By Bold 2 in One Go To PostKelly Anne Omnigul, silence her screams!
How many times do you have to do it before she drops a Grasp of Malok?
By Wedward Go To Postits been 2 weeks, yeah, I know it feels fucking longer, the left needs to get organised, they still have time, not a lot mind you.
Does anyone trust the Dems to use that money wisely?
By Bold 2 in One Go To PostKelly Anne Omnigul, silence her screams!Kellyanne Conway legit looks like a wicked witch. I think these people sort of look on the outside like they are on the inside.
Russian critic Vladimir Kara-Murza suffers sudden organ failure
A prominent Russian opposition activist has been hospitalised with organ failure, two years after he almost died of suspected poisoning.
By Zeus Ex Machina Go To PostI agree she was looking for a fight and got one
They are looking for a fight indeed.
By reilo Go To Post
Apparently the two dissenters waited to confirm it was just them breaking rank before going public. With two years between now and the next election I don't think it will matter. Hopefully I'm wrong.
By Pennywise Go To PostBonus video :
Schulz kicking a Greek right wing party member out of the EU Parliament. Don't forget to enable subs.
to be fair, the Greek guy is just saying what the rest of that 99% white parliament is thinking.
By Fenderputty Go To PostI guess we shouldn't pay extra close attention when a fascist is taking over the white house then. It isn't fair game because of past presidents' fuck ups. Carry on.Been following along and that wasn't said
By blackace Go To PostBeen following along and that wasn't said
He's upset we're paying close attention to the military actions now when we didn't before. Only that aspect. He's trying to divorce this from all the other externalities that have created the need to pay attention. He didn't need to say anything. He can live in reality or he can pretend that a fascist taking over the white house won't cause people to start scrutinizing further. His post was one whataboutism after another. Like we all forgot Obama droned the fuck out of people.
By Facism Go To Postto be fair, the Greek guy is just saying what the rest of that 99% white parliament is thinking.
By FlutterPuffs Go To Postwonder what businesses
masyallah
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/02/politics/haley-russia-un/index.html
Gotta give credit when it's due. Trump pick being pretty aggressive against Russia here.
Gotta give credit when it's due. Trump pick being pretty aggressive against Russia here.
Haley is saying that while the treasury is easing up on some businesses doing work with them. It seems an awful lot like talking tough publicly while being soft behind the scenes.
If they follow through in Haley's comments credit would be due
If they follow through in Haley's comments credit would be due
He's upset we're paying close attention to the military actions now when we didn't before. Only that aspect. He's trying to divorce this from all the other externalities that have created the need to pay attention. He didn't need to say anything. He can live in reality or he can pretend that a fascist taking over the white house won't cause people to start scrutinizing further. His post was one whataboutism after another. Like we all forgot Obama droned the fuck out of people.
I think the point was this happens basically for every president.. if we were a GoP heavy forum we would have been all over Obama's fuck ups. But as long as your guy / gal is in the seat it is "oh poor guys that got killed" and off to Starbucks.
Also the bottom line is at this point the president hardly controls the military... Obama bombed more countires than Bush but I doubt Obama actual singled out these countries to attack.. He got told we should and trusted his people.. Same for Bush, and Clinton..
I personally loved Obama and think he might be the greatest president ever.... But not because of how he controlled the military..
I think that was kind of the point..
Holy shit at the details of how this op went down in Yemen and then the current white house trying to blame Obama for approving it prior to leaving office - which they're disputing.
By blackace Go To PostI think the point was this happens basically for every president.. if we were a GoP heavy forum we would have been all over Obama's fuck ups. But as long as your guy / gal is in the seat it is "oh poor guys that got killed" and off to Starbucks.
Also the bottom line is at this point the president hardly controls the military… Obama bombed more countires than Bush but I doubt Obama actual singled out these countries to attack.. He got told we should and trusted his people.. Same for Bush, and Clinton..
I personally loved Obama and think he might be the greatest president ever…. But not because of how he controlled the military..
I think that was kind of the point..
I agree every president does do this shit, but he even acknowledged they all don't get this scrutiny and he did so with his very first comment!
"sure wish this microscope was getting use over the past two decades"
Two decades covers both Bushes and Obama. So no, he wasn't coming at this from a right / left angle or a my guy / your guy angle. I even agreed that ideally everyone would pay attention to these things and be critical at all times. My point was that we've not seen a POTUS like this in a hell of a lot longer than two decades and that's the reason people paid attention to this Yemen operation more closely than they did for the previous ones.
I agree every president does do this shit, but he even acknowledged they all don't get this scrutiny and he did so with his very first comment!
"sure wish this microscope was getting use over the past two decades"
Two decades covers both Bushes and Obama. So no, he wasn't coming at this from a right / left angle or a my guy / your guy angle. I even agreed that ideally everyone would pay attention to these things and be critical at all times. My point was that we've not seen a POTUS like this in a hell of a lot longer than two decades and that's the reason people paid attention to this Yemen operation more closely than they did for the previous ones.
