CLOSED

1132133135137138164

Comments

  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Deadlines to register to vote in states ...
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    edited October 2018 Posts: 9,073
    I'm way past Taylor Swift fan age and only bought one of her albums so far - just for curiosity. But I was really pleasantly surprised, so much so that I can totally relate to her making a sensible political decision. The "better" protagonists of the Country section (among them Willie Nelson) have always been Democrats.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    ***Please note above list for voting registration - some states are due OCT. 9th ***
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited October 2018 Posts: 12,480
    Catastrophic damage in panhandle Florida from Cat 4 (nearly a 5) Hurricane Michael. Winds 155 mph (gusts about 175 mph). Huge storm surge. This is devastating.





  • edited October 2018 Posts: 3,566
    My thought & prayers to everybody affected by the storm (no, really, no sarcasm intended) -- but it looks like the Kavanaugh story hasn't quite blown over yet. (Okay, there I AM making a very small joke.) https://www.rawstory.com/2018/10/chief-justice-john-roberts-orders-new-investigation-brett-kavanaugh-fox-news/ This is what happens when you're living in unpresidented unprecedented times: the chief justice of the Supreme Court has just ordered an investigation into the actions of the SC's newest member.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,823
    Climate change isn't real.
    When I was a kid, billion dollar damage from storms was constant.
    *effueue*
    Sorry- I sneezed. ;)
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited October 2018 Posts: 12,480
    I think Justice Roberts gave it the courts, where it will likely not be investigated but considered a moot point and let alone. I am not saying that Roberts of any of the justices on the Supreme Court trust or believe Kavanaugh. But I think Roberts is conservative and may figure this way makes him look unbiased but also not a big danger of Kavanaugh being truly investigated. Kavanaugh can still be impeached. I hope I am wrong about Justice Roberts' decision, but I am not overly optimistic at this point about that route going to bring about real justice, genuine investigation, and impeach/removal of Kavanaugh (which is what should happen).

    As for the hurricane, yes it is major, one of the worst in our country's history.



    The last few seconds, you can see the ferocious speed of the eye and its perfect circle (you don't want that). 150 to 155 mph sustained winds. The devastation is widespread.
  • edited October 2018 Posts: 572
    I look forward to voting. I'm no Trumpster, but I like the fact that he has the balls to place tariffs that begin to counteract the enormous trade deficits. It'll hurt in the short term and has/will certainly ruffle feathers with allies, but it'll help for the long haul. There's no such thing as free trade and we can't keep making the US dependant on the rest of the world. Anyone who supports that principal will likely have my vote. Policy over theatrics. (Feel free to disagree with my anti-globalizm sentiment.)

    BTW, keep dreaming of impeachment. It isn't going to happen. I remember yelling and screaming when the tables were flipped (when Obama was in office). The Kavanaugh thing isn't much more than a ploy to drum up votes in the ballot box (both sides, mind you). How do you go about proving a teenage boy groped a girl some umpteen years ago? You can't. Perfect scenario, because no one can be proven wrong and this country becomes a little more divided...exactly where they want us to be.

    And for the record, climate change (the recent hurricane being an example) will only continue to worsen if we keep having all our products made where there is zero environmental regulations. Bringing manufacturing back to the states at least places some level of regulation on the products we buy. Anything less is choosing to be ignorant and hypocritical.

    ...my two cents after skimming through the pages here.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,823
    JamesStock wrote: »
    BTW, keep dreaming of impeachment. It isn't going to happen. How do you go about proving a teenage boy groped a girl some umpteen years ago?

    He can be impeached for simply lying under oath, don't even need to go to the accusations now.
  • Posts: 628
    chrisisall wrote: »
    He can be impeached for simply lying under oath, don't even need to go to the accusations now.

    Why bother? President Clinton was impeached for lying under oath and it ended up being a gigantic waste of money that went nowhere.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited October 2018 Posts: 17,823
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    He can be impeached for simply lying under oath, don't even need to go to the accusations now.

    Why bother? President Clinton was impeached for lying under oath and it ended up being a gigantic waste of money that went nowhere.

