693647638528
MAGA is make America great again. By the way, they love African-American people, they love black people. MAGA loves the black people.
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
Right now is the time for The Rock to cut a promo MLKJ style and call for peace.Especially if he has Ric Flair as his running mate, right?
He'd be the next president without a doubt.
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
Dale Murphy understands that there is endemic racism that must be acknowledged and fought against.
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.
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.
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
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.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.
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.
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
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.
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."
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?
People seem pretty pissed off right now....
There's no one better at sounding indignant and doing absolutely nothing about it. If you need that done, Sasse is your guy.
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).
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.
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.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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
In rather good news for once Steve King, the racist GOPer from Iowa, lost his primary.
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.
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.
I do not think Trump should have gone to the church for his photo op. What were his motives?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
They called the election at 74% Clinton, 28% Trump but I'm guessing they didn't take into account those Russian Facebook ads.
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.
But...but...isnt Biden a ped o phile and isnt he on tape doing the same thing Trump got impeached for?
But...but...isnt Biden a ped o phile and isnt he on tape doing the same thing Trump got impeached for?
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.
Ahmaud Arbery was hit with a truck before he died, and his killer allegedly used a racial slur, investigator testifies
Maybe I should have been a Braves fan so I could communicate with good,God fearing,Southern,folks.
Meanwhile orange moron can lie 24/7 on twitter with no consequences.
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.
Perhaps it's better in the long run to have the chips on the table.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It would be nice to have a more diverse set of views represented.
It would be nice to have a more diverse set of views represented.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
Multiparty systems are nearly impossible to have in our first past the post system.
What does " first past the post system" mean?
Trump administration eases restrictions on killing bear cubs and wolf pups in their dens in Alaska
The cruelty of the Trump admin knows no bounds:I heard most of those cubs and pups grow up to vote Democrat.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-ends-obama-ban-killing-bear-cubs-wolf-pups-alaska/
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.
No comment.
I didnt say a thing and am trying to be better at accepting others and allowing them a chance at a peaceful life.
He is also trying to eliminate further defections from his rapidly shrinking base.
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.
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?
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: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.
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
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.
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.
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
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/if-it-looks-3zbpbr.jpg)
I am more interested in policy and results anyway.
His policies are incredibly racist.
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.
Both choices are awful.
Supreme Court says federal law protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
Proper and predictable result.
This is a devastating ruling for Robb and Dusty.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/supreme-court-lgbtq-employment-case/index.html
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?
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.
News flash: Aubrey Huff is a dick.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1273018665391099904
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.).
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.
Also looking forward to hearing from Trumpers how they feel about their pro-life president supporting concentration camps in China.
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.).That mythical quote has been debunked enough that the only reason you still believe it is because you want to.
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.”
Supreme Court blocks Trump from ending DACA
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.
That mythical quote has been debunked enough that the only reason you still believe it is because you want to.
Jim Jordan. When is that fucktard up for re-election?Jordan is the rep from Ohio's 4th district
Jim Jordan. When is that fucktard up for re-election?
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
How are you this bored? Don’t carry water for GOP **** right now. You have to be better than that, man.
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.
Robb, I'll invite you to post legitimate sources "debunking" this.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.
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.
I'm a fan of the Lincoln ProjectAnd I am in favor of the blexit movement.
Let’s hope so when it matters. GOP voter suppression machine will kick into overdriveIn the history of this country the party who was guilty of suppressing black voters and even threatening their lives is the Democrat party.
"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."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.
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 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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.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 the recent GA elections where voter suppression was once again witnessed, the issue had *nothing* to do with voter IDs. Please stop the nonsense.
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 am on board with that Brjones. I think that would be a good solution.
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.
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.
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.
Looks like the troglodytes from the other board have found this one since it moved here. Should be fertile soil for endless comedy gold.
Now explain the last 50 years.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.
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.
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 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)
(Attachment Link) The reason for the increase in cases is increased testing.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“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
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."
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
Not a good pattern.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EbUJ9i9WkAIV4-W?format=jpg&name=small)
Historic failure of leadership.
I know one American that I'd like to send to Europe.
