Regressives want to ban Justice and Liberty in favor for nannystatism, as like most 12 year olds they require parenting.
Russian ambassador just died in New York under slightly suspicious circumstances. No cause of death so far, other than that his heart suddenly stopped in mid stride. Amb Churkin has no history of heart disease.
I thought all SJWs were spoiled wealthy, elitist, middle-class, Bay Area trustfund babies and all the racist, homophobes and women-harassers were plucky, downtrodden, salt-of-the-earth hardhat-donners?
Get your talking point right, cracker.
>spoiled wealthy, elitist, middle-class, Bay Area trustfund babies
^ these would live with their parents.
In one weekend, Milo went from being a Conservative Wunderkind to being persona non grata — he lost his spot at CPAC, he lost his book deal, and he might lose his spot at Breitbart (several editors have threatened to quit if he is not fired).
Sometimes, there is good in this world.
>^ these would live with their parents.
Wouldn't Trump supporters have to do the same? I mean the reason you hate immigrants is because they "stole your job," not because you're racist, right? So that means you're unemployed, and are either mooching off your parents or the state, or begging on the streets, right?
Republicans can't count, there's your red state education for you.
like all token minority conservatives, Milo is a tool, and the moment that tool stops being useful it is doomed to be thrown away, this outcome shouldn't shock anyone
Milo: "kill and rape and hurt and insult and harass minorities and the weak, it's the punk thing to do"
The right: Haha take that PC people, this is your own fault you know!
Milo: "Man-boy love can be cool if-"
The right: I am, frankly, quite shocked and upset that this fellow would be so cavalier about the strong taking advantage of the weak.
So how's that plan that would defeat ISIS "completely" in 30 days goin', Donald?
Are we not counting weekends?
Clinton would be picking her teeth with the bones of their top brass before E3. Trump got a helicopter destroyed, a little girl and several others killed and the target sent a video laughing at him
You know, watching the flailing, burning Lard Elemental that is this administration struggle to remain functional for even 24 hours at a time on one hand, and MoC alternately flee from and cower at their own town halls, I'm starting to come around to the notion that we can turn this into a net gain.
Would have been nice NOT to have to resort to accelerationism but hey, maybe if SOME bunch of idiots hadn't busted open the primary wars/obstructionism pandora's box we could have stuck to slow but steady bipartisan motions. OH WELLLLLL
Posting in the best politiks thread this place had in months.
Thanks for your concern! Signed a dozen new book deals with pro-pedo leftist publishers.
Not doing so hot huh champ? Ah well, I'm sure you'll find some news cause to sell yourself to, keep trying!
It's cute how /pol/-kun made the new thread as soon as the last one hit 400 because the thought of another Nazi punching OP offends his sensibilities so
Not even /pol/-kun, and did not make this thread, but I am hella glad it triggered you enough to bring out the passive aggressiveness.
>Not even /pol/-kun, and did not make this thread
Of COURSE not buddy, don't worry, we believe you!
Tee hee dumb conservatards believed Trump when he said Sweden is out of contr-
>Still not tired of winning lol.
Never tired of winning, always tired of working (hence why he never does it).
>Sweden is out of contr-
An incident in one district quickly put down by cops is "out of control?"
>Still not tired of winning lol.
How can you get tired of something you never do?
Swede here. Young dudes fucking about with fireworks (those are fireworks) is a returning nuisance no matter their coloration or residential area. There are often disruptions caused by White incels at soccer teams between big teams.
>neighborhoods on fire
>rioters throwing bombs on police
>"its just people having fun guyse!"
Tell me more Mr. Rape Capital of Europe?
We're not the rape capital of anything. We changed the definition of rape in 2005 which had a noticeable effect in crime statistics but there is not a single rightwinger willing to acknowledge that, because they are desperate to cover up their own misogyny and very lukewarm attitude to reducing rape by screaming about Muslims.
Farage sang nazi songs and advocated genocide when he was an adolescent BTW. Humanity needs to eliminate him.
>Still not tired of winning lol.
Remember how he screamed "SEE YOU IN COURT YOU STUPID COURT" but now instead he cucked his own EO down to size to try and push it through again?
My favorite part is it still has a religious test so it's STILL illegal!
>SHE STILL HAS A CHANCE GUYS! NEVER GIVE UP! SAY IT WITH ME - MADAM PRESIDENT!!!
Different country lol.
How wide is your definition of neighborhood... are you including the entire Islamic section of Malmo.
I'm supposed to believe some kids threw a rock so hard that it caused cars to explode and shrapnel to tear through a police officers vest?
We didn't need to build the LHC after all, we could have gotten some Muslim kids to throw rocks at rocks really fast.
Same cars, many shots. It's like a collage illustrating how one car being burned by one brown person turns into seven burned cars in the eyes of pants-wetting White boys. Meanwhile, no one has done a collage of the dozens of refugee homes or islamic centers/mosques being burned or defiled, because only White christian people have any value and deserve to feel any concern in the eyes of nationalists.
Milo resigned so his friends at Breitbart didn't have to face the same death and rape threats their targets usually see. Now we just have to assault any new venue that picks him up with the same pedophilia label.
lol Le Peen got raided by the cops
Patriotic politicians are ALLOWED to be corrupt and have dealigns with hostile foreign countries. As long as you hate muslims you're allowed to be a millionaire cutting into public funds, and still be a real folksy hero.
hey man, she has to comfort herself over the fact she has no partners to bring her above 50% SOMEHOW
You're assuming all the super-left, leftier-than-thou hispters believe in anti-racism, anti-nationalism and anti-corporatist principles enough to vote for Macron and against Le Pen. Not a completely safe bet.
Le Pen's disapproval rating sits at around 70%. Maybe she makes it to the 2nd round. MAYBE. But even if that happens basically everyone is just going to face forward and smash her, whether it's Macron or even Filon (lol).
Alternatively, she doesn't even get to round two and we get to see a real shitshow between Macron and whoever.
>police raids on political parties are acceptable
lol this is why you'll lose support again, and again, and again, and again. And when we finally win we'll have all the tools of oppression you created to keep us down.
Think the police will refuse to raid your political parties when we're in charge? Think anyone will give a fuck about Le Pen doing something Hollande also did?
dog bites man vs man bites dog in long form but it's still an interesting read
>Think anyone will give a fuck about Le Pen doing something Hollande also did?
In your imaginary world where she wins there's no EU funds to pay party members with, and ergo no reason to raid.
We'll find our reasons, as you found yours. Treason is a pretty big one.
>We'll find our reasons, as you found yours.
So you're saying that suspicion of embezzlement is not a VALID reason to investigate people?
Le Pen is allowed to do what she wants but nothing is acceptable to do to her.
If there ever was a crowd that deserves to live under islamists, it's Le Pen's supporters.
>we can break into your party hq if law enforcement has probable cause because any police force in a normal functioning country is not in the habit of ransacking political parties without a damn good reason and documented preceding police work to present as valid justification
Why, I agree completely Anon, how nice to see that you understand basic civics.
>So you're saying that suspicion of treason is not a VALID reason to investigate people?
What treason? You are creating a hypothetical scenario. We are referencing a thing that has factually happened. Le Penn is suspected of embezzlement and under investigation. Are you saying that the charges are fabricated (as you are basically stating that your charges would be)? If so, what is your evidence of this claim, since fabrication of criminal evidence is basically unheard of on the national level of modern France?
Hollande gives 10 billion euro in cash money to foreign states military aid, this is part of public record. All he has on LePen is a claim (PROVEN FALSE) that she used tax money to hire a bodyguard to protect her from Hollandes thugs.
Pretty fucking sure a police officer can make a better case for treason against Hollande, than misappropriation of public funds for Le Pen.
Funding groups that want to destroy the country. Subsidizing the exportation of employment to other countries. Subsidizing importation of labor from other countries. Getting the country involved in unnecessary wars on behalf of foreign countries. Paying trillions to business interests.
There's any number of reasons to fucking EXECUTE you motherfuckers.
To clarify the claim is that she didn't hire the bodyguard, but used the money elsewhere. When she clearly did.
The charges are completely fabricated by OLAF, an EU investigative service.
>Hollande gives 10 billion euro in cash money to foreign states military aid, this is part of public record.
Which isn't a crime.
> All he
Yeah gonna stop you right there. There's no "he." This is not a grand Socialist conspiracy, this is a (fairly routine, actually) criminal investigation in France, a country with a nice, independent judiciary. She is under investigation for using EU funds to pay the employees of her national political party. Her HQ, which would be relevant to any such investigation, has been searched per probable cause. If sufficient evidence is brought to light following an investigation, she'll be able to contest in court as is her right.
Proven where? By what? Provide your sources and the documentation, as well as the court cases they were presented in.
>Pretty fucking sure a police officer can make a better case for treason against Hollande, than misappropriation of public funds for Le Pen.
Really? Treason's quite the specific claim. For your edifictaiton:
"Article 411-1 of the French Penal Code defines treason as follows:
The acts defined by articles 411-2 to 411-11 constitute treason where they are committed by a French national or a soldier in the service of France, and constitute espionage where they are committed by any other person.
Article 411-2 prohibits "handing over troops belonging to the French armed forces, or all or part of the national territory, to a foreign power, to a foreign organisation or to an organisation under foreign control, or to their agents". It is punishable by life imprisonment and a fine of €750,000. Generally parole is not available until 18 years of a life sentence have elapsed.
Articles 411-3 to 411-10 define various other crimes of collaboration with the enemy, sabotage, and the like. These are punishable with imprisonment for between thirty and seven years. Article 411-11 make it a crime to incite any of the above crimes.
Besides treason and espionage, there are many other crimes dealing with national security, insurrection, terrorism and so on. These are all to be found in Book IV of the code."
>Funding groups that want to destroy the country. Subsidizing the exportation of employment to other countries. Subsidizing importation of labor from other countries. Getting the country involved in unnecessary wars on behalf of foreign countries. Paying trillions to business interests.
So there's a lot of problems with this. You have no evidence cited for any of these, several of these aren't crimes at all, one sounds like you being mad about France upholding its own treaty obligations, etc, etc. And of course, only the first has any relation to treason, terrorism, etc, and lo, it's the one which you could least credibly make a case for as it stands. If you want to be bringing people in for treason anon, you should really learn a thing or two about how law, crime, courts, etc work. And of course, even if you did somehow bring someone in (we'll say Hollande for the sake of it) on treason charges AND got those charges upheld in the courts, you'd still have one other problem:
>There's any number of reasons to fucking EXECUTE you motherfuckers.
France doesn't have the death penalty, silly American.
>Which isn't a crime.
It's treason. A historically unpunished crime is still a crime.
