98 replies to this topic

[onbekende]

lol where were all these people when it was time to vote?

 

As any good lazy youngster, on tumbler

[Lysistrata]

Trump just signed Executive Orders for the Keystone and Dakota Access pipelines... check, and check.

[ccabal86]

I don't suppose he'll move the issue of the Hawaiian observatories along, will he? I'd see more value in that.

[Lysistrata]

I don't suppose he'll move the issue of the Hawaiian observatories along, will he? I'd see more value in that.

I have no idea what this is all about... is it a Paris or UN thing? If so, not likely.

 

The Democrats lost the support of the Unions yesterday... I knew that would happen, and I said so months ago. It's amazing to me that the media still has not learned how Trump manipulates their reporting. From the time he came down from the tower to announce his candidacy, to still this very day... he has them chasing their tails over things that mean nothing. Instead of talking about what's happening in the Senate, the TTP, the Keystone, his coming Supreme Court nominee, the Unions, you know... everything that is real news... he has them all talking about crowd size, protesting women, the MLK bust, who gets called for questions, and what he said to the CIA in front of the wall of stars. So, instead of doing their real job of reporting and analyzing the news... they spend all their time talking about things that mean nothing, and change nothing. Too funny

[ccabal86]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauna_Kea_Observatories#Opposition_and_protests

[Lysistrata]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauna_Kea_Observatories#Opposition_and_protests

Hawaii is full of Democrat Environmentalists. If they are against it, they will fight it forever. So, I would still say, not likely.

 

I believe the Republicans have come up with an idea that I didn't even think of... and it's brilliant. I think they are going to pull out the "If you like your ObamaCare... you can keep your ObamaCare". So if they think their State is doing well with it, they can continue on that plan. States that want out... can get the hell out. I like it. ObamaCare depends on mandates and subsidies... so if some states keep using this piece of shit, their entire populations will split into givers and takers... and the givers will move. I can't wait to see this come down.

[ImYachtBoy]

sorry, begin rant.exe:

 

except the reasons that many view the aca as a "piece of shit" were the results of a series of capitulations and compromises that the dems engaged in due to the obstructionist agenda that was ran by the right. The repubs made aca terrible, blamed the dems, and came up with no solid solution for 8 years. Instituting repeal votes 60+ times without any alternative when there were already millions who purchased from the marketplace. that's a piece of shit move 60 times over. 

 

And right now, their brilliant plan is to build the plane as it falls from the sky. And while I hope that what they propose is a net benefit for all, the republicans are clearly wanting to shift towards privatization and power to the states. The go-to for limited government advocates: capitalism solves everything (who needs financial regulations, 1998, 2002, 2008, pssh!) and WE<3 states rights. why? because of a lack in accountability. Part of the purpose for federal oversight is just that - FEDERAL REGULATIONS. What happens when shit goes unaccounted for and state/municipal law makers run amok? You get Flint. You get situations like Ferguson where a law enforcement system is found to be objectively racist. Would we have ever uncovered that without federal oversight? Maybe. But at least we have concrete data now on the issues due to investigations. R's have always loved the idea of a lack of accountability combined with a puritan view of capitalism that is incredibly misinformed and has proven as such with ACTUAL FACTS/DATA over the years

 

see, Bush era tax cuts: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/01/02/the-legacy-of-the-bush-tax-cuts-in-four-charts/?utm_term=.11eb21ebc51b

see for current admin purposes: Betsy DeVos' support of charter schools driven by a hunger for profit and a lack of transparency https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/01/betsy-devoss-accountability-problem/513047/).  

 

What about individuals in red states that ARE utilizing the ACA to treat themselves, and then the governing body is like nahhh, subsidies and taking care of our people creates and engenders this idea of "givers" and "takers." Another classic right-wing myth. The "takers" are people on food stamps barely getting by. The takers are people that need to take because they need the help. That's what being an American is about. ALL men are created equal. To say givers and takers is further inciting divisive rhetoric that ignores crucial facts. Even your own speaker thought as much! 

https://thinkprogress.org/paul-ryan-apologizes-for-calling-the-poor-takers-3581b60925a2#.tf984x8v4

 

ugh, just needed to vent. reading about all the executive orders after hearing for years r's crying foul over O's executive actions... I just needed to get a some thangs out. Meant no offense in any of the above, just impassioned-political discussion. 

[DeathMerchant]

reading about all the executive orders after hearing for years r's crying foul over O's executive actions...

I would much rather see policy put through Congress and have it come out as passed legislation. However, myself (and many Republicans) are perfectly okay with Trump using Executive Orders to nullify the prior Administration's Executive Orders.

[Lysistrata]

Hey YB, this was a good rant!

