mrdannyg 274 Posted July 19, 2018 Share Posted July 19, 2018 Smarmy or full of confidence because he has Trump by the balls? Before all this trump stuff he was riding horseback shirtless and scoring hat tricks playing with professional hockey players. He’s been like this for a long time pre-trump with that little untouchable smirk Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 A long, but great read on the neverending war... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/08/magazine/war-afghanistan-iraq-soldiers.html Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted November 7, 2018 Share Posted November 7, 2018 The unending gaslighting from Republicans is really a sight to behold. I honestly wonder how they can keep it up. I’m watching election coverage on BBC, and even a very independent, international news org can’t find an honest Republican. Every conversation sounds like: Newsperson: people have criticized that Trump is sending 15000 active soldiers to the border and spending billions of unbudgeted dollars to do so in order to deal with a couple thousand unarmed Hondurans who would like to legally seek asylum. This is especially troubling since he has accused the Hondurans of harbouring criminals or terrorists with no evidence whatsoever, and despite that their goal of legal asylum would require thorough background checks. Republican: well, lots of people might not like his tone. I wish he’d be more presidential too! But he’s just protecting us, and look at the economy! Newsperson, easy distracted from the unanswered question: the economy is going great, though many of the gains are empty as they could be the result of hugely inflationary policy in an already strong environment. Republican: cites record numbers while ignoring that 90% of the gains happened under Obama, and that Trump’s cuts and changes have had negative effects on net revenue despite perfect conditions. It’s like they are speaking different languages, and Republicans seem to have noticed that so long as they keep calling everyone else a liar, they’ll keep being believed by people who’s worst slur would be being called a liberal. I don’t know where things go from here, but it is going to get worse before it gets better, and every single person who votes Republican needs to be aware that they’re supporting people who would literally prefer people not vote than vote Democrat, and would happily have people vote Republican based on lies even if those same people would not have if they were accurately informed. Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted November 7, 2018 Share Posted November 7, 2018 It's interesting to me that Pete Ricketts is going to win by a huge margin, but that is basically the same margin that the Initiative 427 about Medicaid expansion passed by, an Initiative that would have been unnecessary if Ricketts had opted into Medicaid expansion in the first place. I would love to pick the brains of the people who voted to re-elected Pete, but voted yes on 427. I believe there is a large gap in the policy beliefs of people, and the way they actually vote Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted November 7, 2018 Share Posted November 7, 2018 It's interesting to me that Pete Ricketts is going to win by a huge margin, but that is basically the same margin that the Initiative 427 about Medicaid expansion passed by, an Initiative that would have been unnecessary if Ricketts had opted into Medicaid expansion in the first place. I would love to pick the brains of the people who voted to re-elected Pete, but voted yes on 427. I believe there is a large gap in the policy beliefs of people, and the way they actually vote all the polling shows that people vote against their policy beliefs often. Things like gun control for example poll against the standard Republican position even among Republicans. Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 It's interesting to me that Pete Ricketts is going to win by a huge margin, but that is basically the same margin that the Initiative 427 about Medicaid expansion passed by, an Initiative that would have been unnecessary if Ricketts had opted into Medicaid expansion in the first place. I would love to pick the brains of the people who voted to re-elected Pete, but voted yes on 427. I believe there is a large gap in the policy beliefs of people, and the way they actually vote I was reading a bit on this from Craig Calcaterra and some other Ohioans today. I think often people vote for comfortable/familiar names without much knowledge for their policy, or do so while purposely ignoring the policies that person will be “forced” to vote for because their party will put it through. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 Not a political post..Because I dont do that The greatest name is politics is Sheldon Whitehouse. Who was reelected for a third term as a senator in Rhode Island. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 Not a political post..Because I dont do that The greatest name is politics is Sheldon Whitehouse. Who was reelected for a third term as a senator in Rhode Island. my cousin's last name is Whitehouse and he's the Chief of Staff to a Federal Liberal MP 1 Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 I have a cousin who's first name is Mike. There's no point in that, I just felt like posting in the politics thread and being absolutely Switzerland about it all, neutral and boring. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 I have a cousin who's first name is Mike. There's no point in that, I just felt like posting in the politics thread and being absolutely Switzerland about it all, neutral and boring. my cousin's first name is Mike also. Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 Not a political post..Because I dont do that The greatest name is politics is Sheldon Whitehouse. Who was reelected for a third term as a senator in Rhode Island. That’s pretty solid. I saw in Mississauga they had a guy running named Butt and I really applaud anyone with that name deciding to do something that involves plastering your name all over town. Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 I think that Sheldon dude missed an opportunity though. You can’t tell me in a primary of 17 Republicans in 2016, a guy frigging named Whitehouse who was actually an elected Republican wouldn’t have gotten enough jokey support to get pretty damn far. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 That’s pretty solid. I saw in Mississauga they had a guy running named Butt and I really applaud anyone with that name deciding to do something that involves plastering your name all over town. Sudbury just had an election. Brian Bigger defeated Tay Butt. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 That’s pretty solid. I saw in Mississauga they had a guy running named Butt and I really applaud anyone with that name deciding to do something that involves plastering your name all over town. he ran in my area. I would have voted for him if I had known he was going to be all butt hurt when he lost.... Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 Bob sent an awesome GIF to me of someone running in Toronto named Jennifer Arp, and her dancing with her placard with "ARP" on it Post it Bob, everyone loves Arp Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted November 10, 2018 Share Posted November 10, 2018 Sudbury just had an election. Brian Bigger defeated Tay Butt. Omg Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted November 10, 2018 Share Posted November 10, 2018 Bob sent an awesome GIF to me of someone running in Toronto named Jennifer Arp, and her dancing with her placard with "ARP" on it Post it Bob, everyone loves Arp 1 Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 1, 2018 Share Posted December 1, 2018 Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump ....Lightly looked at doing a building somewhere in Russia. Put up zero money, zero guarantees and didn’t do the project. Witch Hunt! 4:59 AM - 30 Nov 2018 Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted December 1, 2018 Share Posted December 1, 2018 I'm not good at posting pics/links, but that Bush letter to Clinton is a clear cut example of how things should be, and what it meant before to have civility and gravitas shown by our leaders, and hopefully exercised by the masses in society. I can't believe that was 25years ago, I guess I sound like an old guy talking about 'kids today', but its really sad how leaders/people act today compared to what it used to be like. Democrat-Republican, Liberaal-Conservative didnt mean mortal enemies, it was just a difference of opinion. Now we have this moron, and I dont even know what came first, the moron or his sheep. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 2, 2018 Share Posted December 2, 2018 I'm not good at posting pics/links, but that Bush letter to Clinton is a clear cut example of how things should be, and what it meant before to have civility and gravitas shown by our leaders, and hopefully exercised by the masses in society. I can't believe that was 25years ago, I guess I sound like an old guy talking about 'kids today', but its really sad how leaders/people act today compared to what it used to be like. Democrat-Republican, Liberaal-Conservative didnt mean mortal enemies, it was just a difference of opinion. Now we have this moron, and I dont even know what came first, the moron or his sheep. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 A post on Facebook by Cake... "Stolen from a friend: I am not normally political. This post will be an exception because I am an American and I am concerned. Please allow me to frame the issues involved with "the wall" in its actual terms. Despite what the media is saying, this is not about Democrat vs. Republican. In short, the executive branch of our government is threatening to declare a national emergency since the legislative branch will not authorize the seizure of private American property for a federal works project nor will fund it. The executive branch has already shut down the federal government. It is currently threatening to extend this government shut down for however long it takes for the legislative branch to cave. Let us break this down. First of all, the framework of our government is based on checks and balances. Power is divided into three branches: the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial. The Legislative branch controls the purse strings of government and creates laws. The Executive branch carries out those laws. The Judicial branch tells us whether the laws are constitutional or not. Each branch was designed to be able to balance the other branches. Why? As shown by our original rebellion, Americans didn't want a King or a Dictator when we were setting up our government. We were not particularly thrilled with a House of Lords telling us what we could or could not do either. In this case, the executive branch wants to: (1) take governmental cash, (2) create its own law, (3) take away private property from American citizens (4) create its own federal works project. At least three of these functions fall within the power/ responsibility of the legislative branch. So, what is the problem? This is one of the most