    I was referring to impeaching Kavanaugh... Trump will take a bit more work.
  • edited October 2018 Posts: 3,566
    It's also the prerogative of a new administration (after 2020, assuming no impeachment and no Trumpian heart attack or stroke) to simply add more justices to the SC -- or subtract 1 from the current number-- and change the complexion of the court in that way. There's no constitutional requirement for the number of justices; in the 1800s the number varied from 10 to 7 depending on political expediency for the reigning powers in Congress at that time.
  • It's also the prerogative of a new administration (after 2020, assuming no impeachment and no Trumpian heart attack or stroke) to simply add more justices to the SC -- or subtract 1 from the current number-- and change the complexion of the court in that way. There's no constitutional requirement for the number of justices; in the 1800s the number varied from 10 to 7 depending on political expediency for the reigning powers in Congress at that time.

    That's very interesting. I did not know that.
  • Not only that: in 1937, FDR (who was having trouble getting parts of his ambitious New Deal past a recalcitrant Supreme Court) announced plans to increase the Court from 9 to as many as 15 justices, so as to make it easier for his plans to get past the conservative Court. He eventually backed off that plan...and the SC backed off of their opposition to much of the New Deal.

    "Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it." -- George Santayana
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Yes, so we can do our best for impeachment of Kavanaugh and for Trump to leave (under any circumstances) before 2020. At least in 2020, new presidential election, it is highly doubtful he will be re-elected. We simply keep on keeping on, not accepting things that are unacceptable.

    More Supreme Court justices may be added later, yes, and that's a good thing.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,823
    Wow, look how good the economy is now!!! ;)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited October 2018 Posts: 17,823
    JamesStock wrote: »
    I look forward to voting. I'm no Trumpster, but I like the fact that he has the balls to place tariffs that begin to counteract the enormous trade deficits. It'll hurt in the short term and has/will certainly ruffle feathers with allies, but it'll help for the long haul. There's no such thing as free trade and we can't keep making the US dependant on the rest of the world.
    With all due respect, you really don't seem to have any idea how all of this works. Stop watching Fox News, seriously. It's about GDP, and buying power, to put it simply. But it's a lot more complicated than that... no one is more of a threat to a global trade imbalance than a fool who doesn't understand it in the first place, being Trump.
  • edited October 2018 Posts: 7,507
    JamesStock wrote: »
    I look forward to voting. I'm no Trumpster, but I like the fact that he has the balls to place tariffs that begin to counteract the enormous trade deficits. It'll hurt in the short term and has/will certainly ruffle feathers with allies, but it'll help for the long haul. There's no such thing as free trade and we can't keep making the US dependant on the rest of the world. Anyone who supports that principal will likely have my vote. Policy over theatrics. (Feel free to disagree with my anti-globalizm sentiment.)

    BTW, keep dreaming of impeachment. It isn't going to happen. I remember yelling and screaming when the tables were flipped (when Obama was in office). The Kavanaugh thing isn't much more than a ploy to drum up votes in the ballot box (both sides, mind you). How do you go about proving a teenage boy groped a girl some umpteen years ago? You can't. Perfect scenario, because no one can be proven wrong and this country becomes a little more divided...exactly where they want us to be.

    And for the record, climate change (the recent hurricane being an example) will only continue to worsen if we keep having all our products made where there is zero environmental regulations. Bringing manufacturing back to the states at least places some level of regulation on the products we buy. Anything less is choosing to be ignorant and hypocritical.

    ...my two cents after skimming through the pages here.



    Many paradoxes here...

    Lets start with the extraordianary claim that Trump's tarrifs actually help the environment. The US are ranked 2nd in the world on total carbon fuel emissions. To propose that producers in the US will respect climate regulations is absurd. Especially with a president and a senate majority of climate change deniers who invest in coal mine industry...

    Then to the matter of free trade. It is quite fascinating that the US have actively campaigned free market trade for several decades, even to the point of staging military coups and overthrow governments that wouldn't follow your trade policies so you could exploit them. Now when suddenly the market has shifted, there is "no such thing as free trade". If anything it is quite cute...

    Now for your claim that trade tarrifs will benefit America long term: I wonder what is your evidence or basis behind such a claim? There are certainly many economists who would argue with that:

    https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/24571/trade/impact-of-us-tariffs/

    http://review.chicagobooth.edu/economics/2018/article/will-americans-benefit-new-tariffs-steel-and-aluminum

    The big picture here is that China are slowly taking over America's position as the global financial superpower and main exporter. Excluding yourself from the global market isn't likely to help. I wonder how you think ruining trade deals with other potential importers of american products is going to help America long term?