 

I said somewhere earlier that the only thing that could help Democrats at this point is their own version of the Tea Party. I believe that is what they were trying to do with this march on the 21st, but there are many reasons it will fail. Staging a march on DC for liberals is very easy. Washington DC and all surrounding area is overwhelmingly Democrat. Also, many of those people that took part in the march had booked and paid for their hotels and airfare many months in advance... because they believed Hillary Clinton would win, and they wanted to be there to see that first woman President. So, instead of wasting their money, they decided to make it a protest. Many activist groups got involved, all run by former Obama, Clinton, and Sanders operatives, and financed with 90 million dollars of George Soros cash. It was way too early... and the only objection is a person.

 

In 2008 when Obama was elected, we accepted him as the President. He won the election. We didn't like it, but that's the way things work in the USA. We gave him a shot. We waited to see what he would do... and the first thing he went for was our healthcare. We started organizing the Tea Party in February 2009, and by April we were ready to begin... we hit on April 15th and the issues were healthcare and the Constitution... not the person... and our target was all of Congress, all of them.

 

We hit the House. We hit the Senate. We hit their Town Halls, and there was nowhere they could hide. We forced them to fight over which bill to pass for an entire year... and we forced them to pass a bill that nobody read, and everyone knew it would fail. Democrats thought they could force us to swallow it, and force us to fix it with single payer later. They lost the House in 2010, and it was over for the ACA then and there. They spent the next 4 years implementing it... and defending it. They lost the Senate in 2014. This is how the US citizens change the direction of their government... not by hating a man.

 

We were the opposition party. We opposed the policies, and obstructed everything at every turn. This happened because the other party didn't care about the concerns of the people, or the Constitution that makes it all possible. We expect Democrats to oppose us. It's the job of the "opposition party" to do so, but it's a lot easier to undo what has been done than it was to create the monster that so many people don't want.

[onbekende]

There is constructive opposition, and there is opposition cause you are opposition. Guess which side gets most done? One side brings consensus while the other breeds a "us vs them" story that flips every election cycle.

 

 

 

The Democrats lost the support of the Unions yesterday... I knew that would happen, and I said so months ago. It's amazing to me that the media still has not learned how Trump manipulates their reporting. From the time he came down from the tower to announce his candidacy, to still this very day... he has them chasing their tails over things that mean nothing. Instead of talking about what's happening in the Senate, the TTP, the Keystone, his coming Supreme Court nominee, the Unions, you know... everything that is real news... he has them all talking about crowd size, protesting women, the MLK bust, who gets called for questions, and what he said to the CIA in front of the wall of stars. So, instead of doing their real job of reporting and analyzing the news... they spend all their time talking about things that mean nothing, and change nothing. Too funny

 

 

Unsure about which US news you follow, but I heared about all those things you mentioned, and more!

- no more federal staff hiring. Even thou it is at a 50y low, keeps declining in both absolute and relative numbers AND the state/smaller governments are hiring massivly.

- the children of Trump have in various configurations become CEO's of his vast empire. No clue about howmuch he still "owns" them thou.

- over 250k signed the Wite House website question to release Trump's taxes. Should be a nice press conference.

- Trump has started asking people to "make a plan to obliterate ISIS". And here I thought he had THE plan, the BEST plan!

 

 

Also a funzy I heared, the deferal of the US Embassy to Israel in Tel Aviv is actually an order that needs to be passed every 6 months or the embassy "should" return to Jerusalem. Hear the date is May somewhere. This is probably an even bigger beehive to poke then dropping the One-China policy. Enjoy?!

[Lysistrata]

Thanks for chiming in my friend from Belgium. Glad to know you follow, but it doesn't matter who owns Trump's business, and he will never release his tax returns. It won't get him more votes if he did, and OMG!, he already won. The only people who care is the opposition party, and they only want to dig up and create controversy. Sorry... we won't help them do that.

[ImYachtBoy]

indeed! thanks for the reply.

 

as you can probably imagine, I don't agree with what you are saying there with my current political mindset, but I do see where you're coming from in some sense. What I am having a harder time figuring out is why you do not care about material conflicts around the world? I understand that DT won fairly and squarely (although his own rhetoric leading up, and even on, election day painted a v different picture than the one he portrays now), but that doesn't serve to negate the fact that certainly what's more importantly than him winning the presidency is what he will actually be doing these next 4 years!

 

If he has large business ties and large debt holdings with institutions around the world (which would be detailed in his tax returns; his 108-pg financial disclosure which has no mention of his debtors) , which he most certainly does based off the returns we have been able to get a hold of - why would he be incentivized to impose to financial restrictions or sanctions? Looking at Russia, he is known to be indebted to Russian oligarchs (banks deem him too risky to lend to). The talk concerning some of the first orders of business: lifting Russian sanctions.