>This is not a grand Socialist conspiracy, this is a (fairly routine, actually) criminal investigation in France, a country with a nice, independent judiciary.
lol then why did the investigation happen by an EU body which then ordered French cops to raid FN headquarters? Yet another point for treason by the way, literally what you posted:
>handing over troops belonging to the French armed forces, or all or part of the national territory, to a foreign power, to a foreign organisation or to an organisation under foreign control, or to their agents
Thanks for proving my point.
>France doesn't have the death penalty, silly American.
Le Pen has promised to re-institute it.
You are free to respond properly at any time, rather than this ideological silliness that contradicts itself. Until you take debate seriously, I'm afraid you won't be treated seriously either.
>Le Pen has promised to re-institute it.
Le Pen can promise to change rain into chocolate syrup, a promise does not a constitutional amendment make.
He's going full cumskin guys. Notify his high school.
Also, Bayrou is saying he wants to ally with Macron, so that's another split in the non-FN block mostly sealed up.
>Le Pen denounced the latest move in a financial sleaze case that has landed her in the spotlight alongside another leading candidate, Francois Fillon, a right-winger being investigated over public funds he paid to his wife and children.
lol I'm sure this is completely aboveboard.
It's just a coincidence guys!
>lol I'm sure this is completely aboveboard.
>It's just a coincidence guys!
If it isn't, dispute it in court.
Yeah it's not as if nationalists, believing they are entitled to do absolutely whatever they want because they are the select few that can save their nations from gay rights and halal meat and their supporters always back them no matter what, are prone to corruption.
They legit think the rest of society and its norms are a degenerated, obsolete enemy that needs to be brought to heel. They have no scruples.
Also, Le Pen's defense is that the misused money did not come from "the people" but from (((the banks))). Okay you toothless-looking bloodhound-eyed fucking hag.
First, if you're poor, half the time it's because you are a lazy coward.
Second, yes, universal healthcare is a good idea. But, actually making it work is another thing.
>half the time it's because you are a lazy coward.
So what you're saying is you were born into money and don't have the mental competence to imagine anyone else growing up in different conditions.
In the 1st world, you often can elevate yourself from the conditions you were born into, but many chose to not even try.
>In the 1st world, you often can elevate yourself from the conditions you were born into
Ah, so you weren't just born into wealth, you're a baby boomer who was born into wealth then.
The possibility is there. That does not mean the probability is there.
>Half the time
Holy shit, a full 50% of poverty cases are due to lack of self-motivation? That's incredible! Can I see the research paper you got this from? It sounds like some groundbreaking shit!
He got it from the prestigious scientific journal "Things Are Okay For Me, Therefore Anyone Who Hasn't Been As Lucky Is Just Lazy."
Actually it's closer to 100%.
Four things you have to do in America to not stay poor are:
1. Don't get pregnant before marriage.
2. Finish high school.
3. Get a job.
4. Don't commit a crime.
These are fully personal choices of every individual, there is no one keeping you down but yourself.
It turns out that dumb misnomers like the "war on poverty" actually prevents people from escaping poverty.
Nope. If the war on poverty didn't help no republican would bother hating it. A republican wanting something good and functional gone is like friction between surfaces creating heat energy. Physical law.
Also high school does not lift you out of poverty if you need any decent health care coverage at any point. Jobs that don't require college degrees almost only exist in more expensive cities, which means high fixed costs.
No no no boss, that's not what I was asking for. I was asking for the research paper you found that it. You know, the peer reviewed one? The one which cited a wide variety of different sources and studies, and which showed causation, not just correlation? You must have it, right?
But jobs that only require a high school education to hire you are rare and getting rarer, and because they have more applicants than positions to fill they can pay less than the job is worth and still get all the labor they need. Where does getting underpaid in a dwindling job market result in improved economic conditions?
This is one of those "How much could a banana cost? $20?" Situations. People like you who have never had to work for anything don't know anything about real world economics. All you have is contempt for people who weren't born as lucky as you for daring to remind you by their very existence that nothing you have attained is your own doing.
A person can accomplish all four of those things and still be left out in the cold through no fault of their own. Life is not fair.
Your entire way of thinking is predicated on the idea of "hard work" and "personal responsibility". Neither of those things account for things like systemic discrimination, towns destroyed by the loss of their major industry (e.g., "coal mine towns"), and the lack of rising wages for non-executives over the past few decades. You fail to consider all the discrete-yet-significant factors — including the wealth, or lack thereof, of the family a person is born into — that weigh upon a person's ability to pull themselves out of poverty.
Do some people avoid trying to find work because they are lazy? Absolutely. But some people cannot find work because they are not trained to work in an increasingly service-based economy. Some people cannot find work because of medical or psychological conditions. And some people cannot find work because they live in places where even "entry-level" jobs are sparse. All you see is "laziness" and "wanting to mooch off of the government", though. You have contempt for those who do not try, but spread your contempt even to those that do because they are not trying "hard enough".
People should not be held responsible for factors outside of their control that keep them in poverty and unemployment. If you have a good reason why they should, by all means, share it.
>creating heat energy.
Energy is neither created nor destroyed.
Republicans also want to help people, they just realize that GIVING A MAN A FISH is a fucking dumb way of doing it.that has never worked.
tl;dr You're an idiot.
>A person can accomplish all four of those things and still be left out in the cold through no fault of their own. Life is not fair.
Sure, but that only happens to a negligible portion of unlucky individuals. And its those people that welfare should be aimed at, not the 90% who are poor because no one educated them to obey those 4 things and enter the middle class.
>jobs that only require a high school education to hire you are rare and getting rarer
Which is the fault of politicians like the Clintons for signing FTAs and exporting jobs to Mexico and China. Allowing millions of illegal immigrants into the country isn't helping the job balance either.
All I have are statistics and in depth multi-decade studies proving my point. All YOU have is contempt for everyone who thinks your retarded policies hurt people.
>Republicans also want to help people, they just realize that GIVING A MAN A FISH is a fucking dumb way of doing it.
Too bad Republicans have yet to realize that tossing a guy a stick and some line, then saying "FIGURE IT OUT YOURSELF", does not teach a man how to fish.
>that only happens to a negligible portion of unlucky individuals
And everyone else who happens to get fucked by an economic downturn or somesuch — what, do they not deserve help? Do they all just need to make GoFundMe pages or some shit?
You don't have statistics or multi decade studies.
>Republicans also want to help people
NOPE. I'm going to summarize the last three centuries for you.
The left: The strong should not harm the weak. Laws are meant to prevent this.
The right (libertarians belong here): The strong may harm the weak at will. Laws preventing this must be removed.
The Christian right focuses on making it easier to hurt LGBT Americans, women and Muslims.
The alt-right focuses opportunistically and without any real priority except for Muslims, trans people and feminists.
Libertarians focus on making it easy to hurt and exploit the poor, consumers, targets of hate campaigns, the environment and the capital-deprived.
The left is trying to stop all of them.
Anyone trying to make it more complicated than that has huffed their own jenkem a bit too often.
>Which is the fault of politicians like the Clintons for signing FTAs and exporting jobs to Mexico and China
WRONG. 80-90 % of all job and wage losses are due to technology. Trade is a small part, illegal labor a negligible part.
>tossing a guy a stick and some line, then saying "FIGURE IT OUT YOURSELF", does not teach a man how to fish.
It's a good thing no one is doing that, you disingenuous fuck.
>LIMITS TO REALITY? WHAT? WHY? WHOA! WHAT?
The fuck is wrong with you.
Linked them. Link yours or get the fuck out.
>The right (libertarians belong here): The strong should not harm the weak. An armed populace prevents this.
Notice how we recognize the problems exist, and want to solve them, we just have different solutions. Our solutions just happen to work, your solutions fucking don't. Ever. And you never have any proof of them working you just keep fucking with people and thinking you can make them better.
When Republicans are in power, the economy nose dives, the debt balloons like crazy, crime increases, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and civil rights are eroded. In what sense do your solutions "work?"
>It's a good thing no one is doing that, you disingenuous fuck.
No, they are. That is the entire philosophy of the Republican Party: "Fuck you, I got mine, now you poor fucks figure out how to get yours - and do it on your own, because you have to take the goddamned responsibility for that." I mean, fuck, several of Trump's appointees see nothing wrong with wanting to deconstruct or completely eradicate the government agencies that they run. (Betsy "Fuck Public Schools" DeVos even said she would have no problem with the Department of Education being shut down.)
>Our solutions just happen to work
How did those "solutions" work in, say, 2008?
I mean it does what they want, you have to admit.
>Notice how we recognize the problems exist, and want to solve them, we just have different solutions. Our solutions just happen to work
First of all, guns dispersed in the civilian population do not protect from tyrants or foreign invaders, so go fuck your own mother.
What it does allow for is genocide, civil war, tribal warfare and fascist coups of democratically elected governments. One day, when a democratically elected left-wing president tries to do something constitutional, the subhumans will use the second amendnment to start a revolt to prevent it.
>White House requested the FBI to knock down recent Trump-Russia stories, the FBI said no
Wasn't there a republican who had to resign after trying to interfere with the DOJ's independence in the context of an investigation?
THIS is a moment where the second amendment might come in handy, but sadly people that care about the rule of law and the country are not the ones buying guns.
>When Republicans are in power
It's almost like you have no knowledge of how reality works. Do you think the world is a video game, and Republicans can just change reality the moment the election is over?
Every time a democrat enters power it takes time for his shitty policies to be implemented and time for them to do damage, this is then felt later.
Clinton signed away the economic protections of the Great Depression designed to prevent money lending banks from engaging in investment. And it took until 2008 for this to cause a credit crisis.
The damage Obama did will be felt for decades to come.
>Betsy "Fuck Public Schools" DeVos even said she would have no problem with the Department of Education being shut down
The DOE has about as much to do with education as the Ministry of Truth has to do with truth. It is a giant money laundering ring for tax funds.
But hey if you disagree, just prove this picture wrong.
BTW that growth in employees is not a growth in teachers, it's a growth in administrative and support staff. As in paper shufflers that live off the government dime and contribute jack shit to education.
>Every time a democrat enters power it takes time for his shitty policies to be implemented and time for them to do damage, this is then felt later.
Wrong again - even when accounting for lags, democrats are better at almost everythng all the time, because their consituents have better minds and a more developed, less stagnant culture, leading to better policies. Look at Mississippi, Wisconsin and Kansas.
Or compare infantile movies like "God is NOT dead" or "Left Behind" with even the worst lefty mass-market dross. Leftist and urban culture is superior, and this is reflected in who they elect. Obama is the 10th-12th best president of all time and a true American and charming man that amazed and delighted people the world over every weel.
White rurals elected a rapist with two Habsburgian sons, a lying illegal immigrant object for a wife and a White House full of people doign White Power-signs and saying wives can't be raped by men they are married to.