  • Posts: 4,617
    Part of Trump's tactic is to provide very simple solutions to complex issues. Solutions that all voters across the IQ spectrum can understand. "Build a wall" for example. A 2 year old knows what a wall is. It brings politics down to the level of Humpty Dumpty but we have seen that it works.

    The same applies to tarrifs

    Simple, quick solutions are very tempting for certain voters. Especially when they they have lost confidence in profesional politicians who are seen to have failed using more complex/subtle solutions
  • edited October 2018 Posts: 7,507
    patb wrote: »
    Part of Trump's tactic is to provide very simple solutions to complex issues. Solutions that all voters across the IQ spectrum can understand. "Build a wall" for example. A 2 year old knows what a wall is. It brings politics down to the level of Humpty Dumpty but we have seen that it works.

    The same applies to tarrifs

    Simple, quick solutions are very tempting for certain voters. Especially when they they have lost confidence in profesional politicians who are seen to have failed using more complex/subtle solutions


    True. It is also a psychological thing. A complicated world without concrete answers is far more intimidating. Believing in simple, clear cut solutions will always be the more attractive option if one potentially has the intelligence to realize it is in reality not that easy.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,248
    Alfred Pennyworth in THE DARK KNIGHT: "And in their desperation, they turned to a man they didn't fully understand."

    And thus, people voted for the Joker and Bane of our times: Trump and Brexit.
  • I'm a little surprised not to hear any discussion of the assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Koshoggi on this thread. I'd think a bunch of James Bond fans would be all over this topic! Here's a nice link to get y'all started: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/turkey-jamal-khashoggi-footage_us_5bc0945ae4b01a01d689f04e
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Alfred Pennyworth in THE DARK KNIGHT: "And in their desperation, they turned to a man they didn't fully understand."

    And thus, people voted for the Joker and Bane of our times: Trump and Brexit.

    Not to mention Hitler and Satan.
  • patb wrote: »
    Part of Trump's tactic is to provide very simple solutions to complex issues. Solutions that all voters across the IQ spectrum can understand. "Build a wall" for example. A 2 year old knows what a wall is. It brings politics down to the level of Humpty Dumpty but we have seen that it works.

    The same applies to tarrifs

    Simple, quick solutions are very tempting for certain voters. Especially when they they have lost confidence in profesional politicians who are seen to have failed using more complex/subtle solutions
    I couldn't agree more with this. This is exactly what Trump does...simple solutions to complex problems. If the legislature would get to legislating and not worrying how to keep their tenure, perhaps we wouldn't have the caricature we have in office.

    That said, it doesn't mean complex issues can't be tackled with simple solutions. Yes, there are consequences - often times fairly monumental ones - but by doing so you almost give yourself a reset to past decisions that made it complicated in the first place.

    I work in government and I am quite aware of the tangled web that can exist from the culmination of different leadership. The problem I witness is that so often there is relationship building that takes place and it often influences decision making. Exceptions are constantly being made to rules and eventually we end up in a place where regulations erode to the point of creating double standards. Right now, we have leadership that isn't much unlike Trump - simple minded, transactional, and rather autocratic. Despite the gripes some of us have with the tactics, it's also allowed us to really make strides in simplifying procedures and policies that have been plaguing the system for years - and it's not been without making waves. So often, all that was done was bandage the complicated mess with more complications.

    Now I'm not saying there's a simple solution to everything (humanitarian crises, in particular), but so often there are false walls that exist in government that no one seems to desire to break through.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,298
    JamesStock wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    Part of Trump's tactic is to provide very simple solutions to complex issues. Solutions that all voters across the IQ spectrum can understand. "Build a wall" for example. A 2 year old knows what a wall is. It brings politics down to the level of Humpty Dumpty but we have seen that it works.

    The same applies to tarrifs

    Simple, quick solutions are very tempting for certain voters. Especially when they they have lost confidence in profesional politicians who are seen to have failed using more complex/subtle solutions
    I couldn't agree more with this. This is exactly what Trump does...simple solutions to complex problems. If the legislature would get to legislating and not worrying how to keep their tenure, perhaps we wouldn't have the caricature we have in office.