 

As an American, I don't want to be super friendly to a country or an individual who makes his political prisoners "disappear," starves his constituents, institutes draconian civil rights (e.g. killing of political enemies, limiting free speech), or anything else for that matter. Many of my conservative friends are quick to point out Iran as a counterpoint. Well, shit, I don't like nukes. Does anyone other than Donald? Russia already has them, and Iran was in the process of developing them. I have a problem with Iran aiding Hamas or Hezbollah, and financing terrorism, as it does. I accept that. But I also don't want nukes. Nukes=end of times. We didn't make a deal to just make a deal. There are bright line steps that the administration had to take, backed by other superpowers such as France and Germany, to institute rules and procedures to decommission their nuclear arsenal. If anything, it would PREVENT nuclear arms from more easily getting into the hands of terrorists. We are LIMITING access to nukes. It hurts to hear R's (like Tom Cotton) conflating the issue by lumping in true aspects or Iran (like financing terrorism) and then linking it to world destruction and increased nuclear proliferation. That is simply a lie. The inability to hold two mutually exclusive thoughts in ones' head seems hard for many R's. Nuance and balance are out, and imho, that's what it takes to govern.

 

All of this goes to the fact that Donald not divesting/putting in a blind trust his self-described BILLIONS in assets, he puts the country in grave danger by putting the interest of the country on or below that of his business priorities. I don't often want him to follow through lol, but I wish he would see the light on this one.

[Lysistrata]

Hey YB... sorry for the delay, I had a dinner engagement.

 

I see you have fear that Trump is a nefarious dude, and he only wants to be President to inflate his bank accounts. There were many that spread around an "Access Hollywood" hot mic event from 11 years ago where the Donald expressed his desire to grab women where only celebrities dare tread. There are many who believe that David Duke expressing his support for Donald Trump must mean that Trump is a covert member of the evil KKK. There are many who believe that the Russians hacked the DNC to help Trump get elected. That's cool... but it only got Hillary Clinton 232 electoral votes. She needed 270.

 

There are many that don't believe any of that, and even though all that stuff was out there to scare people into voting for Hillary, Donald Trump still scored 306. More electoral votes than any Republican since Ronald Reagan. Not enough voters cared about the scare campaign to usher the criminal Clintons back into the White House.

 

Donald Trump is now the President of the US, and there is no law requiring the President of the US to divest his property, place his property in a blind trust, hand his property over to his kids, or anything to avoid a conflict of interest... because it's not possible for the President of the US to have a conflict of interest... by law... period. Any case brought into a court will be thrown out, because it will have no merit. You will need more evidence than just fear, for any of that to stick.

 

No candidate for President is required to release tax returns. They have only been doing it because they think it will get them more votes. The chances that Trump will release them now are zero... he has already won. By your logic, if Trump owns a dog, he must get rid of it because it's naturally gonna bite someone. Things don't work that way... and some of us were honestly relieved that there is still a man in Hollywood that wants to grab women!

[Lorikz Kain]

Meh so far we have seen the TPP killed and we have this guy:

 

 

 

I might have concerns with some of the appointments he has/wants but for just a couple days he is off to a pretty amazing start in my book
 

[ccabal86]

The thing about Russia is that the West should have been MUCH harder in reacting to Ukraine and Syria. It wasn't, and Putin played us. He won, it's over. We might not like it, but it's a done deal. Might as well move past it, drop the sanctions and restore the working relationship.

Meanwhile, we in Europe should get our heads out of our asses and realize the world is becoming a more dangerous place and take military spending serioulsy again. We have been neglecting it for half a century, and I completely understand that the US doesn't want to foot the bill anymore

[Lysistrata]

Okay this is rich... and will be so fun to watch what happens.

 

We have been outsourcing our jobs to Mexico.

Mexico has been exporting their unemployed to the US.

Mexican migrants send $25 Billion US dollars to Mexico per year.

80% of Mexican trade comes to the US... and they want to play tough with Trump...

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mexico-says-ready-quit-talks-us-necessary-174502231.html

 

I may have to stock up on Tacate, because Donald Trump will eat these guys for lunch.

 

The thing about Russia is that the West should have been MUCH harder in reacting to Ukraine and Syria. It wasn't, and Putin played us. He won, it's over. We might not like it, but it's a done deal. Might as well move past it, drop the sanctions and restore the working relationship.

Meanwhile, we in Europe should get our heads out of our asses and realize the world is becoming a more dangerous place and take military spending serioulsy again. We have been neglecting it for half a century, and I completely understand that the US doesn't want to foot the bill anymore

I agree with you. Obama has scapegoated Russia to blame them for Hillary losing, and attempt to delegitimize Trump. The DNC got punked. Everyone knew they were rigging the election for Hillary Clinton, but the Wikileaks proved it. So after she loses... not before, when it happened... but after she loses, Obama sanctions Russia, and kicks out their diplomats. For what? To make Trump look bad when he has to clean up the mess. If we are going to take out ISIS, we have to work with the Russians, or we'll be killing each other in the process... and that won't turn out too good for anyone.