I don't want to speak for Dy.. but that was how I read it. People don't give a damn about the kids we kill on both sides until it fits an agenda..
And it is fully about my guy / your guy.. You can bet Trumpers give zero fucks about this operation but would have been livid if it happened under Obama..
By blackace Go To PostI don't want to speak for Dy.. but that was how I read it. People don't give a damn about the kids we kill on both sides until it fits an agenda..
And it is fully about my guy / your guy.. You can bet Trumpers give zero fucks about this operation but would have been livid if it happened under Obama..
It's interesting you bring up that "if it happened under Obama" because that's one of the things he took issue with. In fact I think he called my post "bullshit" when making the claim.
Either way I've wasted enough pages arguing about this and agree that it sucks people don't pay more attention.
EDIT: What reilo said
By Fenderputty Go To PostIt's interesting you bring up that "if it happened under Obama" because that's one of the things he took issue with. In fact I think he called my post "bullshit" when making the claim.One last thing is you claimed that Obama would have been under investigation for a botched operation and that is bs lol
Either way I've wasted enough pages arguing about this and agree that it sucks people don't pay more attention.
EDIT: What reilo said
By Phoenix RISING Go To PostThey are looking for a fight indeed.Imagine that, people will want to start defending themselves after getting attacked.
You can justify political violence all you want, just don't be surprised when people start retaliating in self-defense.
By reilo Go To PostY'all been arguing in circles about this for a while now.That's politics for you.
By blackace Go To PostOne last thing is you claimed that Obama would have been under investigation for a botched operation and that is bs lol
Goddammit Ace. It's not BS ... neener neener
<3 DY
Let's not 'both sides' this Yemen fuckup. This administration is so far taking utter delight in being unprecedented, unpredictable, and institutionally destructive.
By DY_nasty Go To Postits hilarious and sad how hard it is for her to say this
Dems tend to want to appease everyone and that makes them soft. The reason they are standing up is so many of their constituents are saying "man the fuck up". Protest can only do so much..... look at Wisconsin. Even out of power they need to harass and "Benghazi" every Trump fuck up to keep the base enflamed.
If they think appeasement is going to get them seats on 2018 and 2020 they are mistaken.
By Phlebas Go To PostImagine that, people will want to start defending themselves after getting attacked.
You can justify political violence all you want, just don't be surprised when people start retaliating in self-defense.
Yeah that's the point..... you think we're not going to see riots and violent outburst in the next few years? We had that during his campaign based on him talking about doing this stuff. I'm not one of these resistance hashtag people but it's pretty clear we're heading towards large social unrest. Which once again fits with the idea that Russia wanted to weaken us from within and paid Trump off to do it. Then you got guys like Bannon who assumes they will rise on top that ash heap except it's this real lack of self awareness that cities (that are liberal) fund America and it may get to the point that cities and even states just refuse to listen.....
I remember reading all these uplifting stories of how all these women held onto help Hillary win it all and instead we broke their hearts :(.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/02/politics/ruline-steininger-hillary-clinton/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/02/politics/ruline-steininger-hillary-clinton/index.html
By Ciaran Go To Postwhat's their argument here…It's popular with the gun industry and with the hardcore NRA types.
I fail to see how this is wise in any shape or form
Plus it's undoing something Obama did so it's gotta be good, right?
By S@l Go To PostElon Musk, lads.
Intensifying his multi-planet civilisation fuckery.
He's waste material like Thiel.
He made a comment about it recently and I agree with his logic. He has vast aspirations, and choosing to ignore such a position would be stupid.
He'll quickly find out he's talking to a wall of course. Trump just brought him on for the optics and he'll eventually dismiss him because its obvious he's not going to go along with any of Musk's ideas.
In an interview with Yahoo News Global Anchor Katie Couric, Murkowski cited both her experience with the public school system in her home state and a flood of messages from her constituents as influences in her decision.
Murkowski argued that while DeVos is an advocate of alternatives to public schools, many rural communities in Alaska are not able to sustain multiple schools.
“In so many of our communities, we don’t really have an opportunity for school choice,” Murkowski said. “If you are a remote, small community in western Alaska, the thought that you could have an alternative school just doesn’t exist.”
“The strength of the public school system was really what Alaskans cared about, and they were very concerned that Mrs. DeVos simply lacked that experience when it came to how we build a better public school system. That is what I was hearing.”
She also said she was concerned about DeVos’ commitment to students with disabilities. In her confirmation hearing, DeVos fumbled a question about the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, saying she believed it to be “a matter that’s best left to the states.” Murkowski said compliance with federal laws like that is “not negotiable.”
“It’s these assurances that allow for a system where all of America’s kids can get a good education,” Murkowski stated.
Assuming all Democratic senators vote against DeVos, the upcoming vote would stand at a 50-50 tie, with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, also against the pick. In that case, Vice President Mike Pence would cast the tie-breaking vote. Murkowski said she was unaware of any other Republican senators who were considering voting against DeVos.
