Pariah Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 I read an op-ed piece today suggesting that the current Republican agenda is, ironically, a twisted form of Socialism: Socialize costs, privatize profits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 38 minutes ago, Pariah said: I read an op-ed piece today suggesting that the current Republican agenda is, ironically, a twisted form of Socialism: Socialize costs, privatize profits. Oh, I agree. For me, Capitalism died when the banks got bailed out in 2008 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 One hour in the debate, and man, Sanders and Warren are feeling their oats. "I wrote the damn bill" from Sanders and "“You know, I don’t understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the United States just to talk about what we really can’t do and shouldn’t fight for.” From Warren Yes. I realize, I just posted quotes with no context and thus did what annoys me about new organizations- but I'm not a new organization! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 2 hours ago, Pariah said: I read an op-ed piece today suggesting that the current Republican agenda is, ironically, a twisted form of Socialism: “Many people consider the things government does for them to be social progress but they regard the things government does for others as socialism.” ---Earl Warren, jurist (1891-1974) Iuz the Evil, Pariah, wcw43921 and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted August 1, 2019 Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 First Debate night, anyone wanting Warren and Sanders to turn on each other got quite the opposite. The two went back to back like a buddy duo in a martial arts movie beset by enemy ninjas on all sides. And won, I would say.. but I maybe having some cognitive bias there. Warren is looking really on the ball as bold. Second Debate night Gabbard ripped into Harris, and brought up some of the very reasons I'm not crazy about Harris as president. Kamala Harris had power before, she rated success over what I feel is true justice. Ironically, this may have taken some of the teeth out of Kamala's finger pointing at Biden. Biden got it from all sides and.. survived. He performed better than last debate but that's not saying much. Yang didn't get to say much at all, but almost always swung it around to his 1000 dollars a month idea. This is either a feature or a bug, and to his credit, he often looked unwilling to attack Biden or the others. He also had a damn good line about Immigrants getting scapegoated when increased automation has been a real job killer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottishFox Posted August 1, 2019 Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 Having watched Gabbard on the JRE I have to say she's my favorite of the current crop of Democratic candidates. I'm a big fan of her stance on military involvements overseas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted August 1, 2019 Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 Her stance on military involvements overseas is pretty inconsistent. In fact, it's pretty hard to pin down her stance on anything really. She represents my district, so I've been trying to figure that out for a while now. I don't vote for her. Cygnia and Iuz the Evil 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archer Posted August 1, 2019 Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 I find it amusing that Biden was getting attacked over the deportation numbers from the Obama era. The Obama administration changed the reporting standards for what counted as a "deportation" in order to inflate their deportation numbers. Previously "deported" had meant that the person in question went through the system then were expelled from the country only after going through the legal system. The Obama administration changed that in order to also include everyone who was turned back at the border (without actually getting into the country and spending any time here) as being a deportation. At one point when I was doing political blogging during the Obama administration, I got my hands on months of hard government data which showed that if the government was reporting deportations using the same definition as previous administrations that actual deportations had decreased significantly. I mean, Biden can't really stand up on the debate stage and admit that the Obama administration deliberately doctored the numbers in order to escape criticism at the time. But it has to rankle him to take criticism from Democrats when he knows that they know it isn't deserved. Hermit, TrickstaPriest and DShomshak 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted August 1, 2019 Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 1 hour ago, archer said: I find it amusing that Biden was getting attacked over the deportation numbers from the Obama era. The Obama administration changed the reporting standards for what counted as a "deportation" in order to inflate their deportation numbers. Previously "deported" had meant that the person in question went through the system then were expelled from the country only after going through the legal system. The Obama administration changed that in order to also include everyone who was turned back at the border (without actually getting into the country and spending any time here) as being a deportation. I did not know this. The more I know.. 🌈 TrickstaPriest 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted August 1, 2019 Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 Apparently the term "Moscow Mitch" has actually struck a nerve under McConnell's normally resistant and reptilian skin. I am petty enough to delight in this. Ternaugh, Iuz the Evil, Cygnia and 4 others 4 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted August 1, 2019 Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 That is pretty delightful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrickstaPriest Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 4 hours ago, Hermit said: I did not know this. The more I know.. 🌈 Pretty much the reason I read this board I like getting these pieces of contextual information from people. When I feel it's very relevant I'll dig up more on them. ScottishFox 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottishFox Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 I do like the consistency in the Russian election interference narrative. Now, apparently, it is Russian bots that caused the destruction of Kamala Harris by Tulsi Gabbard to trend... pffft. And here I thought it was just a sick burn that drew actual applause when it happened. The DNC is going to have their own Trump moment if they don't improve their game. Politics as usual isn't working for the electorate any more. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/455712-kamalaharrisdestroyed-trending-after-democratic-debate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 Trump promises cure for AIDS and Pediatric cancer coming soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 49 minutes ago, ScottishFox said: I do like the consistency in the Russian election interference narrative. Now, apparently, it is Russian bots that caused the destruction of Kamala Harris by Tulsi Gabbard to trend... pffft. And here I thought it was just a sick burn that drew actual applause when it happened. The DNC is going to have their own Trump moment if they don't improve their game. Politics as usual isn't working for the electorate any more. