|
|
Post by Ronhel on Sept 25, 2018 15:00:38 GMT -5
During his speech at the United Nations, President Trump claimed his administration "has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country." The audience laughed.
|
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Oct 21, 2018 15:43:30 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2018 21:31:45 GMT -5
"Dozens of US spies killed after Iran and China uncovered CIA messaging service using Google ... Meanwhile, in China, 30 agents working for the US were executed by the government after compromising the spy network using a similar means. Beijing had managed to break into a second temporary communications system, splintered from the initial platform and were able to see every single agent the CIA had placed in the country, the sources told Yahoo. ..." www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/11/03/dozens-us-spies-killed-iran-china-uncovered-cia-messaging-service/Regardless of which Administration is to blame, if any... is this a country (China) we really want free trade with? Personally, I'm glad we're hitting them with tariffs. We can have more of our cheap imported shit made in other 3rd-world countries for slightly higher cost and I'm fine with that. |
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 5, 2018 21:49:22 GMT -5
On the subject of China, I think the great firewall is awful in that it censors their citizens. However can you blame china for wanting their own companies and not having to rely on Google/Facebook/etc? There Chinese companies rule and the money stays in their country instead of flowing here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2018 22:49:14 GMT -5
On the subject of China, I think the great firewall is awful in that it censors their citizens. However can you blame china for wanting their own companies and not having to rely on Google/Facebook/etc? There Chinese companies rule and the money stays in their country instead of flowing here. That's because their govt has 50% ownership in all companies based in China. The Chinese govt can play hardball and still has the ability to control everything (and take everything), just as it was before they introduced wider acceptance of free-market principles. Bottom line - conduct business in China at your own risk, as the China govt could step in at any time and take everything (IP theft is already blatantly and widely accepted there). They play (economics) to win (long-term). We play it for the short-term, to maximize profit today, and selling out our country's future. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2018 23:12:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 13, 2018 11:03:52 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2018 19:07:37 GMT -5
There's some truth to it, even if he expresses it in an undiplomatic or inappropriate context. Personally, i feel like we should let them do whatever they want and pay for their own military if they so desire. But the historical precedent is there and history can have a way of repeating itself, if/when ppl forget its lessons.
Yeah, they totally should start supporting their own military. That's a smart move on their part, as the U.S. is looking less stable & weaker with each passing decade. As the U.S. declines and ceases to be a superpower... eventually, without the U.S. there (to act as the world's policeman, bully, or whatever you wish to call it), the world will become less stable (i.e. more large-scale wars). Seems like the world is more stable with 1 or 2 superpowers (with at least one of them being Democratic and non-expansionist). But the U.S. hasn't been keeping its own (economic) house in order and it takes a strong economy to support a strong military, so don't count on the status quo to last much longer.
|
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 14, 2018 9:08:07 GMT -5
There's some truth to it, even if he expresses it in an undiplomatic or inappropriate context. Personally, i feel like we should let them do whatever they want and pay for their own military if they so desire. But the historical precedent is there and history can have a way of repeating itself, if/when ppl forget its lessons. Yeah, they totally should start supporting their own military. That's a smart move on their part, as the U.S. is looking less stable & weaker with each passing decade. As the U.S. declines and ceases to be a superpower... eventually, without the U.S. there (to act as the world's policeman, bully, or whatever you wish to call it), the world will become less stable (i.e. more large-scale wars). Seems like the world is more stable with 1 or 2 superpowers (with at least one of them being Democratic and non-expansionist). But the U.S. hasn't been keeping its own (economic) house in order and it takes a strong economy to support a strong military, so don't count on the status quo to last much longer. Oh it would be great if we could get other countries to pay for stuff, however if we piss people off enough that they say pull out of NATO I don't see how that is beneficial to the American Empire at all. Thats all hypothetical of course, a long way from a few tweets to people ditching US military bases in their country. A good question is why do we still not have Single-Payer Health care but we have all this war ships sailing around the world in circles and costing billions of dollars. The whole military budget is a giant black hole of money. Like Trump sending troops to the border to not shoot at people? What is the point of blowing millions of dollars on that. I know its a few days old but lol to cancelling a trip because of rain. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2018 11:54:34 GMT -5
"The whole military budget is a giant black hole of money."
I agree our spending on military is excessive and spending the money elsewhere (such as improving the nation's internal infrastructure) would actually improve the economy. Proponents of bigger military share the Ricky Bobby philosophy, "if you ain't first, you're last", so they place virtually no limit on military spending.