When asked whether she would be comfortable if DeVos were to be confirmed, Murkowski said, “I’ve made clear that she does not have my support, so I think that’s a pretty clear statement.”
Although she said she had not communicated with anyone in the Trump administration since announcing that she would oppose DeVos, Murkowski acknowledged the possibility that she would become the target of the harsh criticism the president likes to dole out via his Twitter feed.
“I cannot live in fear of a tweet,” Murkowski said, laughing. “We as lawmakers should not. What we need to be doing is working for the people that we represent, trying to do best by our states and their people, and doing so in working with a new administration.”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/sen-murkowski-on-defying-trump-i-cannot-live-in-fear-of-a-tweet-193230535.html
It's hilarious how many rural bumfuck states latch onto stuff like school choice. Murkowski is right in that in a lot of rural areas you'd be lucky if your school commute isn't 45 min
By KingGondo Go To PostIt's popular with the gun industry and with the hardcore NRA types.
Plus it's undoing something Obama did so it's gotta be good, right?
I was arguing regulation with a gun nut the other day. Total NRA dude. He's the husband of my wife's cousin to give you an idea of the degrees of separation. Also keep in mind I'm a gun owner and would like to acquire a couple more myself but I totally support regulation and hate the NRA.
Anyway ... his basic argument is if you give them a little they'll come for the whole thing. Many 2nd amendment nuts view any regulation as a step in the door for sweeping bans and confiscation. To be fair ... that is what hardcore lefties want. I personally don't believe requiring drivers license like testing or mental health checks will lead to all our guns being taken away, but he genuinely did. He feared that forced licencing or no fly lists etc is a way for the federal government to track who owns a weapon for when the bans happen.
This mindset is pretty common among the hardcore 2nd amendment types. Any regulation at all, is a step towards taking their gun away. IMO bans are not the way to go. Banning the AR15 doesn't stop semi automatic .302 caliber rifles from being sold as an example. So gun owners tend to think those who write the regulations have no clue what they're actually doing.
Goes along with the paranoid mindset of many gun "enthusiasts."
Need to have an arsenal for when "shit hits the fan." Need to be able to protect your family when bad guys break into your house.
The bottom line is that there is absolutely no assumption of good faith on either side in US politics. Very hard to have a functional government when that's the case.
Need to have an arsenal for when "shit hits the fan." Need to be able to protect your family when bad guys break into your house.
The bottom line is that there is absolutely no assumption of good faith on either side in US politics. Very hard to have a functional government when that's the case.
By KingGondo Go To PostGoes along with the paranoid mindset of many gun "enthusiasts."
Need to have an arsenal for when "shit hits the fan." Need to be able to protect your family when bad guys break into your house.
The bottom line is that there is absolutely no assumption of good faith on either side in US politics. Very hard to have a functional government when that's the case.
It definitely came across as paranoia to me. The whole big brother gonna find you angle is just something that never crosses my mind. I feel I tend to tow the middle line as a gun owner in that I'm for a lot of regulation that doesn't exit (mental checks, licensing, federally mandated clip sizes etc), but I'm generally 100% against reactionary bans. IMO they only serve to make this divide larger. Honestly the majority of gun violence is caused by handguns anyway, but if you think banning an AR is hard ...
By Fenderputty Go To PostMake America White, Conservative, Catholic And Straight Again.Fixed that for you.
Nah ... Brown people are Catholic. We're building a wall to prevent more of them coming too.
Make American White, Evangelical and Straight Again!
MAWESA hats for everyone!
unless you're not part of the anagram
Make American White, Evangelical and Straight Again!
MAWESA hats for everyone!
unless you're not part of the anagram
By LFMartins86 Go To PostFixed that for you.
America runs on protestantism. Due to their largely Irish & Italian backgrounds Catholics have been outsiders in a lot of ways throughout its history, and because of that haven't been reliable conservative voters. It was a big deal when JFK became the first Catholic president. Their vote has been split pretty much down the middle the last couple of elections.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_politics_in_the_United_States
I'm behind handgun bans for citizens. Like if you need a gun for your job (work for the courts, move money etc. okay you get a license) that's one thing, but Joe Blow farmer doesn't need dozens of mobile firearms.
To go along with a handgun ban I would like to see mandatory sentencing if you're caught with an unlicensed handgun. It would take years but the numbers would go down. The jails would quickly fill up too but that would also level off over time.
The handguns are the problem. To cheap and readily available everywhere even in states like mine (Maryland) where you can't open carry and the process for a license is pretty stringent when compared to the states we share borders with.
To go along with a handgun ban I would like to see mandatory sentencing if you're caught with an unlicensed handgun. It would take years but the numbers would go down. The jails would quickly fill up too but that would also level off over time.
The handguns are the problem. To cheap and readily available everywhere even in states like mine (Maryland) where you can't open carry and the process for a license is pretty stringent when compared to the states we share borders with.