    That said, it doesn't mean complex issues can't be tackled with simple solutions. Yes, there are consequences - often times fairly monumental ones - but by doing so you almost give yourself a reset to past decisions that made it complicated in the first place.

    I work in government and I am quite aware of the tangled web that can exist from the culmination of different leadership. The problem I witness is that so often there is relationship building that takes place and it often influences decision making. Exceptions are constantly being made to rules and eventually we end up in a place where regulations erode to the point of creating double standards. Right now, we have leadership that isn't much unlike Trump - simple minded, transactional, and rather autocratic. Despite the gripes some of us have with the tactics, it's also allowed us to really make strides in simplifying procedures and policies that have been plaguing the system for years - and it's not been without making waves. So often, all that was done was bandage the complicated mess with more complications.

    Now I'm not saying there's a simple solution to everything (humanitarian crises, in particular), but so often there are false walls that exist in government that no one seems to desire to break through.

    I agree with you on your assessment of how government works, as an ex-civil servant and now consultant mainly working for the government. And there's a point to be made about Trump beeing the most 'honest' president in years as FOx recently put it as he really tries to do what he promised. But as so often it's nice to finally 'get things done' the net result may indeed be desastrous, and simply put: at presidential level there are no shortcuts and easy wins. They just don't exist. International trade is a delicate balance, with free trade beeing agressively persued by none other then the USA, which has now turned 180 degrees. That triggers instability, which is deadly for all economies, protected or not. The only reason why the economies are booming is a direct result of the banking crisis: with interest rates this low everybody is lending and spending, with the federal banks printing money/ creating it out of nowhere to keep the momentum going. All in all it's 1928 all over again, this balloon will snap.

    In the meantime Trump is selling out the future, denying theexistence of a global problem that hits the USA the hardest, funnily enough. These storms will increase and with the cheap building techniques of the Southern states many people will die because of it. But Trump goes for the cheap win: more money to his friends in the coal industry, effectively killing the solar-power installation industry at the same time which was a lot larger.

    All in all, it's nice to get things done, sure. But is it worth the price.

    And one more thing: Obama would've gotten far more done had the house and congress been democratic, but that combination hasn't been around for a long time. So it isn't quite the fair comparison at all.
  • Fair assessment @CommanderRoss.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited October 2018 Posts: 12,480
    "Honest" is definitely not the accurate word for Trump. But selling a common phrase, easy description, one size fits all kind of solutions, those are more apt. He is not honest but likes to come across as "one of us" .... so "refreshing" as he is "not a politician." But he is very tainted, involved with organized crime and money laundering for years. So no, "honest" actually does not fit him. His promises were not based on good faith for our Constitution or Bill of Rights. The bigotry he says and promotes, his nudging of "okay" for violence at home as well as by dictators around the world is all there to see. He does, however, do what he can to continue to protect his own interests and all of the big money and/or mob connected interests who put him there. Just being blunt, but that is in enough sources now so it is backed up.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    Yes, @BeatlesSansEarmuffs - and just listen to Trump's own words discussing this murder. As a nation we are too immune to his rhetoric and replies now. It ought to be shocking; it is awful.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,823
    Yes, @BeatlesSansEarmuffs - and just listen to Trump's own words discussing this murder. As a nation we are too immune to his rhetoric and replies now. It ought to be shocking; it is awful.

    Sorry if my response seems trite or too angry here... but...
    SDvlvcW.jpg
  • Posts: 7,507
    "Honest" is definitely not the accurate word for Trump. But selling a common phrase, easy description, one size fits all kind of solutions, those are more apt. He is not honest but likes to come across as "one of us" .... so "refreshing" as he is "not a politician." But he is very tainted, involved with organized crime and money laundering for years. So no, "honest" actually does not fit him. His promises were not based on good faith for our Constitution or Bill of Rights. The bigotry he says and promotes, his nudging of "okay" for violence at home as well as by dictators around the world is all there to see. He does, however, do what he can to continue to protect his own interests and all of the big money and/or mob connected interests who put him there. Just being blunt, but that is in enough sources now so it is backed up.


    I dont think you are being blunt, I think you are being very polite and diplomatic!

    If I was the one who had to comment on a claim that "Trump is honest" or even "the most honest"... well... it would not be pretty...
This discussion has been closed.