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/
MANDATE WEARING FUCKlNG MASKSwe have to have special masks for THAT too?
Watching some of these city hall meetings and we are truly **** as a nation.
Russia Secretly Offered Afghan Militants Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops, Intelligence Says
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
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.
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.
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).
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).
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?
CurtOneYes, I know. Is this really otto? I could read it, so I'm confused.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think this is going to be the closest election to Reagan vs Mondale.
https://youtu.be/r8yOv4PwttM
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.
https://twitter.com/sleepydjango/status/1278473876461113344?s=21
Black high school baseball player says fans yelled 'You should have been George Floyd' and 'Get back to the fields'
Racism is no longer a problem.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/03/us/iowa-baseball-teen-taunted-trnd/index.html
Bluejay - is there any validity to this?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hydroxychloroquine-helped-save-coronavirus-study?fbclid=IwAR32XgT9sg2QLuSmnS7ZPfvefZs5l3TwdoCSU2YLElgV75cVHR9UHCDPd1Y
How about drinking bleach?Why bother? It's going away.
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!
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
He’d love my 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.
Do you hear stuff like this from your dad’s family?
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.
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
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.
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."
"Dr. Fauci is a nice man, but he's made a lot of mistakes," Trump said
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.
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.
Still unanswered is the question "can a president pardon himself?".
It's a safe bet that he will have no choice but to try.
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1281616586273468416?s=21! It's Trump. Nuff said.
Curious how the career educators feel about this one.
This is wild.
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?
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.! Italy? Who said Italy?
! 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.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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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
There's an idea, Doc. "You can come into my establishment without a mask, if you sign a DNR."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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.
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.
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.
Hopefully a lot of Trumprrs will decline. Thin the herd.I hope you are joking.
I hope you are joking.
I hope you are joking.Facetious maybe, but, from what I've observed lately, we have to fix the gene pool somehow.
I forgot to add nominating a guy most likely in the early stages of dementia.Doesn't this apply to both parties?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/us/politics/trump-cdc-coronavirus.html
I predict Covid numbers will now drop drastically.
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.”
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?
Meanwhile in Portland, federal secret police are abducting protestors over and against the wishes of local lawmakers and law enforcement.
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.
Has anyone ever seen Robb and Tucker Carlson in the same room?
Has anyone ever seen Robb and Tucker Carlson in the same room?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Trump's saddest contribution to this country is the lack of civility.
tico, was the intent of the writers of the Constitution to insure States Rights or to diminish them? Just asking.
tico, was the intent of the writers of the Constitution to insure States Rights or to diminish them? Just asking.
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?
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.
Ladies and gentlemen, your Cubs corporate partner:
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/24/media/sinclair-fauci-conspiracy-bolling/index.html
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
Trump would never say that.
Ladies and gentlemen, your Cubs corporate partner:
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/24/media/sinclair-fauci-conspiracy-bolling/index.html
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.
The excess deaths are also due to increased suicides drug od's and murders.
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.
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.
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
Robb reads what he believes you're thinking.I think he was responding to shucky ducky. Everyone needs to chill.
Are you really glad that a man has died because you think it might make Trump look bad?
I think he was responding to shucky ducky. Everyone needs to chill.
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.
because you think it might make Trump look bad?
'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.
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.
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.
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.
Latest poll national poll (Emerson) has Trump training by only 4 points. That's basically even in my book.
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.
Add representative Jim Jordan of Ohio to the list
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.
I couldn’t get through 10 minutes of the Trump Axios interview. It was like watching a snuff film.
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?
Kamala Harris is Biden's running mate. He has sent an email out to donors making the announcement.
Kamala Harris is Biden's running mate. He has sent an email out to donors making the announcement.
Kamala Harris is Biden's running mate. He has sent an email out to donors making the announcement.
I'm just looking forward to the VP debate. That will be great entertainment.
I was hoping for Susan Rice.
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.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.
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?
...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.
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.
People won’t be getting medicine or social security checks long before any ballots get mailed out. It would be a disaster for Trump.
Why does Trump even want to be reelected. Does he derive any joy or sense of accomplishment from being President?