You are our problem, we are your benefactors. We have you because we refused to let Tecumseh burn and salt the south and were too stupid to give all the freed slaves your guns and a swathe of your territory. All of the US' problems comes from excessive mercy towards the confederates and insufficient reparations towards the slaves. This is not surprising, since the US was founded by slave owners infected with Anglo-Saxon liberalism, which has always been a White boy's ideology.
I refuse to believe an Asian can be this retarded.
Alan Greenspan: a Randian zealot.
>BTW that growth in employees is not a growth in teachers, it's a growth in administrative and support staff. As in paper shufflers that live off the government dime and contribute jack shit to education.
So let's have the teachers do all that for the same wage! That won't make the teaching worse!
I refuse to believe an Asian can be this retarded.
Christ, and people say I can be condescending.
So the GOP, the people who come up with solutions that work, on the same day all support:
-Using "states' rights" to revoke bathroom access for trans kids, because that solves some kind of problem
-Telling Colorado that it's time to stop the whole "legal marijuana thing" that has LOWERED usage AND brought in billions, because states' rights is NOT a thing
-Announced a stay on the closing of private federal prisons, so there is a place to put all the black men caught with marijuana in, because THAT solves a problem
And this is why next time there is a Sandy Hook I pray all the kids have republican parents. Because not a single Trump voter deserves to have any dopamine or serotonin in their bodies for the rest of their lives.
I mean let's be fair here--we're pretending like this guy is arguing from a legitimate and well-meaning place, but his "We're trying to solve problems and give people guns to protect them from bigotry" is coming from someone who votes the same way as Genocide-endorser Richard Spencer.
Exactly, they are ready to let people die to get smaller taxes and stick it to all the people whose Tumblr posts made them annoyed, so why don't we just walk on by next time we see a Trump supporter lie bleeding in the street, or turn them away if they need someone to watch their kids so they can go do something important?
We should also try to make blue states pay less into federal programs and focus on the poor in blue states, who are far more deserving. Poor people in red states, at least the White ones, don't vote or vote to hurt poor people.
I stopped giving money to charities that don't focus on "urban" (black) youths and LGBT youths. If I give money for just the poor I might end up keeping republicans alive.
At this point, I have to believe you are /pol/-kun trying to play us like a damn fiddle.
Nope. I don't plan on killing any republicans but I want to make sure I don't help them live.
Hiding tax returns. Burying Flynn-Kislyak ties. Now, pressuring FBI for political cover. None of the people that screamed at Clinton care about this because they do not have principles or even functioning, coherent ideologies.
>Witnesses say man shouted "get out of my country" before killing one man and injuring two at Kansas bar.
Thanks to republicans, who destroyed wage growth and prevented job creation, then blamed it on non-Whites.
He's obviously SOME sort of troll, but he's so over the top that he's easier to ignore than pk.
A troll is someone changing their opinions or presentation thereof to create a response. I am expressing my feelings exactly the way I intended.
Comment repair initiated:
>-Using "states' rights" to grant bathroom access for trans kids.
>-Smoking weed is not a constitutional right, anymore than smoking cigarettes is. Get over it you petulant child. Also being thrown in prison over weed isn't a problem, weed arrests are 45% of drug arrests despite weed being 65% of drug use. If anything its under-prosecuted, you moron.
>-Announced a stay on the closing of private federal prisons because wtf do you do if you close a private prison? Where do you put the people? If you're going to close private prisons, first you need to secure funding for state prisons, then construct them. Which takes time.
You're welcome for the shitty comment repair.
>And this is why next time there is a Sandy Hook I pray all the kids have republican parents.
Hardly likely as Sandy Hook, like most mass shootings, was in a liberal approved Gun Free Zone. Not that you care about getting your own kids killed.
>coming from someone who votes the same way as Genocide-endorser Weatherman Underground
GG NO RE
>Where do you put the people?
Considering most of them are non-criminals on trumped up charges and unnecessary laws created purely to get more black people in private prisons where they can be forced into cheap labor and kept in the school-prison pipeline, why not just fucking release them?
A.T.F. Filled Secret Bank Account With Millions From Shadowy Cigarette Sales
This is what happens when liberals think government is angelic.
Probably why they choked that black dude, he was cutting in on their action.
When will these leftists fags learn government isn't to be trusted? Even their hippie parents understood it.
>Also being thrown in prison over weed isn't a problem
I can smell how little your mother has worked in her life just from this sentence.
This is the 'voted most likely to die in an ATV accident' of comments.
>most of them are non-criminals
Provide some evidence. I'm not going to take such a ridiculous claim on faith, you're basically saying USA has Soviet-tier political prisoners.
>unnecessary laws created purely to get more black people in private prisons
You mean the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act? Google it, click the wiki link, look into the right infobox and scroll to the bottom of it.
I've always wondered how a person capable of putting roofies in a girl's drink and then raping her talks.
I can smell how ruined your job prospects are, pothead.
This is the 'voted most likely to die in a gun free zone' of comments.
>Thinking using marijuana charges as an excuse to continue the slave trade in a socially acceptable way is evil and dishonest makes you a pothead.
>Votes the same way as Weatherman Underground
Given that the Weatherman Underground has not existed any of the years I have been on this planet, I can assure you that we have never voted the same way.
A reminder of what anti-marijuana legislation is really about, since we're on the subject and since Trump's about to take away the states' rights to choose whether or not to prosecute it:
>gun-free zones are scary
People who do mass-shootings don't care about whether people around might have guns. Guess what, most gun owners are mainly interested in saving a White woman from a swarthy attacker and finally being allowed to procreate as a reward.
>Ew pot is of the devil sXe
>Ew rap music
>Ew premarital sex
Hey Mike Huckabee Jr. can you get a boner without watching a dog die from hanging yet?
>weed arrests are 45% of drug arrests despite weed being 65% of drug use.
Now break that down along racial lines. What percentage of white people use pot? What percentage of black people use pot? What percentage of white people are prosecuted for having pot? What percentage of black people are prosecuted for having pot?
As I saw it put on Twitter: "We can't have background checks on guns because criminals don't obey laws," say the people who think sexual predators obey bathroom signs.
>slave trade in a socially acceptable way
If you want to talk about immigration, we can talk about immigration.
lol you're ignoring Ayers saying he'd vote for Hillary?
>People who do mass-shootings don't care about whether people around might have guns.
You basing this on anything or just general out of ass opinion?
Name ten mass shootings with a kill count over 3 not in a gun free zone.
You mean the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. Google it, click the wiki link, look into the right infobox and scroll to the bottom of it.
>What percentage of white people are prosecuted for having pot? What percentage of black people are prosecuted for having pot?
What percentage of those pot smokers have secondary crimes they're wanted on? Most possession charges don't happen because a cop is looking for pot, they result because a prosecutor wants additional counts/convictions to extend a sentence for something else.
We have background checks on guns, 255 million background checks since the program started in 1998.
It's a liberal fantasy that we don't have background checks, because once a problem is solved you idiots have to invent problems to feel good about yourself. I bet you don't even feel embarrassed for believing such nonsense.
>It's a liberal fantasy that we don't have background checks
And conservatives think background checks are worthless because gun violence happens anyway. They also think that America needs more guns so civilians can stop crime by shooting people who are committing crimes. The solution to gun violence, in the eyes of conservatives (and the NRA), is not stricter gun control - it is getting more guns on the streets and empowering people to play vigilante.
>lol you're ignoring Ayers saying he'd vote for Hillary?
Hard to ignore something that I've never even heard about. There's this weird false equivalence thing where conservatives think that the "liberal equivalent" of their shit is actually equivalent. Like thinking Soros is the equivalent of the Koch brothers because "they're both rich campaign contributors." The fact that Soros has pretty much no influence on the Left while the Kochs control ALEC and founded the Tea Party doesn't seem relevant to conservatives. Same thing with this Weather Underground shit you're trying to pull now. An organization that's been defunct for 40 years and has no influence on the left, and you expect us to answer for their actions, while you avoid answering for the actions of the founder of the alt-right movement that more or less controls the party now.
lol good job "faux" news
It's weird how all the nationalists have no problem letting their countries become dependent on and exposed to nationalists in other nations.
Any European country that cares about itself should make it illegal for anyone involved in any kind of politics to have financial times to Russia, for starters.
>Laughing my ass off. Why don't you go wave an anti-Trump or pro-Hillary placard with yellow background and black text made by a Soros owned ad-agency.
I wouldn't even know where to get one. Because, again, Soros has very little influence on the left. He's far more well known by people on the right than people on the left, because he's a boogeyman, and a convenient hate-sink so y'all can pretend "Both sides are exactly the same, so vote Republican."
>It's weird how all the nationalists have no problem letting their countries become dependent on and exposed to nationalists in other nations.
As always, party before country.
>witches are trying to stop Trump with spells RIGHT NOW
And yet when Christian Fundamentalists were praying against Obama, you had nothing to say.
To be fair, /pol/-kun is probably thrilled that Republicans want to repeal the Johnson Amendment and let churches become extra tax-free arms of political campaigns, so of course he has nothing to say about Christian fundamentalists.
You can get one at any anti-Trump riot. It's so common it's a stock image by now.
Christianity practically invented civil rights and immigration, because "we're all equal under the lord" bullcrap. Also before 1990s all of the speech policing came from that arena.
So no thanks.
Religion is best taken in small doses.
So wait, people getting signs that they want to wave but that are paid for by others (whoever it is) is the same as being paid to protest?
Wait no, it is not. Again, anyone whining about Soros is obviously inbred.
When that happened, I did not know and did not care.
Petition for White trash scared of refugees to all stop being just as homophobic, misogynist, theocratic, hateful, antisocial, violent, radical, fascist, censorious, intolerant, inbred, uneducated and generally deserving of death as they claim refugees are.
You do realise that epitome White trash, aqnd even White people aren't the only people who oppose Muslim refugees?
Banning people based on their religion is as antithetical to the West as Shari'a law, and if you don't see that YOU ARE WHITE TRASH.
I have not seen this many buzzwords in a single post for some time.
It actually pays quite well.
Prove you aren't a racist by taking some migrants into YOUR house, anonymous poster. Take pics with timestamp by next week, otherwise you're omophobic, misogynist, theocratic, hateful, antisocial, violent, radical, fascist, censorious, intolerant, inbred, uneducated and generally deserving of death.
Ol' 45 plans to bail on the White House Correspondent's Dinner.
You would think that he would attend it, given how he loves to attack the media. (And how Obama took potshots at Trump during one of those events, thus setting in motion a chain of events that led to where we are now.)
>Banning people based on their religion
Something like 90% of muslim world is unaffected by the extra questions at the airport.
You've managed to turn an interview at an airport, for people from wartorn countries with no felon tracking system, into a BAN on an entire RELIGION. You're an idiot.
And that last part is me being charitable.