naked power grabs by the executive branch over the others in recent history. Once that power is exercised, it is going to be difficult or impossible to regain any balance again. The executive branch was never meant to have that much power (see our country's previous concerns about Kings and Dictators). Is this constitutional? Very doubtful. Should all Americans be concerned? That is a question for you to answer yourself. Second, a "National Emergency" is generally declared under these general conditions: (1) Natural disasters including hurricanes, tornados, and earthquakes to name a few. (2) Public health emergencies such as significant outbreaks of infectious diseases. (3) Military attacks. (4) Civil insurrection. (5) Any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy. Now the first 4 aren't applicable. The last category was meant to be short-term only. It was designed to be reviewed by the legislative branch every year after it’s enacted (because again; the check and balance is fundamental to how we operate). So, what is the problem here? If national emergencies can be declared by the executive branch for non-emergency purposes which vest power in one branch of the government why would that branch ever let go of that power again? Third, the seizure of private property (known as “eminent domain”, a body of law which says the government cannot just take your home without due process). You are joking, right? No. The US/Mexican border is 1,933 miles long. It runs through 4 states (California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas). Only 33% of that land is actually owned or managed by the Federal Government. A sizable percentage of that land is owned by the Indian nations. It is land preserved for those tribes by treaty and land given under treaty is not land owned by the United States. These tribes already have a lot of reasons to be angry at the Federal Government. This would be pouring additional gas on an open flame. The other 64% of that land is privately owned. How much land would have to be taken? The amount of land that the Federal Government would have to take would likely run 1,237 miles long to 12,371 miles deep (assuming a 1 to 10-mile DMZ from the border into the United States). Even if we could only take 100 to 500 ft of land in densely populated areas, that is a lot of private property that is going to be seized by the Federal government. The land necessary for this project would also run through some highly populated areas in the US such as San Diego, Calexico, Nogales, El Paso, and Laredo. There will be a lot of Americans who are going to have their homes and businesses taken by the federal government. Which will also mean a lot of lawsuits. In terms of the federal works project, these types of works include hospitals, bridges, highways, walls and dams. These projects may be funded by local, state, or federal appropriations. If they are federal, they are funded by the legislative branch of our government (the same branch that our executive branch is currently trying to take power from). Is the seizure of power constitutional? Not likely given the separation of powers discussed above. Finally, these considerations do not take into account the sheer cost, human and monetary, that will be involved. The Department of Homeland Security estimates the current cost at $21 billion for construction alone (not counting costs of maintenance or costs associated with increased military/federal patrolling). Ask yourself a simple question. When was the last time that you saw a governmental project brought in under time and under budget? Does anyone remember the “big dig” in Boston, Mass? The actual costs are likely to be much higher. This estimated cost also does not include compensating folks for taking their land or the associated impact upon their businesses. The Federal budget deficit grew to $779 billion dollars in 2018 according to the Treasury Department. How are we, as a country, going to fund this project? How are we, as a country, going to deal with the additional debt? Unlike private businesses, our country cannot declare bankruptcy. This is not about Democrat vs. Republican. It is not about who has the best zingers measured in 10 second sound bites. It is about our country. The core of this issue deals with the profound and immense changes the outcome will have on the structure of our national. This is the way that we, as a country, should be framing these issues. Please think about it." Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 It's far more simple than that. Trump took something that they came up with as a shouting point that his racist goobers at rallies lapped up and made it the hill that Trump is willing to die on. Trump’s Shutdown Settles It: His Base Is About Racism, Not Jobs Read more: https://forward.com/opinion/417326/trumps-shutdown-settles-it-his-supporters-care-more-about-being-racists/ 1 Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 ok, this settles it. We all just live in a simulation now. This is actually from a 50's TV Show and the name of the conman who wants to fool the rubes into building a wall is named Trump Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 ok, this settles it. We all just live in a simulation now. This is actually from a 50's TV Show and the name of the conman who wants to fool the rubes into building a wall is named Trump Robert Culp... is that real? Seems like the name Trump is being dubbed in. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Robert Culp... is that real? Seems like the name Trump is being dubbed in. 100% real Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now