I guess he is clueless about how he will be remembered in the perspective of history.
Ballots are already being mailed out (and "misplaced").
He enjoys the rallies and he doesn’t want to be indicted.
Trust our Constitution.
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
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'.
I think only Trumpers have to be worried. The real Republicans only fear 4 more years of Trump. Just sayin'.
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.
Considering Trump is drawing over 90% of Republican support in polls, I'd question that definition of what real Republicans are.
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.
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.
So if your mother is from Puerto Rico how can you be a first generation American?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Next time, read the article. You might learn something.
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.I watched tape compiled of livestreams of both shootings with no commentary at all.
Seriously? Supporting BLM? Check out the following:Where does it say in that article whether he does or doesn't support the protests?
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2020/08/26/kyle-rittenhouse-charged-kenosha-protest-shootings-militia/5634532002/?fbclid=IwAR339jv50JvgPAc4tJabRSP4BuYJ8TpFbjOlCvG6f90q9H43KU4nI6nyLS8
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...Agreed. Just like chasing someone and throwing a Molotov cocktail at a person is a strange way to protest a police shooting.
What are you talking about?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.
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.
sanity check:Too funny. You are the one spreading the false narrative now.
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
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.
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.
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..
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
I'd like to think that a couple of % of those are movable.
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.
That 1% could also be the key to taking control of the Senate.
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.
I'd like to think that a couple of % of those are movable.
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"?
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.
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?
My wealthy, educated, world-traveled, boomer parents have leaned further into supporting Trump, because "Biden is going to take all our money".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.
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'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.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.
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.
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.
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.
So, for the person who is honestly on the fence, what is it about Biden that is worse than Trump?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
The latter is far more terrifying, since they are not going away after January.
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.
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.
It is happening here.
https://getpocket.com/explore/item/it-can-happen-here?utm_source=pocket-newtab
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.
Clinton didn’t win a plurality? That must be the new math.
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)
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
Also Republicans: the Electoral College and Senate are awesome!
How much do each receive from the federal government?
How much do each receive from the federal government?
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.
Like I said - false equivalency mythology is worse than overt Trumpism.
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.
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.
That kind of thinking is what got us Trump in the first place...
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.
this is batshit crazy. insane story unfolding. potential for MASSIVE spread within COVID-negligent WH
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.
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.That and not wanting to look like some kind of wimp by not wearing a mask like their fearless leader set with his example.
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?
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.
Breaking news during the commercial break before the last half inning of the season: Trump is on his way to Walter Reed for tests.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Looking like the Supreme Court nominee’s introduction in the Rose Garden was a spreading event. Lee, Tillis, Trump, Hicks,Amy Coney Barrett has already had Covid-19.
Notre Dame’s President all have tested positive. Was McDaniel and Hicks there as well?
Chris Christie now tests positive.
Amy Coney Barrett has already had Covid-19.
Add Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson to the list.
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."
Anyone gloating that he is suffering is a **** bag. He deserves it, but lets not drop to his level.
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.
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.
I am pulling for Trump to make a speedy recovery. And to lose big next month.
treats?
Trump risking the lives of the people in his security detail for another photo opp. He's Covid Positive in anNothing can get in and anything already inside, says insideenclosedhermetically sealed car with 3 people for a 20 minute drive.
WTF?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I bet he was recommended/endorsed by Ronny Jackson, the prior WH physician and one of history’s biggest quacks.
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
As soon as he got back to the White House, he takes off his mask. What a ridiculous person.Perhaps not surprising for a mildly obese man after walking up those steps.
https://twitter.com/Acosta/status/1313254795172614144
His breathing appears to be very labored in that video, by the way.
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.
I’m thinking more like meth.
The HHS secretary met with these people.
https://gbdeclaration.org/
Roughly half of the US population is at risk, so this will work great.
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."
Stephen Miller tested positive.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
"Normally" Republicans and Democrats are equally good and evil.
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.
(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.
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.
Not to mention refusing to endorse the only viable alternative.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Neither side should be doing stuff like that. Trump is a jackass. Can we agree on that?