I've had so many White kill-worthy insects try to push me into a corner with this shit.
Why should I let immigrants into my domicile when I'm not telling anyone else to do that?
Fuck, I wouldn't invite Tyra Banks to live in my domicile. Would be crowded.
Try again, vermin.
I don't follow your--for want of a better word--"logic."
I was retorting against a "tu quoque" fallcy in the first place. Next to shitty analogous arguments ("banning pro-pedophilia transphobes from speaking at Berkeley = censorship"), tu quoque is a rightwinger troll's main approach.
The idea, according to people that probably sit in church and do those retarded hand gestures every Sunday, is that if you support immigration into your country, then obviously you think immigrants are so cool you want an immigrant in your home!
Except, my country is not my home. Not your home either. Asking your country to take in refugees is not the same as demanding your countrymen take in refugees into *their* homes. That was never on the table.
>Why should I let immigrants into my domicile
RACIST SCUM DETECTED!!!
Why should the entire nation pay for your opinions? Pay for them yourself, you little bitch.
Okay stop taking abortion away from women who like abortion just because you dislike abortion.
(Seriously though you're the reason god invented fibromyalgia)
This is horrible, even when taking into account the standard level of +/pol/ discourse.
Y'all go take a timeout or something.
Sorry, that was actually targeted at the person saying that if you support the sheltering of refugees that you are obligated to let strangers live in your house. I clicked the wrong post when I made my reply. I got your logic. it's the "logic" of the person who thinks that saying that engaging in the same policy of harboring refugees from war-torn nations that pretty much all of the western world engages in was somehow equivalent to forced quartering.
Strikes me as the same sort of "logic" where an anti-feminist's first response to a feminist is that "I should be able to punch women in the face" because "equality" when it's not legal to punch men in the face, either.
The only person who knows that for sure is your mom.
Reminder that a man without a single redeeming quality who has failed at every single thing in his life and is not qualified for anything became the most powerful man in the world because the people doing the job interview and the hiring had the same gonads and ethnicity as him.
Once everyone that is stupid enough to think racism and sexism aren't important factors have been eradicated by their own stupidity, Trump will be seen as the zenith and beginning of the end for the age of White Judeo-Christian men.
I've heard a pretty interesting hypothesis recently that Trump's incompetence is *why* he got elected. He's attained massive popularity among 4chan's self-professed "betas" because he is the ultimate Beta Power Fantasy: an ugly, self-centered man with no social skills nor any other useful skills of any kind, who fucks up at everything he does and has contempt for every other living person, and is massively rewarded for it. He's what every person on 4chan who dubs themselves "betas" dreams of being.
>he is the ultimate Beta Power Fantasy: an ugly, self-centered man with no social skills nor any other useful skills of any kind, who fucks up at everything he does and has contempt for every other living person...................
Be careful not to project too much, the light bulb might explode.
>the rest of us just don't want our tax money being used for elective surgery
how convenient that it's not
>Taxpayers paying for abortions
Oops, doesn't happen. Which is why the superior Americans in blue states end up paying for all the teenage pregnacies and many related problems in the subhuman red states.
Thank god for opioid epidemics, tornadoes and dust bowls.
Tax money does not pay for abortions. That is written into federal law.
Maybe turning off AdBlock wasn't such a good idea...
aaaaaaaaand the attorney general perjured himself
how many cabinet members that lied under oath are we up to now, i'm losing track
The way evil turns in upon itself in this administration comes off like a slightly hacky fantasy novel, in all honesty.
Even Do Nothing Chaffetz is now asking for, at minimum, recusal.
Is the thing that finally removes Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III from Washington seriously going to be getting promoted?
He's recused himself.
Except the AG can't commit perjury and not resign.
too much news
Speaking of emails:
The real shock is that he was STILL using AOL(?!).
Pruit has also been outed for private email servers
>posting ITT as a precaution
Can a cross-religion romantic relationship really work? Do any of you know of one?
I would assume (for example) that most Christians in a relationship with a non-Christian would not be content with their partner going to hell after life, and would therefore be very tempted to try and convert their partner or leave them. Similarly, I assume other religious people (and also many convinced athiests) would act the same way. And I guess if they didnt care that much, then the relationship probably lacks strength anyway.
There are a lot of examples of people dating people who have different religions from their own. It's especially necessary for members of religions that represent a minority of the population.
Also, remember that most religions don't condemn everyone who doesn't follow them to eternal torment for it. That's largely a Christian conceit (most religions don't even have a concept of hell), and one that even many Christian denominations (such as Catholicism, thanks to a recent papal edict) reject.
Evangelism also isn't a universal feature of religions, and is again much more a Christian conceit than a universal feature of religions.
Those are good points. Being raised in an Anglican Christian community with some Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses in the mix, I made the unsubstantiated assumption that most other wide-spread religions had similar evangelism and believed in punishment to those who don't believe in their religion. Thank you for correcting me.
Also, I never heard of the papal edict you refer to (I don't often keep up with Vatican news), but trying to find it I saw a Pope Francis quote from 2013 that supports it:
>"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone!"
>There is a famous story told in Chassidic literature that addresses this very question. The Master teaches the student that God created everything in the world to be appreciated, since everything is here to teach us a lesson.
>One clever student asks “What lesson can we learn from atheists? Why did God create them?”
>The Master responds “God created atheists to teach us the most important lesson of them all — the lesson of true compassion. You see, when an atheist performs an act of charity, visits someone who is sick, helps someone in need, and cares for the world, he is not doing so because of some religious teaching. He does not believe that God commanded him to perform this act. In fact, he does not believe in God at all, so his acts are based on an inner sense of morality. And look at the kindness he can bestow upon others simply because he feels it to be right.”
>"This means," the Master continued "that when someone reaches out to you for help, you should never say ‘I pray that God will help you.’ Instead for the moment, you should become an atheist, imagine that there is no God who can help, and say ‘I will help you.’"
Source: "Tales of the Hasidim, Vol. 2: The Later Masters" [Martin Buber, Olga Marx]
>That's largely a Christian conceit
............... and muslim.
Islam inherited it from Christianity
That's actually a good point.
Still, anon's post was political, and not historical.
The White House is now telling Comey that he needs to stop pointing out that Obama did not ask anyone to wiretap Trump or his campaign headquarters.
This is probably just a brilliant tactical move rather than a high crime that would have any non-republican out of office in a heartbeat.
Well, if the GOP is going to focus on legislating women's reproductive systems…
It is doing no such thing.
Right, because it is always Democrats who are defunding Planned Parenthood, passing TRAP laws, forcing abstinence-only education onto schools, and talking about things like "legitimate rape" and how a woman's body can "shut down" during rape to prevent her from getting pregnant. Yup, always the Democrats.
Wow, you know so many things. You're prolly smart.
Just because you don't pay attention to issues that don't affect you doesn't mean they don't exist, chum.
In LGBT news, Joseph Nicolosi — the modern father of "conversion therapy" — has passed away. So hey, one less fucktarded asshole in the world.
Context-free links to youtube videos is a sign that whatever your opinion is, it comes from a position of idiocy.
>I am afraid to watch a 2 minute video because it will warp my fragile little mind
>I have my opinions fed to me by right wing nerds on Youtube and expect everyone else to do the same.
>The Guardian is right wing nerds on YouTube
2 The BASED Griffon tells it like it is regarding transgender bathrooms:
Wouldn't know, I don't watch internet goblins' political rant youtube channels. My time is actually valuable.
2 is still a thing? HOW?! …oh right, he still appeals to disaffected assholes.
>Spending 20 seconds to a minute during breaks on an imageboard is the same thing as watching strangers rant about how unfair it is that not enough women want to touch their wieners on Youtube.
You have not watched the video, haven't you?
Nobody cares about the video you posted.
No. We haven't. None of us have.
I think you should tell that to him personally.
Gays like 2 and Milo is why god invented anal fissures. And leftists like Michael Tracey is why he created the Pinkertons.
A hairy rust-belt fetischist from the Young Turks who hates Clinton, thinks the left cares too much about "SJWs" and deems anyone that thinks something is amiss about the deep connections between Trump and Russia as a fan of Henry Kissinger. So, basically about as useful to left-wing causes as Jill Stein.
>Debating gender: what if Donald Trump was a woman?
Then she'd basically be Agatha Trunchbull minus the gold medal in hammer throws?
>someone actually watched it
Thank you for not being paranoid, anon.
And if you had supplied that context in the first fucking place, maybe other people here would have watched it.
I forgot you cannot just click the link and see what it is. This place does not have this function, sadly.
I forgot you cannot just type a few words and add context to your link. Your brain does not have this function, sadly.
Donald Trump, now in manga!
(In his defense the in-universe justification for why he's become the president in the first place is that a meteor is coming to destroy Earth and he wanted to die on top of the world.)
And in an anime airing this season. Akibastrip episode 9 to be precise.
The best name for Republican healthcare is Wealthcare.
Welp. If Trump had a distaste for Hawaii before, he is really gonna hate the fuck out of that particular state now.
He got two hours late to a Nashville rally because he stomped around in an infantile paroxysm after his travel ban got spited again. His staffers had to cheer him up. How much do you have to hate yourself to work for this administration?
Some intern in the social media department gave their job for this tweet: https://twitter.com/MintRoyale/status/842372139185537024
The Trump regime wants to eliminate the budget for things such as Meals on Wheels, after-school programs, and PBS because they do not “get results”.
Everyone in his regime, up to Ol’ 45 himself, is a heartless sociopath. That is the only explanation I have for shit like this.
I don't know who you think I am, but actually I am a different anon. I just came in to say
>cr....... you get the idea (hopefully)
Well, if there were anything that might be seen as YouTube fucking itself over (in re: >>414240), this could be it: http://gizmodo.com/youtubes-restricted-mode-is-hiding-some-lgbt-content-1793382337
Their tone-deaf response is not much better: https://twitter.com/YTCreators/status/843613347367079937
I'll be the devil's advocate here and say that some #ButNotAll lgbtq individuals are all for promoting their culture to young and easily impressionable children.
And that is kind of sort of bad.
I suggest making such videos 13+ only.
What do you mean by both “promoting” and “culture”?
Convincing small children (as opposed to older ones) that they are probably all not straight! Cause, as we all know being straight is just a cultural construct we need to free ourselves from at the youngest age!
This is a completely nonsensical character you've created, fuck off and stump for Trump somewhere else.
>Convincing small children (as opposed to older ones) that they are probably all not straight!
This is not a thing that happens. Men and women are different enough that if you know you don't like one type of dish, you're not goign to be able to convince yourself you actually do.
Like most people who aren't left-wing, you have a tragically oversized chip on your shoulder created by insulation and a readiness to feel embattled and besieged.