[onbekende]

Thanks for chiming in my friend from Belgium. Glad to know you follow, but it doesn't matter who owns Trump's business, and he will never release his tax returns. It won't get him more votes if he did, and OMG!, he already won. The only people who care is the opposition party, and they only want to dig up and create controversy. Sorry... we won't help them do that.

 

Well it is usually a big "NO-NO!" when a democratic elected leader of a nation gets on the buttons to enrich himself, this usually ends into despotic tendencies. Case in point the 2 pipelines he just unfroze, he has assets in both pipelines building coorperations. And while I personally aint a fan of oil pipelines in general, these 2 don't really sway me either way anyway, him getting $$ indirectly does feel like unsavoury things happended.

 

 

Anyway, I would like to run a question by you all. Which "side" do you feel is most unified? The "right" or the "left"? To me the "right" seems more uniform just on the basis of a stronger black/white mentality then found on the "left" (not that either side hasn't extreme's or nuances). This is cause while the Republicans basically had 8y to finetune a single reaction, is it the "right" true nature or rather good choreography that will fall apart when the tune has been played?

[Lysistrata]

Well it is usually a big "NO-NO!" when a democratic elected leader of a nation gets on the buttons to enrich himself, this usually ends into despotic tendencies. Case in point the 2 pipelines he just unfroze, he has assets in both pipelines building coorperations. And while I personally aint a fan of oil pipelines in general, these 2 don't really sway me either way anyway, him getting $$ indirectly does feel like unsavoury things happended.     Anyway, I would like to run a question by you all. Which "side" do you feel is most unified? The "right" or the "left"? To me the "right" seems more uniform just on the basis of a stronger black/white mentality then found on the "left" (not that either side hasn't extreme's or nuances). This is cause while the Republicans basically had 8y to finetune a single reaction, is it the "right" true nature or rather good choreography that will fall apart when the tune has been played?

We elected a billionaire businessman that has never held an elected office... I don't believe that has ever happened before. We have had extremely wealthy Presidents before... Washington owned about half of Virginia, FDR was filthy rich, Kennedy was born into a fortune from bootlegging... We didn't force Washington to close his distilleries, make Roosevelt divest his assets, or drive the Kennedy's into bankruptcy to satisfy Republican concerns that he's too damn rich... and no President has been prevented from doing great things for the country because they would make some money off the deal. Hell, everyone in Congress can legally use inside information to guide their own stock purchases, and no one can do anything about it. Best to just move on from this issue because it's never going anywhere in court.

 

There are many Conservatives that are not on board with a lot of what Trump wants to do. Wait until he tries to get that trillion dollar infrastructure plan going... he's gonna have to go to Democrats to help him get that through. Just like all Republicans are elected to repeal ObamaCare... they were also all elected to reduce the debt. Paul Ryan has never been a fan of the Trump Train, but since he actually won the election, he can't stop smiling. He actually has a President that will sign the bills they work so hard to create. So, I do believe the Republicans are more unified, and the Supreme Court pick will further unify them. They will know they have the right man in office.

 

I always said that Donald Trump may not be the President we want... but he is the President we need.

[ccabal86]

I think you're quite right in that the "right" is more uniform than the left, but it's not becuase the left in general sees more nuance (even though it is true that I think more on the left consider nuance, as opposed to the right where it's lost on nearly everybody).

 

It's because the right still rallies around a few specific issues (move jobs back to America, kill ISIS, etc.), and this serves as a lowest common denominator. Now on the left, you see that they've been playing nothing but identity politics. They've been catering to the gay community, the trans community, the Muslim community, the feminists, etc, etc, etc... but this inevitably leads to fractures. This was aggravated by the messages that encouraged people to proudly identify themselves by one SINGLE identity and use glasses of that identity to look at everything else (if you're gay, think like a gay, if you're a Muslim, think like a Muslim, etc.). In this reading however, there is no lowest common denominator, no positive message to really unify people (only the hatred of Trump).

 

If the left is to come back, they will have to move away from identity politics, as it's not only toxic for a myriad of reasons, but also a losing strategy.

 

My thoughts anyway...

[onbekende]

Well Lys, I would add that because he is a businessman with no prior governing/diplomatic skills, he can fall harder into the trap to do some self-profeteering. Not saying politicians are all clean angels, but the mindset from the start usually differs greatly.

 

 

Well the left mostly keeps away from those "lowest common denominator" precisly cause that has the tendency to lose any nuance. Any grouping loses "taken by heart" when they try to unify with "taken by word". It is a constant struggle to walk the line of "letter of the law" vs "spirit of the law". Both sides walk the line and both fall to either side depending on the issue, which is good as just being on 1 side makes for either an awfull rigid society or a libertarian "free-for-all" deal.