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.
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.
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
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.https://news.gallup.com/poll/313094/americans-abortion-views-steady-past-year.aspx
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.
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.
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.
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.
The governor of Texas has limited the number of drop off locations for mail-in ballots to one per county.
“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.
The party of family values, the party of life:
https://twitter.com/jacobsoboroff/status/1318679776144420865?s=21
So Trump throwing out a first pitch (if asked) would also be out of the question...even though he is the sitting President?
Based on some news breaking today, it appears hunter biden's laptop actually belonged to Rudy.
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.
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.
If Biden wins and the Dems take the Senate, Republicans will be talking about the importance of bi-partisanship and compromise.
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?
but it isn't looking like they'll keep the Senate.
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?
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.
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.
Wow, Robb’s support for Trump is getting downright vitriolic.Vitriol is what you're all about Tico.
Sorry to see Trump’s character replicated in yet another fan.
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?
I saw this on the bears board and thought it might be relevantThere 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.
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
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.
Vitriol is what you're all about Tico.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
Look, 538 says Trump currently has 12% chances to win. Think that’s what Cubs had at some point in 2016 to win WS.
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?
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.
How many 538 A+ pollsters are taking into account the shy Trump vote, which will be greater than last time?
There are almost as many non-party affiliated mail ballots returned so far as Republican mail ballots.
4,686,272 Independents.
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.
Not trying to pick a fight Tico. But I vote for policy, not personality.
They're relying on a big Election Day turnout when the Trump virus seems to be gearing up for another major spike.
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.
But he opposes abortion.
But he opposes abortion.
Over under on the number of pregnancies Trump has ensured aborted? I'm going to say 4.
Over under on the number of pregnancies Trump has ensured aborted? I'm going to say 4.
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.Great. Trump wants us to feel the election will be rigged and now so does deeg. Paranoia reigns.
Rallies Are the Core of Trump’shttps://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/24/fact-check-19-false-claims-in-barack-obamas-speech-for-joe-biden-in-florida/
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
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
Ron,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.
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.
Do we have an icon for inexcusably, insufferably dumb?(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcR6A3sVEVHj_rSzdQgX-KFPjPKOvHhzoHicpw&usqp=CAU)
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.
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.
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 are deep in alternative fact land. I’d love to see your browser history.
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.Obama is toast. --Jes Beard
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.”
Some places require it.
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.
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.
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.
I cant see Trump losing any southern states.
He's Abraham Lincoln around here.
I cant see Trump losing any southern states.I just threw up in my mouth a little.
He's Abraham Lincoln around here.
The confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett may turn out to be a small negative for Donald Trump.Exactly. One of his best cards was that he would nominate more judges.
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.
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
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.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.
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.
My guess is he carries all states he won before and adds MN and possibly NV.
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.
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?
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.
Police use pepper-spray on protesters — including children — marching to Alamance polls
Texas Republicans Ask Federal Judge to Throw Out 117,000 Legally Cast Ballots
Trump’s only real chance is for more stuff like this:Can't believe anyone would associate with this: https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas/status/1321604259725664256?s=19
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.
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.
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?
Keep feeding the troll, it's working great.
From a Democrat pollster friend:John Bolton has said he is writing in the name of another Republican. Is that a separate category that should be accounted for?
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.
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.
538 has Biden's odds at 74% in NE-2. Not exactly a lock.
538 has Biden's odds at 74% in NE-2. Not exactly a lock.
There are numerous news stories about storefronts being boarded up in Washington, D.C., Boston, New York, and other cities.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.
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]
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.
Does the data suggest Trump will win? Yep.
better off than 4 years ago polling
voting registration trends
...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...
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.https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/09/politics/gallup-poll-better-off-donald-trump/index.html
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.
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."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?
"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.
Unfortunately, that state is California.Care to place a bet, Curt? How about our 1st round picks next spring?
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.”
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?
Nate Silver @NateSilver538This could be the final nail in Silver's credibility.
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.
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.
Care to place a bet, Curt? How about our 1st round picks next spring?
My team sucks... i'll take that bet.Mine too! You're on!