I often suspect that people who think people can be "turned" gay are people who are gay themselves but in denial, and therefore think that since they "choose to be heterosexual" despite their attraction to people of the same sex, that clearly everyone who is being gay is just choosing to be that way, or tricked into thinking it was okay.
Gay folk who have really internalized that societal heteronormativity and homophobia to so deep a degree that they don't even understand themselves.
It could also be to allow them to blame other pople, not unlike vaxxers (or what ever that term for vaccine autism conspirators is)
>Like most people who aren't left-wing
On some issues. Depends on the issue, easily assuming buddy.
I didn't say anything about being "turned". More like kids will say/do some embarrassing things they will regret later.
And I absolutely love the "if you hate it you must secretly love it" argument. Sure, sometimes that is true, but to assume it's like that everywhere, would be close to a fallacy.
Conservative woman calls other conservatives hypocrites, finds out that conservatives do not like to have their hypocrisy pointed out to them — especially by a woman, and especially on the issue of abortion: http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/03/20/report-tomi-lahren-suspended-at-theblaze.html
That article does not mention at all why being a pro-abortion conservative is hypocritical.
And it is wrong to fire someone on the basis of their political opinion.
>That article does not mention at all why being a pro-abortion conservative is hypocritical.
Conservatives tend to support the idea of excessive legislation, at every level of government, to restrict the right of a woman to have an abortion. Conservatives also bristle at the idea of “big government” interfering in people’s lives, which is why they keep pushing the “small government” idea. Can you spot the contradiction? Tomi Lahren did, and for all her other horrible conservative beliefs, she managed to snag herself a Stopped Clock moment (as well as shitloads of heat from other conservatives) by pointing it out.
What you wrote about is basically a huge problem that can be summed up in one sentence:
Libertarians and conservatives in the US of A are lumped into 1 group right now.
That helps no one, and needs to stop. The 2 groups should not be in one party.
>Libertarians and conservatives in the US of A are lumped into 1 group right now.
Is that group "assholes" or "idiots?"
Be careful of calling others "reactionaries" in all caps.
You are reacting right now.
>reacting to your stupidity
The line between libertarian and fascist is quite blurred since both movements are just clubs for White dudes who want to be "different" and dehumanize overweight women or BLM.
The only real difference is fascists actively WANT to hurt other people while libertarians just DON'T CARE if other people get hurt as long as they get to do and say whatever they want whenever they want and no one is allowed to react to those things in any way other than the one they want them to.
It's malice versus toxic levels of apathy.
The basic difference between the left and everyone else is that the left thinks laws and regulations should protect the weak from the strong.
Libertarians hate that because they think the rich and incorporated should be allowed to slowly drain your life with poor working conditions, poor wages and poor food safety etc. They think anything else is unnatural and infuriating.
Fascists hate that because they think the most "usual" type of person should have the power to marginalize or punish the less "usual". They don't really care about "degeneracy" or "muh culture", they just have the genes that make you attracted to barbarism, sadism and belonging to a group.
Christianists hate that because they think they should get to make things worse for gay people, pregnant women and muslims. They think they are failing their purpose if they don't get to reshape others or punish those who won't be shaped.
Today may very well have been the beginning of the end for the Trump administration.
The GOP is going to get hurt by passing or failing to pass The Worst Healthcare Bill ever Devised, but let's hope it's the former. Allowing insurers to not even have to cover emergency visits or basic pediatrics, now that's almost impressive in its stupidity.
Man as great as the fallout from passing would be it would also literally kill millions of people so let's not.
But they are just Americans, so wouldn't that be a good thing?
Killing people (or letting people die) to make a political point is never a good thing. Shit, I disagree with Trump voters, and I still want them to have healthcare.
Breaking news from the “not really a big surprise” department: Donald Trump is fucking insane.
And in an analysis surprising no one, fivethirtyeight shows off that Trump's most rabid followers have a huge overlap with members of online hate groups:
>Shit, I disagree with Trump voters, and I still want them to have healthcare.
Oh well I don't care about Trump voters, but millions of honest Americans would be affected alongside those things.
Thing is, we *didn't* "let them" die. We've done everything in our power to prevent this from happening.
They saw us blocking the way to the power outlet and they charged it with a fork.
So, what, we should stop asking our Congress critters to block the repeal of the ACA? We should let millions of people lose their access to affordable(-ish) healthcare just so Trump supporters “get the message”?
I disagree with Trump voters, but that is not a good enough reason to inflict suffering upon them — and it is sure as fuck not a reason to inflict suffering upon millions of people who did not for him.
>So, what, we should stop asking our Congress critters to block the repeal of the ACA? We should let millions of people lose their access to affordable(-ish) healthcare just so Trump supporters “get the message”?
That would actually be the winning strategy yes, Obama even said as much. Unfortunately the collateral damage is a bit too much for my taste.
On the bright side, it looks as if the ACA repeal is dead in the water, and Trump just gave Congress an “out”: He said that if Congress does not pass the Trumpcare bill tomorrow, he will refuse to sign any other “repeal and replace” bill, leave the ACA in place, and move on to other things.
>So, what, we should stop asking our Congress critters to block the repeal of the ACA?
Let's be real here--no republican congressman is going to block the repeal of the ACA no matter how many constituents call them. We can tell them specific replacement bills, like this current ACHA bullshit, is bullshit and they might listen to that and block the repeal until a better one comes along (which might mean "forever," because the Republicans can't come up with a decent healthcare bill to save their lives), but if you have a Republican congresscritter, they are ideologically committed to repealing the ACA. It's a platform plank.
If 47 failures when the Democrats were in charge weren't enough for them to get the message that people didn't want the ACA repealed, your phone calls aren't going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back.
So yeah, stop trying to tell them not to repeal the ACA. That's not going to make any progress. Do however tell them that the current replacement bill (whether that's the actual current one or some future one down the line when they try again) is shitty and that they need to work toward something better before they repeal the ACA.
>no republican congressman is going to block the repeal of the ACA
Well it certainly seems like the repeal is being blocked because the GOP does not have enough votes to pass it in Congress and Paul Ryan delayed the vote so he and Trump could try convincing the “no” votes to change their minds but I suppose that is just fake news.
And again, that's not the repeal being blocked, that's the replacement being so shitty even the Republicans won't vote for it. If you tell them "Don't repeal the ACA" they're going to nod along and then ignore your opinion completely. If you tell them "The ACHA is so bad I think it gave me cancer, which sucks EXTRA hard, because that'll be considered a preexisting condition now" they might not pass it (as seems almost certain at this point because the ACHA is such hot garbage), but they're still going to come back and try to repeal the ACA again.
Now Trump *has* threatened to block the Obamacare repeal if they don't pass the ACHA (for some reason he's decided this is the hill he wants to die on) though a promise from Donald Trump is completely meaningless so that'll only last about as long as it takes for them to write a bill that is actually popular among the Republican base.
>that's not the repeal being blocked, that's the replacement being so shitty even the Republicans won't vote for it
What did they want to do before passing that? Repeal the ACA. But now that regular jackoffs have figured out that Obamacare is the ACA and millions of people are going to lose their insurance/access to affordable(-ish) healthcare if the ACA is repealed, they have been making sure that even a repeal of the ACA will be unpopular in the home districts of Congressional Republicans. The Republicans needed a shitload of cover to stop both the repeal and the replacement so they could stay strong going into the midterms, and Trump’s “pass it or I move on” ultimatum is exactly the cover they needed.
This does, however, raise a point that Republicans (voters and officeholders alike) likely did not consider. The Trumpcare plan was so horribly received by the general public, even the GOP figured out that passing it would be political suicide. Republicans had eight years to come up with that, too. If they had passed an actual ACA repeal during Obama’s presidency, what the hell were they going to do afterward when they did not even have a plan as bad as Trumpcare?
>Now Trump *has* threatened to block the Obamacare repeal if they don't pass the ACHA (for some reason he's decided this is the hill he wants to die on) though a promise from Donald Trump is completely meaningless so that'll only last about as long as it takes for them to write a bill that is actually popular among the Republican base.
See I'm actually willing to believe him on this, mostly because we have here a combination of several very Trump things:
1. Short attention span, he doesn't want to have to focus on this anymore.
2. LAZINESS, he doesn't want to have to DEAL with this anymore.
3. PETTINESS, if what he wants to pass doesn't do so, he doesn't want to change it for anything
4. passing the buck, he can basically leave Congress holding the bag here as far as the base is concerned
Admittedly, the pettiness is a thing. But if he sees a chance to get popular he's going to take it even if he has to work with people he hates.
The problem there is that if he actually works with both sides of the aisle to craft legislation that benefits the broader American public more than it does the richest Americans, it would likely eat him alive. You think he wants to work with the Democrats? He spent his entire campaign trashing the Democrats. He asked Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s missing emails, for fuck’s sake. If he worked with the Democrats, he knows they would be able to take partial credit for a healthcare reform bill that works — and I have serious doubts that he would let something like that happen.
(Of course, given all the news about his campaign and Russia going around, passing a bipartisan healthcare bill and worrying about who gets credit for that looks like the least of his problems right now.)
Oh, he's not going to work with anyone. He's just going to try to take the credit if someone else does something.
They're filibustering Gorsuch, Bane of Truckdrivers. Here's hoping that if McConnell nukes it and they get power back together with a Democratic president they increase the court to 11 seats on day one without warning.
>they increase the court to 11 seats on day one without warning
Why, so the Republicans can drop it back down to nine (or expand it to thirteen) whenever they get all the power again? The Republican-controlled NC State Legislature is pulling crap similar to this in an effort to keep hold of their power post-McCrory. If such a move is horrible when Republicans do it, it should not suddenly be The Best Thing Ever when Democrats do it, no matter how “justified” you think it is or how cathartic it would be.
> If such a move is horrible when Republicans do it, it should not suddenly be The Best Thing Ever when Democrats do it
Actually it is because pushing things to their extremity and conclusion is the only recourse against an enemy that will always fill the absence of escalation with escalation.
The worse a republican move is, the more important it is that democrats don't forgive. Who cares if Andrew Sullivan applauds your statesmanship or not?
Not assaulting republicans and cheating at every opportunity is incredibly irresponsible and selfish. It is choosing pride over the wellbeing of the country.
>Why, so the Republicans can drop it back down to nine (or expand it to thirteen) whenever they get all the power again? The Republican-controlled NC State Legislature is pulling crap similar to this in an effort to keep hold of their power post-McCrory. If such a move is horrible when Republicans do it, it should not suddenly be The Best Thing Ever when Democrats do it, no matter how “justified” you think it is or how cathartic it would be.
Increasing the number of people involved in a thing, over time, has a moderating effect on that thing. For example, if you roll 11 dice, you're much more likely to come out to a total of somewhere around 38 than you are to roll a 3 rolling only one die. In a situation where representatives are meant to represent the Will of the People, increasing the number of representatives also increases the ability of every voice to be heard, by making more room for more esoteric beliefs among the representatives. Especially if one switches from first past the post to proportional representation.