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/455712-kamalaharrisdestroyed-trending-after-democratic-debate Yeah. I mean, yup, Russian interference IS a thing, but alas, it is in danger of becoming an excuse when it doesn't apply as well. Honestly, it went beyond Burn, whatever you think of Tulsi, she stated what fact checkers later found to be dead on FACTS about Harris' performance while in a position of power. That is germane to someone hoping to be Prez. 8 minutes ago, Starlord said: Trump promises cure for AIDS and Pediatric cancer coming soon Well goodness, this man is a medical genius. He needs to leave the presidency and get t work as Surgeon General! TrickstaPriest and ScottishFox 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranxerox Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 4 hours ago, ScottishFox said: I do like the consistency in the Russian election interference narrative. Now, apparently, it is Russian bots that caused the destruction of Kamala Harris by Tulsi Gabbard to trend... pffft. And here I thought it was just a sick burn that drew actual applause when it happened. The DNC is going to have their own Trump moment if they don't improve their game. Politics as usual isn't working for the electorate any more. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/455712-kamalaharrisdestroyed-trending-after-democratic-debate *Shrug* Something can be a sick burn that gets a fair amount of tweets on its own merits and also get further amplification from bots. It is not cool having the Russians meddle in our elections even if some of the information they spread is the truth. Moreover, Twitter needs to find a way to purge itself of bots, even the advertising. This would make the platform much less harmful, annoying and as a side benefit keep people from hiding behind claims of bots when opinion just doesn't go their way, Cygnia 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 6 minutes ago, Ranxerox said: *Shrug* Something can be a sick burn that gets a fair amount of tweets on its own merits and also get further amplification from bots. It is not cool having the Russians meddle in out elections our elections even if some of the information they spread is the truth. Moreover, Twitter needs to find a way to purge itself of bots, even the advertising. This would make the platform much less harmful, annoying and as a side benefit keep people from hiding behind claims of bots when opinion just doesn't go their way, Oh the screams from corporations everywhere if you take away their advertising bots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DShomshak Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 I have to say, Warren probably lost my primary vote with something that may seem small: her demand for a "no first use of nukes" pledge. First, I don't like litmus-test policy oaths. It's so... Republican. Second, it's either posturing or it's incredibly arrogant. We can't know what the future may bring. It's foolish to imagine there could never be a circumstance in which first use becomes the least bad option. And very often, leaders are forced to choose least-bad options. A fair and honest pledge would be, "My administration's policy would be to not be the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict. [Which, IIRC has been US military policy for long periods -- someone check me on this, please.] But extraordinary events may force policies to change." Not as good a sound bite, though. Dean Shomshak ScottishFox and archer 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottishFox Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 1 minute ago, DShomshak said: I have to say, Warren probably lost my primary vote with something that may seem small: her demand for a "no first use of nukes" pledge. That's an irresponsible pledge. Whoever fires second in a fight involving nukes - loses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archer Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 2 hours ago, Starlord said: Trump promises cure for AIDS and Pediatric cancer coming soon Virtuall everything is "soon" when measured in geological time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 1 hour ago, ScottishFox said: That's an irresponsible pledge. Whoever fires second in a fight involving nukes - loses. Generally speaking, so does whoever fires first. assault, TrickstaPriest, Pariah and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 4 hours ago, DShomshak said: I have to say, Warren probably lost my primary vote with something that may seem small: her demand for a "no first use of nukes" pledge. First, I don't like litmus-test policy oaths. It's so... Republican. Second, it's either posturing or it's incredibly arrogant. We can't know what the future may bring. It's foolish to imagine there could never be a circumstance in which first use becomes the least bad option. And very often, leaders are forced to choose least-bad options. A fair and honest pledge would be, "My administration's policy would be to not be the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict. [Which, IIRC has been US military policy for long periods -- someone check me on this, please.] But extraordinary events may force policies to change." Not as good a sound bite, though. Dean Shomshak Honestly? With so many Americans afraid to go to doctors for fear of being bankrupt for the rest of their lives, with corporations increasingly calling the shots on what form our laws take and damn the rights of real humans if it means profits, and with a planet ecosytem possibly irreversibly harmed for future generations already? I guess a possible piecrust promise made with good intentions doesn't shake me much TrickstaPriest 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDarkness Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 It is posturing. The useful platform is 'we will use nukes if they are on the table by all players has shown to mean no one uses them. Only an idiot it worrying about using them first, because the real goal is not using them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted August 3, 2019 Report Share Posted August 3, 2019 Agreed. "Pledges" aren't legally binding, so politicians don't worry about them outside of their public-relations impact. Only the gullible believe such promises from a politician anymore. Remember, "Read my lips. No new taxes!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archer Posted August 3, 2019 Report Share Posted August 3, 2019 40 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said: Agreed. "Pledges" aren't legally binding, so politicians don't worry about them outside of their public-relations impact. Only the gullible believe such promises from a politician anymore. Remember, "Read my lips. No new taxes!" What he obviously said was "No gnu taxes". Easily my least favorite president of all time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.