Florida numbers. https://twitter.com/monk_cryptic/status/1323664511681892354?s=19
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.
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.
Dude... its over. 4 more years of **** show. i really need to re-evaluate my life and view points.
Look at where the votes are coming from in Virginia, it isn’t the cities.
Look at where the votes are coming from in Virginia, it isn’t the cities.So far, but VBM was counted first. ED voting is coming in slower and heavily tilted to Trump.
In Ohio Biden is out-performing Clinton by a lot.
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.
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.
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.
It would definitely be better for the country if Biden were to win by substantially more than 1 electoral vote.
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.
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.
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").Robb, better look back on that bet. It was that Trump would win California.
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?
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.
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.
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
Is it clear that Perdue will exceed 50%?
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.
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.
Personally, I like br.He has slipped in credibility lately, P2.
Now the Trump family is calling on R state legislators to appoint electors.
Full-blown dictator stuff at this point.
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.
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.
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.
Trump's lead in Georgia is down to 3,635 after some Chatam County votes have been counted.
I watched Hannity for about 30 seconds. He’s full in on the Democrats are stealing the election.
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.
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.
Curt, I'm talking about the possible need for the 25th amendment between now and then.Understand.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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 fault, dear Brutus, is not in our election system, but in ourselves.
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
And I disagree with you, Ron. 48% of the American electorate supports reelecting Trump. What is wrong goes way beyond the Electoral College.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
That is the design of the Senate. What you would be arguing for is a unicameral legislature.
Another 1,700 added to the margin in Pittsburgh.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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
For now, the popular vote compact is the best way forward. It's not all that far from the threshold it needs to reach.
Wouldn't it be nice to see a conventional concession speech by Trump?It would make me believe in pod people.
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.
Hope they told him as he was putting.He gives himself any putt under six feet.
He gives himself any putt under six feet.
Heard that some Trumpers are calling for Biden's impeachment.
Jan 21
Fox News is being quite responsible in its coverage of the election. It's disorienting.
How do you post a jpeg again? I've forgotten.
And his "6 feet" is different from everybody else's.
Put the URL after the first of the double quotesThanks, Bennett. Still can't get it to post.
<IMG src="">
<IMG src=":small">
<IMG src=":medium">
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
That news has caused the Dow Jones to surge nearly 1,500 points.How hard is it to make money in the stock market?
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 has to be kept at -112 Fahrenheit? Yikes.
Pfizer was not part of Warp Speed and has received no Corona Task Force payments.
The Trumpers around here aint happy about the vaccine.
Something about it having monkey dna in it.
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?
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?
Can Trump fire Caputo?He just fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper.
He just fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper.Yeah, the election loss was Esper's fault.
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.
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.
Trump wont leave without a fight.
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.
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???
So are just assuming that all the generals and soldiers are going to coup because Trump tells them too?
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)
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.
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.
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.
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…”
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."
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.
The Trump Corporation has now taken in $281,000 from the campaign since the president entered the Oval Office.
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
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.
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?Michael Cohen
Michael Cohen
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.
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.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/12/politics/donald-trump-2024-republican-nomination/index.html
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.
What worries me is that Thanksgiving has the potential to make Trump's superspreader events look mild in comparison.I thought we were all going to JR's for Thanksgiving.
The Sturgis motorcycle rally too.
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.
What worries me is that Thanksgiving has the potential to make Trump's superspreader events look mild in comparison.
The Sturgis motorcycle rally too.
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!
If Trump does eventually win it'll be a sight to see.
Why is it unbelievable? If you watch an infomercial everyday eventually you are buying the food dehydrator.
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.
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.
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.
Trump got 5 million more votes than last time.Yes, and Joe Biden received 13 million more votes than Hillary Clinton did in 2016.
Yes, and Joe Biden received 13 million more votes than Hillary Clinton did in 2016.
no official observers were kicked out just the unofficial ones that were chanting stop the count and trying to intimidateBut 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.
the poll workers
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.
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.
no official observers were kicked out just the unofficial ones that were chanting stop the count and trying to intimidateThat'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.
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.