Now admittedly, judges are appointed by one of those representatives, rather than elected, and that's PROBABLY for the best, because regardless of their political leanings, both parties can agree that judges need to be chosen
from amongst the people who best know the law. Which means they need to be selected by experts, and not elected, since elections would just lead to putting people you want to have a beer with on the bench.
But increasing the number of judges also increases the turnover of judges, which means that the chances that any given president is going to appoint at least one supreme court justice increases. Which means that over time, there will be a tendency toward a more balanced court. Increasing the number of supreme court justices (not to mention Congressmen and Senators) isn't a ploy to increase one party's power, it's a long-term strategy to make sure actual representation of the People--regardless of which side of the aisle they're on--not only continues, but is strengthened.
Refusing to replace a Justice because the other party's president is in power is an entirely different ballpark from increasing the number of justices that make up a full complement. Though if we did that, I would probably get rid of lifelong tenures in favor of long, but limited, terms on the bench. 10-20 years per term maybe.
I really cannot get behind “an eye for an eye” as a governing philosophy. >>414311 managed to work up a decent explanation as to why an expansion of seats on the Supreme Court is a good idea, and it did not involve a “fuck the Republicans” philosophy.
Disagreeing with the opposing political party is one thing; governing to spite, harm, and possibly even kill them (however indirectly) is an entirely other thing — and it is damn near as sociopathic as the way Republicans themselves “govern”. Paul Ryan probably gets boners when he thinks about all the poor people that Trumpcare would kill. Why should Democrats be jacking off to the idea of Republican voters dying due to Democratic governance?
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the GOP pulled the Trumpcare bill, knowing it did not have enough votes in the House to pass.
So, what massive fuck-up will Ol’ 45 move on to next, hmm?
>Why should Democrats be jacking off to the idea of Republican voters dying due to Democratic governance?
Because it demonstrably works for their evil ends, why shouldn't it work for our good ones?
The high road has failed, it's time to fight.
>Because it demonstrably works for their evil ends, why shouldn't it work for our good ones?
Because we should not be about harming people out of spite or hatred. That makes us no better than the people you are calling “evil”. Governing should be — and can still be — about making decisions and reaching compromises that best benefit the general welfare of all people, even those with whom you disagree. I can disagree with Trump voters and still not want them to suffer by way of an ACA repeal.
>and can still be
Wrong, you can't compromise with Republicans, this is proven fact.
>Because we should not be about harming people out of spite or hatred.
It's not about actively harming them. It's about removing them from our calculations entirely. They will never, ever vote Democrat no matter how worthless the Republican candidate, so we don't need to continue thinking about whether something hurts, helps, or offends them. We need to focus on real people in the cities and suburbs, and fight Republicans gerrymandering.
People in rural areas, as much as it might displease you to think otherwise, are still real, actual, living-and-breathing people. They deserve compassion and governance that takes their concerns into account, too. They may not deserve the most focus, but they deserve a government that listens to them and tries to help them — just the same as you and I deserve the same thing. If you want the government to let them die out of spite for them, you are expressing something close to the governing philosophy that fuels Paul Ryan’s wet dreams.
Paul Ryan: "We were an opposition party for ten years, now we have to govern and it's harder."
That is…really not something he should be saying.
It's a stupid fucking thing to say. And an insanely obvious thing too. Makes him seem like someone who has no real idea what to do once he got where he wanted to go.
Considering how the GOP had seven years to come up with an ACA replacement — and how they kept voting to repeal the ACA during those seven years despite not having a replacement ready — I would say that, yeah, the GOP had no real idea what to do once they got the power to actually do it. That is what happens when you refuse to govern like an actual fucking adult.
>people who consistently vote for the opposing party to me are not real people
Oh shit what are you doing.
So what about demarcates that vote for republican? Are they like werewolves or something? Only pretending to be human?
>As the prospect of a loss became more real on Friday, the frustrations of GOP lawmakers loyal to the leadership began to boil over. “I’ve been in this job eight years, and I’m wracking my brain to think of one thing our party has done that’s been something positive, that’s been something other than stopping something else from happening,” Representative Tom Rooney of Florida said in an interview. “We need to start having victories as a party. And if we can’t, then it’s hard to justify why we should be back here.”
>They deserve compassion and governance that takes their concerns into account, too.
Super, they should vote Democrat then. Oh wait, they never will, guess Dems shouldn't care about them.
Every time we extend a hand to these people they spit in our face. Fuck them.
While I might not go as far as Rodyle, I have to agree that we need to face facts and accept that progress is always going to come in spite of the right wing, not from compromising with them. They have to be dragged kicking and screaming into....well, not even the future. They need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the present like the bratty children they are.
You might actually be more heartless than Paul Ryan, and his entire career has been nothing but refusing to give a fuck about poor people regardless of their political leanings.
I believe that the GOP has to be reminded that they are supposed to govern, not rule. Trying to do this by spiting everyone who voted Republican, refusing to address those people’s grievances, and basically doing everything the GOP did during Obama’s administration will not accomplish this.
Should the Democrats oppose the Trump administration? Abso-fuckin’-lutely. But should they actually refuse to vote “yes” for any legislation that might actually help the broader American public just because it comes from the GOP?
>I believe that the GOP has to be reminded that they are supposed to govern, not rule. Trying to do this by spiting everyone who voted Republican, refusing to address those people’s grievances, and basically doing everything the GOP did during Obama’s administration will not accomplish this.
How do you figure that? The GOP were awarded for this with literally every level of government. The answer is not "continue compromising, which doesn't work" it's "double the fuck down"
>I believe that the GOP has to be reminded that they are supposed to govern, not rule.
They're not interested in doing that. They proved that when they elected Trump, though they had been demonstrating it pretty well for the past few decades anyway.
At the very least, none of the agenda of the Trump administration should be passed until an independent investigation regarding Russia has taken place. Especially the confirmation of any of his nominees. Until we know Trump's not compromised, we can't risk giving someone who might be compromised an office they can't be removed from regardless of their qualifications.
>But should they actually refuse to vote “yes” for any legislation that might actually help the broader American public just because it comes from the GOP?
Yes, obviously? Public credit for such would go to Trump and keep him in, not to mention grant political capital for whatever poison pill the GOP want to add to such a measure. Not that the GOP would ever actually introduce such legislation so it's a moot point.
>Trump's legacy is more important than the citizens of his nation.
OH SHIT, WHAT ARE YOU DOING
It's not his legacy so much as whether or not he gets a second term that's worth arguing. It is possible that the citizens of the US will suffer less with four years of stagnancy (four more years of stagnancy, really, seeing as the Republicans have already given us 8 years of stagnancy under Obama) in exchange for four fewer years under Trump.
The ability to look at things in the long term is important, especially for the left, because the right only ever thinks about immediate gratification.
>four more years of stagnancy, really, seeing as the Republicans have already given us 8 years of stagnancy under Obama
Obama was able to accomplish many things despite having to fight Republicans and Blue Dogs every step of the way.
Trump on the other hand lacks the competence or wherewithal to do anything without a fuckton of help, which between the understaffed, constantly exploding executive branch and chaotic legislature he's not really getting much of.
>But should they actually refuse to vote “yes” for any legislation that might actually help the broader American public just because it comes from the GOP?
What legislation of such value do you imagine the GOP will produce?
But my point is, Democrats need not shut down the entire government because it disagrees with the president’s agenda. We do not need another Tea Party-style government shutdown that fucks over shitloads of people because one political party did not get its way. If there are Republicans who will actually work with Democrats to craft new legislation, or Republicans actually do bring forth a bill that will help the general public, Democrats should not refuse these things because “fuck the GOP”. And besides, the GOP is doing a good enough job of kicking itself in the nuts.
>Democrats need not shut down the entire government because it disagrees with the president’s agenda.
They do if that's the only bargaining chip they have to keep him from hurting immigrants, racial and religious minorities, the poor, and LGBTQ+ folk. The House and Senate can still "go nuclear" on Dems with almost any other vote issue, but when it comes to raising the debt ceiling, we can take a page from their playbook and refuse to go along with them unless they compromise on other issues, and/or unless they do an independent investigation into the Russia issue to ensure the people "leading" (and I use the word quite wrongly) the nation aren't compromised by hostile foreign powers.
So you want the Democrats to pull another federal government shutdown, despite knowing how fucked it was back when the Republicans did, just to spite the Republicans? That is not governing. The Tea Party did not want to govern, and now look where it got them: They fucked their own asses with Trumpcare.
>So you want the Democrats to pull another federal government shutdown, despite knowing how fucked it was back when the Republicans did, just to spite the Republicans?
No, I want them to not take it off the table if the Cruel Algebra of Necessity shows that fewer people are hurt by the shutdown than would be hurt by getting the legislation we need passed. I want them to not let stiff necked pride in "being the better man" be used as rationalization to sit idly by while evil, fascism, and white nationalism is allowed to go unchecked because Democrats are unwilling to play the game.
I want us to not be fucking Neville Chamberlain just because it's easier to roll over and take whatever the opposition party wants to ram up our asses like we always fucking do.
>I want them to not let stiff necked pride in "being the better man" be used as rationalization to sit idly by while evil, fascism, and white nationalism is allowed to go unchecked because Democrats are unwilling to play the game.
I am not saying “do not resist evil”. I am saying that if a “nuclear option” is not warranted and will produce nothing good, there is no sense in defaulting to it as a response to anything and everything the Republicans try to do. The Tea Party/Freedom Caucus shut down the government practically because Obama was president, and it was fucking stupid when they did it. It would not be any less stupid if the Democrats shut down the government because Trump is president. A shutdown of all governance — an abdication of even trying to act like adults in a room full of pissbabies led by the biggest pissbaby in American political history — should be an absolute last resort, not the first fucking reaction.
Yes, first we attempt filibustering. Then once they pull the nuclear option and take away the filibuster, we hold the debt ceiling hostage. Because those are our only two bargaining chips on matters the republicans are united on. And I don't know what world you're living in if you think that after all the times we've attempted to negotiate with them in the past, they're suddenly going to be amenable to compromise now that they hold all the cards.
The Republicans have no ideals and no desires, which makes compromise pretty much impossible even if we wanted to. They don't have any goals other than "liberal tears," so there's nothing to work with them toward achieving. Once they show an interest in anything other than opposing liberalism, THEN they get the benefit of a doubt in regards to their compromise and negotiation like adults.
But you don't argue with children. You tell the children how things are going to be, you explain why if they seem genuinely interested, but you don't actually debate with them as though they are rational adults with any sense of perspective on how life works. And if they disobey, you take away their privileges--in this case, the privilege of being able to actually accomplish anything.