Of course, pro big military people could argue that many of the soldiers employed by the military might be unemployed today if spending were slashed. I can't fault the argument entirely, because it's a similar argument that liberals use when supporting big govt and funding other govt organizations (i.e. govt does create jobs and GDP growth). I understand we could slash spending on weapons & equipment instead, but then our soldiers wouldn't be equipped with the best gear. There are valid points on both sides of the fence. It's one of those issues where we have to find some balance/compromise, imo.
|
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 14, 2018 16:29:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 20, 2018 12:45:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronhel on Nov 23, 2018 7:34:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronhel on Nov 26, 2018 15:02:39 GMT -5
Now Trump feels is the time to start his nazi rule over America.
Donald J. Trump
Verified account @realdonaldtrump
While CNN doesn’t do great in the United States based on ratings, outside of the U.S. they have very little competition. Throughout the world, CNN has a powerful voice portraying the United States in an unfair....
Donald J. Trump
Verified account @realdonaldtrump
....and false way. Something has to be done, including the possibility of the United States starting our own Worldwide Network to show the World the way we really are, GREAT!
|
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 26, 2018 17:52:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronhel on Nov 29, 2018 5:29:19 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2018 19:05:21 GMT -5
This is the main weakness of the Republican party, imo. They embrace profit over peoples' lives and, oftentimes, rebuke science in the process. Regardless, as long as unemployment stays low, Trump will probably get re-elected. In the short to immediate term, the Fed steadily raising interest rates isn't really helping (to hurt Trump's re-election bid) either. Just saying, when the (low) cost of borrowing money to dump into stocks is no longer a viable profit strategy, companies look for other sources of profit (i.e. increasing business operations.. and that translates to more hiring). |
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Dec 5, 2018 20:22:21 GMT -5
I think SJ you mentioned civil war over something to do with transgender names or something of the sort. In the grand scheme of things that is fluff. Totally inconsequential. Years ago I remember reading about how Scott Walker was going to lead some kind of national revolution and he even ran for president. Now its 2018 and he lost the presidential bid and was voted out. So the Republicans in Wisconsin are limiting the power of the offices they lost scrambling to get it all done by the end of the year: www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/us/wisconsin-power-republicans.htmlFunny when Scott Walker was in power they had no issue with the power of those two offices. You go out and vote and it doesn't even matter, you don't vote the way they want so they change the laws to limit it. So Democracy doesn't work at all. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2018 20:37:50 GMT -5
I think SJ you mentioned civil war over something to do with transgender names or something of the sort.In the grand scheme of things that is fluff. Totally inconsequential. Years ago I remember reading about how Scott Walker was going to lead some kind of national revolution and he even ran for president. Now its 2018 and he lost the presidential bid and was voted out. So the Republicans in Wisconsin are limiting the power of the offices they lost scrambling to get it all done by the end of the year: www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/us/wisconsin-power-republicans.htmlFunny when Scott Walker was in power they had no issue with the power of those two offices. You go out and vote and it doesn't even matter, you don't vote the way they want so they change the laws to limit it. So Democracy doesn't work at all. I think it would have more to do with repealing freedom of speech. If ppl want to refer to a male as "he," or a female as "she," and the govt tries to step in and say that's illegal, people would go apeshit over it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2018 21:01:54 GMT -5
Does it even make sense to legally regulate the usage of gender pronouns (which have been part of human language since the dawn of history) for the entire population, to accommodate and avoid hurting the feelings of 0.6% of the population? Your argument is that it's inconsequential. imo, the govt would have tough time enforcing it and even trying to enforce it to begin with would be a complete waste of time & resources.
|
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Dec 5, 2018 22:08:58 GMT -5
Oh no I don't think the government should be doing that. However you mentioned Civil War. My point is Civil War over .6% of the population is silly but if you live in Wisconsin and you voted Democrat the Republicans there are permanently changing what two political offices can do since they lost control.
You voted us out? Fine, we will destroy the office we lost. Fuck your vote.
I think that is a far more valid reason to go to war then fucking pronouns.
|
|
|
|
Post by Babel-17 on Dec 6, 2018 12:17:58 GMT -5
Oh no I don't think the government should be doing that. However you mentioned Civil War. My point is Civil War over .6% of the population is silly but if you live in Wisconsin and you voted Democrat the Republicans there are permanently changing what two political offices can do since they lost control. You voted us out? Fine, we will destroy the office we lost. Fuck your vote. I think that is a far more valid reason to go to war then fucking pronouns. True enough, but conversely the Democrats have the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, plus other judges, who will try to legislate from the bench. They too try to disregard the consequences of elections.
Illegal immigration is effectively legal when the Ninth won't let you enforce laws that were passed by the representatives that were voted in, and signed by the President, and followed by the executive branch.