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.
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.show us the evidence
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.
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.
I want one political thing in the next 4 years: the end of the electoral college.
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?
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.
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.
He basically runs the election, overseas public records, and collects fees for professional licenses and businesses. What policy making is he involved in?
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.
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.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_state_(U.S._state_government)
I will take the vaccine as soon as it is available to me. I don't see a reasonable argument for any other approach.
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.
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.
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).
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.
Hopefully there will be peer reviewed data soon.
That will come when the application to the FDA for either an EUA or approval.
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?
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?
It goes without saying that any FDA approval should not come from some Trump appointed lackey as its head.
I have a hard time understanding the opposite POV.
“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.”
That's caused by a different affliction...What are you implying? That I have CRS?
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
So why are they going to the White House?
So why are they going to the White House?
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
But all those Trumpers who voted for him KNEW he was ego manic and we have talked about his idiocy for four years.
I’m more fearful that someone who is actually competent will takes Trump’s playbook and run with it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
None of which mitigates the damage this charade is doing to the system, even if all that were taken as read.
It's cities vs. rural
Educated vs rubes. That is exactly the kind of belief that divides us.
. 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.
That is exactly the kind of belief that divides us.
If we continue the inaccurate portrayal that rural people are all rubes and educated people all live in the cities
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.”
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/11/21/michigan-lawmakers-trump-meeting-erin-burnett-monologue-ebof-vpx.cnn
How in the hell are there no sanctions against the attorneys?
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.
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 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).
Worst he could do is delay it until Biden takes office. It might actually get Republicans to stand up against him.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I wonder who was trying to pay for a pardon.If Epstein would have held out, he probably would be free right now. Wonder if Cosby has a shot.
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.”
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.
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.
Reading Reb’s posts these days it’s like having Jes back again.
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.
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.
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.
I'd take the vaccine.. There's an IQ cutoff?
I dont know many others who would.
I read something like 90% of the U.S. would get it before I would though.
Bill Barr resigns minutes after Biden technically clinches the election in the Electoral College.
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.
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.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.
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.
. 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.
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.
She's only 50 years old. Does she have risk factors that would justify moving her to the front of the line?
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.
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.
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.
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.Donald Trump is pulling all of these shenanigans because he knows how high the odds of his being incarcerated are after he leaves office.
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.
All 10 living former defense secretaries: Involving the military in election disputes would cross into dangerous territory
Right. Clearly Trump is a crazy phuqr. He might TRY anything. That doesn't mean it will work.
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?
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
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.
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.
Multiple buildings being evacuated on Capitol Hill.
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
We have officially failed the test of a peaceful transition of power.
"We" have not unless you're aligned with Trump. We the people are still running the show.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Trump leaves no doubt that he thinks the attempted coup today was justified:The moron really believe that.
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!
Way too broad a brush. In 1866 was the WHOLE Democrat Party the hate party?
The Republican Party is the hate group now.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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"
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.
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.Maybe Carlson and Hannity should be reminder that their President described the invaders as wonderful people.
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.
Pelosi just called for the cabinet to use the 25th amendment. If they don't, the House will consider impeachment again.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Here's a shocker:
I assume you say that rhetorically, since the reason why could not possibly be more obvious.
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.
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.
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.
I'm mostly just curious how they convinced him to do the video. There had to be a threat of some kind, right?
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.
“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.
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.
“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.”
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.
It would be more unifying if some Republicans joined the effort from the get-go.
And, his new tone on Parler is going to be a doozy.
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.
Trump tried to use the POTUS Twitter account and it was taken down. They will apparently ban any account he tries to use.
Neither side has expressed interest in unifying since Clinton's first term.
Sorry, Curt that is utter B.S.
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.
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.
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
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.
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'm sure from your viewpoint it is. That's the problem, neither side can see their own flaws
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.
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.I respect your opinion. My issue is not that people like Newt weren't doorknobs like Hawley today. My issue is with "enormous."
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."
OK. Can we agree on "substantial" or "significant?" See, this Dem is willing to compromise to find unity.LOL Yes, I'll compromise.
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.
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?