Trump rolled back some of Obama’s regulatory EOs that meant to help fight climate change — all so he can keep his promise of getting coal miners back to work and make life easier for those poor overburdened companies that want to be successful if not for all the regulations on pollution and shit.
Even if you do not believe in climate change (which would make you pretty fucking stupid), why would you want to bring back jobs that would produce more pollution and put people’s lives at risk? Teach people to hang and maintain solar panels, for fuck’s sake.
But but but I thought he loved the gays! He promised to kill Muslims for them!
Does the word 'victim blaming' imply that victims can't ever be responsible for their own suffering?
Or have I just got a wrong impression by some delusional tumblr users misusing the word a lot?
>Does the word 'victim blaming' imply that victims can't ever be responsible for their own suffering?
That depends on the choices that led someone into harm. The White guy who killed a Black man in NYC last week, for example, is to blame for the suffering of a life-long prison sentence that he will soon be serving. His victim? Not so much with the responsibility for his own death.
>Or have I just got a wrong impression by some delusional tumblr users misusing the word a lot?
Given how quickly you turned to the "tumblr lol" boogeyman, it's pretty safe to assume you've got a wrong impression, and that developed that wrong impression intentionally.
I doubt that. I jumped to the tumblr conclusion because I almost never see the term used elsewhere (I dont hang around political/social justice discussions much, so I have little exposure to such terms)
If I has to guess, I reckon I got a bad impression or two, and no other impression, resulting in me assuming that usage was typical.
<— Flynn’s own words from a “Meet the Press” interview last September. Keep that in mind, because today, this news broke:
Shit just got real.
Although the outcome of the Hilary emails thing proves he was wrong about that. I'm excited too, but I don't want to get my hopes too high yet.
Excellent. I'm glad I bought a case of popcorn recently. Shit might get cinematic soon.
I can recognise the fucked-up situation of rural areas (which heavily went in Trump‘s favor) being spared the initial ravages of a nuclear strike against the US — which would likely be triggered in some way by Trump’s tough guy act — and still refuse to condone a nuclear strike against rural areas. Motherfucker, I don’t want any kind of nuclear strike anywhere in the world.
Yeah but we don't want a nuclear strike on the rural areas, we merely wish to stop giving them the handouts they so often complain about.
Would I have a little sense of schadenfreude if the latter happened? Not gonna lie: Yes, I would. But that does not mean I want people whose lives depend on things like Medicaid or even SNAP to lose those things, even if it would somehow “teach them a lesson”. The underprivileged and underserved should have access to those programs regardless of their political beliefs.
>The underprivileged and underserved should have access to those programs regardless of their political beliefs.
In fact, many would say that they need it more then the rest.
Wasn't there a story in the bible about Jesus dining with tax collectors, and not his followers, since his followers didn't need more of his help?
>Law related, so I'm putting it here. This is a curiosity thing, not related to anything I ever wish to do. I don't hate anyone this much, I think.
What might be the ramifications of Yellow Paging someone? Yellow Paging (https://pastebin.com/V4s1SrdU) is essentially calling every service in the phone book to a target's house at the same time. Comparable to SWATting, or an IRL DDoS.
What would be the likely events that follow if:
- the perpetrator was caught?
- the perpetrator was not caught?
Would costs be covered?How much jail time would the perp rack up.
It would qualify as harassment at the absolute minimum. Maybe a form of fraud at the worst.
New guilty pleasure: Watching “sovereign citizens” getting owned in court.
I’ll enjoy it while I can, seeing as how Trump is nudging the doomsday clock closer to midnight all on his own.
Someone should make a coffee table book of all the bad takes from 2016.
“This is the End: As Told by Everyone Who Thought He Would Not Be”
Alex Jones is claiming he is a “performance artist” now.
So, hey, he all but admitted he is “fake news”!
He's going with the "merely pretending" defense.
It's super easy to make fun of him and point out how bullshit that is, but I had no idea he had kids, which is disturbing. Not just in a "ew, Alex Jones copulating" kind of way, but considering how violent and deluded he is.
Remember that this is a guy who has proclaimed, as recently as late last year, that the Sandy Hook shooting was a false flag operation and those directly impacted by the shooting were actors.
If he really believes that, he is a horrible human being. If he pretended to believe that, he spread pain and misery amongst those who suffered for the sake of getting attention — which makes him a horrible human being.
The racist rapist who deserves to burn with all his voters is cucking out on officially declaring China a currency manipulator AND on tearing up the deal with Iran because it turns out they're complying. Now we just need the moderately human individuals on his staff to convince him to stay on the Paris climate accord and we might get Bannin to kill himself.
http://www.pacast.com/ Oh hey, PA state government seems to be doing pretty well.
My. Who could have seen this coming?
Bill O’Reilly is out at Fox News. Apparently, he could insult and demean and harass anyone but White women.
…y’know, this thread is just not the same without /pol/-kun rambling on about Ol’ 45.
Think he finally saw the light?
Or you. These threads are not the same without you.
Well, there is so much bullshit going on with this administration that I have to pick and choose what to feel outraged about. If I got pissed off at all the things, I’d be too tired to fight the things that pissed me off the most. Think of it like the Spoon Theory of political discussion.
That said? Now I am pissed off, because the regime has begun its assault on our First Amendment rights: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/329840-trump-lawyer-protesters-violated-campaigns-first-amendment-right-by
More things to be disgusted by today: Trump and the Republicans in Congress are trying to end birthright citizenship. A constitutionally guaranteed protection.
Donald Trump is not fit to serve as the President of the United States.
I'm just praying to god he's walking back from scoring a "win" in his first hundred days and he doesn't bomb DPRK or something.
Nice, arresting a 10 year old on a 6 month old dismissed warrant.
This is gonna be an interesting week, is Trump fucking dumb enough to threaten a shutdown over not having wall funding?
Of course he is. The better question: Would he actually celebrate if the government shuts down? (I mean, I know President Bannon will. He wants to shut it down and destroy it.)
You are a little late there, Bannon got clipped, it's President Kushner now.
If America survives Ol’ 45, it will be a miracle.
Oh, beat me to posting it.
He is really deteriorating.
>No I have, it's interesting, I have, seem to get very high ratings. I definitely. You know Chris Wallace had 9.2 million people, it's the highest in the history of the show. I have all the ratings for all those morning shows. When I go, they go double, triple. Chris Wallace, look back during the Army-Navy football game, I did his show that morning. […] It had 9.2 million people. It's the highest they've ever had. On any, on air, (CBS "Face the Nation" host John) Dickerson had 5.2 million people. It's the highest for "Face the Nation" or as I call it, "Deface the Nation." It's the highest for "Deface the Nation" since the World Trade Center. Since the World Trade Center came down. It's a tremendous advantage.
This man is narcissism personified. (Also: I never thought he could say anything more offensive than “grab ’em by the pussy”, and yet, here we are.)
Is it okay if I ship them? Cause I ship them.
I have no idea who they are, so I do not care if you ship them. That said: shipping real people is creepy as fucking fuck.
>It's the highest for "Deface the Nation" since the World Trade Center. Since the World Trade Center came down.
That reminds me of him talking about his building being the tallest in Manhattan after the towers fell that day.
Over the weekend, he gave an injured soldier the Purple Heart and congratulated said soldier on receiving the medal.
This dumb motherfucker is going to kill us all.
So GOP lawmaker Robert Fisher, of Newhampshire, founded Reddit's "theredpill" forum. Some helpful people on Reddit have found his post history where he self-described as a "race realist" in addition to his opinions about how statutory rape laws are bullshit and thanks to them women only serve a purpose for 12 years, since they're also useless once they're over 30.
God, why are the elected officials of the GOP so universally disgusting, and why are GOP voters so okay with it?
My opinion is that they're a different species, and it's our shame that we're weak enough to accept a situation where they are legal equals.
>God, why are the elected officials of the GOP so universally disgusting, and why are GOP voters so okay with it?
The GOP's largest base demographic is White males. So long as they are made to feel as if voting for a Republican will Make White America Great Again, those voters will not give a shit about anything that Republican does.
Woah, this is +4pol, not /pol/. Keep ypur racism to yourself.
Now anon, the GOP's officials might be abhorrent, and their voters idiots who often undermine their own long term interests, but that doesn't make them a different species. Technically, any psychological barrier sufficient to prevent effective inter-fertility would be speciation, including presumtion of a species divide where there wasn't one before. But that's a self-fufilling prophecy that doesn't have any bearing on human rights and one that basically amounts to admitting you want a future of Eloi and Morloks. My entire response to you is a joke because that's how much respect I have for your position.
Sounds to me like an important step in putting an end to that would to help people currently categorized as white look for ways to better avoid identifying with whiteness. For instance, if anyone happens to be in charge of writing a survey for marketing purposes which asks about ethnicity including a list of default options, and has the opportunity to list things like German, Irish, French, and American as among those default choices but not white, I'd consider taking it. In general it just seems nice to not be encouraging people to hold an identity that you see as one people can't ethically hold pride in.
Ol’ 45 is preparing an executive order that will withdraw the US from NAFTA. He also signed an EO that gives Betsy DeVos a 300-day window to propose cuts in federal oversight of schools and educational institutions, all so said institutions can go back under “local” and “state” control. Oh, and his plan for tax reform is a bunch of vaguely-worded bullshit that was able to be printed on a single page (because Trump is too fucking dumb to understand anything but vaguely-worded bullshit able to be printed ona single page), and all credible analysis of this “plan” notes that it will still benefit the wealthiest Americans in spite of its promise to cut tax breaks that mainly benefit the rich.
I once said that if America survives Trump’s run as president, it will be a miracle. At this rate, if America survives 2017, it will be through motherfucking divine intervention.
This legitimately looks like the abstract from a middle school civics project.
Like I said, Trump is too dumb to understand anything above that level. Why do you think he watches so much TV and talks like he does?
Ernest Hemmingway could read this shit and say "Isn't this prose a little simplistic?"
In other transparent-tax-cuts-for-billionaires news, the GOP has introduced a somehow even worse version of the ACA repeal that they're trying to rush a House vote on this Friday, again without any hearings or a CBO score, and despite it being in potential violation of international human rights law to yank millions of people's health insurance away (not that Trump or the GOP give a shit about what the UN has to say, or about human rights, but still):
There's also a loophole that exempts lawmakers and their staff from the repeal, because of course there is, though the legislator claims he'll remove it:
Can't wait for another news cycle full of sad Paul Ryan photos when this bill dies too.
Oh wow, that article is not just some speculation, the UN actually contacted them. That's srs business (well, supposedly).
I am immediately reminded of that scene from Team America in which Hans threatens that the UN will be very angry and will send a letter telling people how angry they are.
Resign already, you stupid fuck.
Funny thing is, if he resigned, his announcement would get ALL the ratings and ALL the press.