Don't like a law, have an activist judge rule/legislate its application unconstitutional. That some judges will reliably do this is what causes court shopping.
It's about stopping the executive branch, but in a some cases it's been used to force the executive branch to do things, even when there's no legislation to compel the action. This is where the Constitution starts getting heavily interpreted.
If the voters stand for it, then the situation prevails. That's what it seems to boil down to. On the other hand, the country is polarized, with neither of our two ruling parties having clear dominance, so who can say what the voters want regarding judges acting as legislators.
Reagan could be said as having been elected in part as a repudiation of liberal judges, and so could Trump, as he clearly appeared determined to enforce existing immigration law, and to speed up deportations.
His win was very narrow, so it's hard to say "the voters have spoken", but as Clinton was a heavy favorite, and lost, it's arguable that that this issue was more important that was generally acknowledged.
A lot of first world countries are now pushing back against judicial activism. People want their borders enforced.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 12:26:26 GMT -5
Oh no I don't think the government should be doing that. However you mentioned Civil War. My point is Civil War over .6% of the population is silly but if you live in Wisconsin and you voted Democrat the Republicans there are permanently changing what two political offices can do since they lost control. You voted us out? Fine, we will destroy the office we lost. Fuck your vote. I think that is a far more valid reason to go to war then fucking pronouns. Personally, I think both parties are corrupt and backstabbing. Just look at what the DNC and Hillary did, conspired behind closed doors to shut out Bernie. I don't think Civil war is a good idea. I'm not condoning it all. What I'm saying is, in the current political climate, people are seething with hate and division in the country has never been worse. It wouldn't take as much as you think. Many people would be much more opposed to compelled speech or revocation of the freedom of speech than you think, and might even use that as justification for war. Of course, that's just one example. I don't think I said or meant to imply that it's the one and only reason people would go to war. But people are more likely to fight over issues that affect their daily lives, things that affect their personal freedoms or economic well-being. If there was a major economic collapse, i could see the country easily plunging into Civil war, with all of the hate already present. |
|
|
|
Post by Babel-17 on Dec 6, 2018 12:27:53 GMT -5
Where I'm coming from is that while I supported the Clintons in the past, even with money, what Hillary did to Libya amounts to being a war crime. Some of the groups she backed looted Qadaffi's armories and went on to further push Syria into a horrible Civil War.
The proven war monger lost to the unproven war monger, one who had neither the experience nor the inclination for it, so I did not mourn her loss.
On a happier note, one of the least war mongerier of the 2016 candidates seems to be running again.
Sanders: 2020 Hindsight
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 12:31:46 GMT -5
I could vote for Sanders, even if I don't agree with all of his policy. Because, to me, he seems to be a man of integrity and that is a rare trait among politicians.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2018 16:45:46 GMT -5
On the subject of China, I think the great firewall is awful in that it censors their citizens. However can you blame china for wanting their own companies and not having to rely on Google/Facebook/etc? There Chinese companies rule and the money stays in their country instead of flowing here. Their money doesn't flow here and there's no risk of that in the foreseeable future. The exact opposite has been happening. They have the massive trade surpluses. We have massive trade deficits. It's not a good economic plan, except for those ppl hoping to see an eventual economic collapse in the U.S. They are being blamed for IP theft, espionage, and transfer to our enemies though. Huawei CFO arrested. Seems they've been transferring IP and tech to North Korea, Iran, etc. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 11, 2018 18:54:46 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2018 15:18:56 GMT -5
I think SJ you mentioned civil war over something to do with transgender names or something of the sort. In the grand scheme of things that is fluff. Totally inconsequential. Years ago I remember reading about how Scott Walker was going to lead some kind of national revolution and he even ran for president. Now its 2018 and he lost the presidential bid and was voted out. So the Republicans in Wisconsin are limiting the power of the offices they lost scrambling to get it all done by the end of the year: www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/us/wisconsin-power-republicans.htmlFunny when Scott Walker was in power they had no issue with the power of those two offices. You go out and vote and it doesn't even matter, you don't vote the way they want so they change the laws to limit it. So Democracy doesn't work at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Ronhel on Dec 22, 2018 7:19:35 GMT -5
Trump: If we don't get what we want, one way or the other... I will shut down the government ... So I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I'm not going to blame you for it.
Verified account @realdonaldtrump
The Democrats now own the shutdown!
|
|
|
|
Post by Coolverine on Dec 22, 2018 9:57:58 GMT -5
Some crazy bastard out there actually started a GoFundMe for Trump's wall.
|
|