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.
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?
I respect your opinion. My issue is not that people like Newt weren't doorknobs like Hawley today. My issue is with "enormous."
Interesting. My post on 5903 only shows up on my desktop, not my phone or tablet. Dave, can you explain?
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/11/ana-navarro-alice-stewart-i-call-bull-trump-republican-tent-sot-newday-vpx.cnn
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.Arrest them. States should recall them.
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/
Trump has officially been impeached again. Ten Republicans voted to impeach, which makes this the most bipartisan impeachment in history.
I question whether 10 Republican votes in the House makes the impeachment "bipartisan".
"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."
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
Access to voting that isn't race-based, moderately progressive taxation, any environmental regulation, reproductive choice, and acknowledging that global warming exists.
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?
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.
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...)
And, point proved.
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.
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.
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.
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.
That seems like more of an indictment of Chicago than of Sogard.
Here CBJ, maybe this will work for your patients:
https://t.co/jEZGvF5m3Z?amp=1
Wait, it doesn't turn you into a lizard??? *Mind blown*
Over 24 hours since my vaccine and I havent felt a thing.Dusty, that's bad. If you don't feel anything, you're either paralyzed or dead.
Not even a sore shoulder really.
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?
There's gossip that she's Stan Lane from the Midnight Express wrestling tag team of the 80's daughter.
You mean from The Fabulous Ones…
The length of the island is not too much different than the distance between LA and SF.
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.
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.
75 million people voted for Trump. Should they all congregate in New Orleans to be removed from existence
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.
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.
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 guess he’ll be going for Sasse? Which is a shame because he’s one of the few politicians I like nowadays.
I guess he’ll be going for Sasse? Which is a shame because he’s one of the few politicians I like nowadays.
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.Umm. Ted Cruz, Ron Johnson, Cotton, Hawley, Ernst, Blackburn, Paul, and Tommy Tuberville would all like a word with you.
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~
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.
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.
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.
Sasse’s Trump score ties him with Chuck Schumer.
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.
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.
Search the link by Trump score, they are both 0.1.
But it means you want Donald Trump’s policies which is not so good.
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."
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.
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.”
I’d probably get banned if I went over to the Bears board.
Anyone know a reporter that might be interested in ties between a governor to a racist anti-vaxxer?
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.
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.
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.)
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/
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.
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.
Ricketts backed Governor candidate beat the Trump back governor candidate in Nebraska.Yea! The guy was a pervert.
Ricketts backed Governor candidate beat the Trump back governor candidate in Nebraska.
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
To the killed child or irresponsible mother?
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.
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 ****?
To the killed child or irresponsible mother?
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/
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.
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.
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.
If its still in the low 60's its still the majority.
This is still one nation under God.
The ungodly heathens are and always will be the minority.
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.
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 :)tico, I did not mark your comment as "dumb" and I don't appreciate whoever did that.
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.
Your god.. please be aware thats just your personal belief... others have different ones.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Loving v Virginia. That's one Dusty should like
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.
Because you dont like condoms.
As far as judging I know I shouldnt and dont think I am.
I dont like people who dont see it my way…
Seeing that Im married to an Asian girl not quite.
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.
Biggest issue is that both sides seem to prefer seeing the country fall than surrender control to the other.
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.
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.
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.”
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.
Yes, sorry.
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.
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 - 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.
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 voted for impeachment. That takes guts in this version of whatever the Republican party is supposed to be.
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.
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.Fischer. She spells her last name the same way I do. No relation. None wanted.
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.
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?
Docs on nuclear **** weapons.
And his cultists attacking FBI offices with nail guns.
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)
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.
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.
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.
Dude from Florida will be the next president.
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.I never said that, but I wish I had.
“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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
What feds didn’t pursue this charge? Bill Barrs DOJ? No $hit. Barr played interference all-of-the-time….
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.
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.It didn’t make John Edwards stronger when he got caught doing the same thing.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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 SeriesDidn't say that's my hope, Deeg. Just the opposite. Fear.
As much of a Cub fan as I am, I couldn’t accept the devil’s bargain this season that I did in 2016.