He wanted to win the contest far more than he ever wanted the prize.
Does he HONESTLY expect people to sympathize with him over this?! "I thought being president would be easier than being (INSERT LITERALLY ANYTHING HERE)?" What kind of brain damage is he suffering?!
Thing is, being president probably would be (marginally) easier for him if he had surrounded himself with competent people with experience in public service roles. The presidency is not a one-person job; while the POTUS makes the top decisions and wields a hefty amount of power, it is his cabinet and his other appointees that deal with the finer details and the day-to-day operations. An incompetent (and hamstrung) cabinet creates nothing but chaos and leaves the president to do too much of what his cabinet would be doing if it weren’t a complete shitshow.
The epitome of the White rural working-class is, of course, a lazy, whiny know-nothing rapist surrounded by bigots and useless, generic-looking women. And they're still sticking by him because he says he is the best ever and they can't admit that they were wrong.
While black America voted for one of the best human beings to ever be commander in chief of any country.
what do you MEAN, heading a world superpower is harder than running a real estate organization?!?
Republicans are enemies of America.
Aaaaaand here we go
Will Trump say the words "radical Republican terrorism"?
>Student injured in machete attack
>"...banged something, a hatchet or an ax, on the table."
They're all threatening, but those are two very distinct types of weapons.
>They're all threatening, but those are two very distinct types of weapons.
They make tools that are combination machete/hatchets now. I bought one recently to clear brush in my backyard. It's sort of a weird shape, and I could understand someone being confused about whether they were looking at a machete or a hatchet or even some sort of weird cosplay klingon weapon or something.
Incidentally, it has not been that useful for heavy brush clearing thus far--doesn't chop as much as I would expect from a hatchet.
>They make tools that are combination machete/hatchets now.
I'm usin’ the hatchet. I’m usin’ the machete. I’m usin’ the combination hatchet and machete.
You are given the opportunity to ask any Government agency three questions, which they will answer truthfully.
What do you ask?
I need ask only one, of any government agency.
Can you see why kids love the taste of Cinnamon Toast Crunch?
AAAAAAAAAAnd our budget deal is:
+No cash for border wall
+No cuts to sanctuary cities
+99% EPA funding retention
+Planned Parenthood funding retention
-Defense budget increase
Shit, he's winning so hard we can't even SEE what he's doing!
Also he stopped the Macri government from giving Carter the Order of San Martin for.... some reason.
>+No cash for border wall
>-Defense budget increase
As much as I despise the American defence situation, at least he realised that Mexican asylum seekers aren't a serious issue.
>at least he realised that Mexican asylum seekers aren't a serious issue.
No, that's not how our government works. Congress sets the budgets, Trump is fucking FURIOUS, publicly so, about this.
A majority of his supporters are so unintelligent a wall is the only thing they can imagine working, and they think "political correctness" or "feminists" or something is the reason it wasn't built before.
>I don't stand by anything.
Even a deranged, lying clock is right twice a day.
And then they complain about how it's "too expensive" to give kids lunch at school or something like that while supporting a several trillion dollar vanity project like the wall.
So the US government may have just sent a woman and her child to their deaths because they were undocumented.
In other news from the gaping hellmouth that is now our nation’s capital, Ol’ 45 will celebrate the National Day of Prayer tomorrow (as if he thinks anyone but him is God), and he is expected to sign at least one executive order.
The first rumored EO would direct the IRS to stop investigating churches and other non-profit organisations that try to campaign for a specific political candidate, which would effectively turn those groups into Super PACs for any given candidate willing to make a large enough donation. (Trump cannot actually strike down the Johnson Amendment, but he can direct the IRS to stop investigating groups that run afoul of the law.)
The second rumored EO would create a legal license to discriminate in for people and organizations that claim a religious or moral objection to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and transgender identities. (Pence is rightfully credited with pushing this shitpile onto Trump’s desk.) The original draft version of this EO gave basically anyone cover to discriminate under the guise of “religious freedom” — https://www.thenation.com/article/leaked-draft-of-trumps-religious-freedom-order-reveals-sweeping-plans-to-legalize-discrimination/ — and though a draft of the revised version has not yet leaked, those in the know say the language in the revision is just as strong.
I wonder who will be the first democratic politician to call for an end to the USA and a splitting into two or more nations with some defensive pact and a trade agreement.
They'd get my full support.
If there is anything the United States needs less than Ol’ 45 right now, it is another Civil War.
What's the GOP thinking with trying to ram AHCA through, repeatedly voting against releasing 45's tax returns, etc.? Are they just that confident that they can make these unpopular moves and still keep their seats in 2018? You can already hear the DCCC revving up the attack ads.
They're trying to buy enough time to do all their unpopular choices before impeaching Trump, then they can claim that they were the party that "saved us" from Trump's madness, and get all the shit through that no one in the country but them wants through without suffering the heat from it because it was "Trump" who did it, not the GOP.
Conservatives — and establishment Republicans in particular — hate the fuck out of Obama. Trump ran for President on a platform that amounted to “fuck everything Obama did”. The executive orders that Trump has signed so far have undone several of Obama’s executive orders (notably protections in federal hiring for LGBT people), and his entire agenda so far seems to rest upon the idea that he and the GOP must undo everything the evil black guy did.
Of course, by undoing everything the evil black guy did, Trump and the GOP would undo the biggest step forward for American healthcare reform in decades, push this country out of the Paris climate accords, roll back critical consumer protections in the financial sector (goodbye Dodd-Frank!), give cover to anti-LGBT discrimination by calling it “religious freedom”, and — of course — give even more (and bigger) tax breaks to people who cannot even spend all of their money under the hopes that maybe this time they’ll re-invest that money in the country (spoilers: they won’t). But watch them give a fuck about the health and well-being of anyone but themselves and their campaign donors.
Republicans know from the protests of the past few months and their narrow victories in special elections so far this year that shitloads of people do not like Trump. They also do not approve of the GOP trying to turn this country into a third-world hellhole where only the obscenely wealthy can afford things like education and housing and food — you know, the luxuries. But if they pass all their shit now, they can point to just how badly Trump and his administration are running the country, tell the voting base in their home state/district/whatever that “big government is no longer working”, and win an election all over again by promising to “fix” all the issues (that they helped create, natch) while saying all the same shit that conservative voters love to hear.
The GOP is praying that its voter base is dumb enough to stay on the GOP’s side even after Trump’s administration turns this country into a wasteland of broken public schools, sold-off national parks ruined by oil and gas companies, housing projects so pathetic that even rats will refuse to live in them, rural hospitals forced only to accept rich patients because no one else can pay the bills, still-empty coal mines, and millions of dead Americans. Given how many Trump voters are still supporters in spite of shit like Trumpcare, the GOP has to believe that support will be enough to keep their asses out of the fire until at least 2020…or the global thermonuclear war that Donald Trump so desperately wants to have, whichever comes first.
This whole nonsense has proven that another civil war is what America needs. White extremists can only be purged by force. The Rural Yoke can only be lifted from real Americans by killing the holler dwelling tyrants and the fat cats who control them.
Volume 3 when? They can't leave it on that cliffhanger.
Huh, I never realised Pakistan and Iran were neighboring countries.
In fact, I never actually looked at that region on a map before. I just cared about the rest of the world, because it's safe and not a clusterfuck of insurgencies.
>An Ohio family says they learned just 20 minutes before dinner this week that a planned mystery guest would be Facebook founder and billionaire Mark Zucker. The newspaper reports Zuckerberg had asked his staff to find Democrats who voted for President Donald Trump.
Fugg Sugarjew is coming to dinner tonight, what do I make!?
There's NOTHING kosher in my house!!
Take your anti-Semitism back to 4chan — and stay there, too.
I never want to hear about how Republicans and Democrats are the same again.
So the Senate then. It affects the budget so it needs 60. Do we see another rule change or will cash be the line Mitch won't cross?
At this point if he crosses it, it means Single Payer in 2020. And even he probably knows it.
I think the Senate GOP actually have enough prudence to know that a rule change will screw them down the line. One thing I can trust is that McConnell doesn't want to give up his own power.
Maybe they heard Comey say Russia is still involved in US politics and now they're aiming to make Handmaid's Take a reality before 2018 because they think they can survive the midterms with some help.
Lol the Senate has said they're not going to even look at the House Bill i.e. it's being sent straight to the committee to die.
I wonder if Trump even understands that this turd had to go to the Senate. Going by the Mission Accomplished party in the rose garden I'm guessing no.
Was looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_digital_library_projects earlier and noticed that Mexico apparently has a bunch of textbooks online for free. Unlike every other country I know of that only makes them available to the schools themselves, with students only having access to their current grade's texts, the Mexican government apparently decided it'd be nice if anyone could reference them at any time.
I think it's a pretty big deal and a good thing that at least one country allows the texts used in its public school system to be read freely by anyone with internet access. An adult who wants to refresh their memory of stuff they learned in high school? Got you covered. A fast-learning child who wants to read ahead at material above their current grade level? Nothing stopping you. Someone from any othe part of the world who knows or is willing to learn Spanish? Go right ahead.
One could argue that there's plenty of educational resources out there, but none of it's really in a solid textbook format, with scattered homework help websites, documentaries, videos, and ecyclopedias. Those are good too, but I spent a lot of time reading ahead in my textbooks when I was in school, and it's really just an enjoyable format to read when you can do so at your own pace rather than following along with a group. I seriously intend to take what little I know from a quarter-year of Spanish in high school and seeing where I can go by reading from pre-school up, though I should maybe I should try an actual second-language resource in addition to attempting to learn from Spanish-as-a-first-language books.
Tories slaughtered Labour and SNP at council elections, UKIP has lost all their seats.
Thats actually quite good. I was about to rebut that in Australia (and likely elsewhere) public libraries are free until you borrow a book for too long, but then again the libraries are limited in size and availability, unlike a digital version.
Huh, another last-minute hacking/disinfo operation pushed by Wikileaks against the candidate beating Putin's fave.
How convenient for Putin that such an UNEXPECTED COINCIDENCE should occur in his favor once again. Just like last time that happened, and also that time that reporter came down with polonium poisoning when he questioned him.
Oh yeah, libraries are like that everywhere I think. It's just that textbooks usually aren't made available in them, to my knowledge.
I want this to become a meme.
My God, please make it so.
Macron won. Le Pen joins the Disappointment to Putin Club with Yanukovych. 10 to 1 Trump doesn't call Macron to congratulate him but tweets about how evil brown people are going to swarm into France now.
Let's see how he fucks up now (or miraculously saves everything).
FCC opened up comments on its plans to kill net neutrality again.
Looks like we’ve hit the bump limit now, so switch back over to >>414457 and act as if I didn’t completely fuck that up, ’kay? 👍🏻