Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 18, 2017, 07:04:15 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 802
26  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Kansas Tried Trump's Tax Plan -It Didn't End Well on: October 11, 2017, 08:42:24 am
There is no need for tax cuts of any kind -profits are booming on Wall Street, we are at nearly full employment with still enough slack in the labor market to keep inflation and wage increases at a minimum, and with taxes already low after decades of previous tax cuts no one (except fat cat GOP donors) is clamoring for them.  

It is a solution in search of a problem that no longer exists.      

Precisely. The time for tax cuts is when the private sector is struggling and needs stimulus. Now is the time to reduce deficits so that we have more room for Keynesian expansionary policy when the next recession hits. (By the way, nuclear war has a tendency to bring on recession)
27  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Are Dave Franco and Seth Rogen responsible for the Korean crisis? on: October 10, 2017, 06:59:18 pm
No, but it appears that someone is feeding North Koreans both weapons technology and giving them hacking assistance, all in an effort to raise their confidence for a war. We have no way of knowing all the spy machinations that occur behind the scenes, and I'm sure they are far more dramatic than anything Hollywood has ever come up with. All we know are the end result: who wins, and who loses? That's your answer.
28  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Insider claims Bill Clinton is ‘heartsick’ over Hillary’s book tour on: October 10, 2017, 09:47:56 am
Lolololol - is this like the stories Clinton "melted down" on election night or that Huma Abedin is her lesbian paramour? God, these people are so desperate. I'd suggest this: Trainwreck
29  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Approximately 100,000 Puerto Ricans Expected to Relocate on: October 10, 2017, 09:21:40 am
Mortimer, Latin American countries are poor because of their institutions, not because of the "extraction" of their people. These institutions were set in place at the countries' founding and have shaped their development ever since. Just look at the difference between North Korea and South Korea to see how, even with the same "extraction", different institutions make the difference between rich and poor.

Latin America has the institutions they have at least partially because of the people they have. Institutions don't spring from the ground. They are made by people.

And these were made, for hundreds of years, by people of European Spaniard “extraction.” In any case, your theory still fails to explain lain how the two Koreas, with the same ethnic extraction, could have produced such different results. Just admit it’s historical circumstance which influenced human behavior and nothing about the people’s ethnicity. Unless your going to say North Koreans are a different race than South Koreans?
30  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Why isn't Hollywood turning against Harvey Weinstein? on: October 10, 2017, 09:00:39 am
Most celebrities turned very quickly against Cosby once the allegations against him came out, but they've been rather silent on Harvey Weinstein. Why is that?

The accusations against Cosby were known about for like 20 years at least.

Anyway, is Weinstein accused of rape? Being accused of sexually harassment is very different than being accused of rape. Especially if you give the people you sexually harassed like a million dollars each. If your boss tells you "nice ass", that's bad but I think if he gives you a million bucks afterwards it kind of cancels out the badness.



I just saw a news segment on Weinstein.  The allegation, if true, would be a crime.  

I watched Judi Dench and Meryl Streep comment on Weinstein today.  These are folks that would knock over little old church ladies to get to a microphone to blast Trump for ogling some beach babe 20 years ago, but they sure are deliberate about Weinstein, and it begs the question why?

One reason, of course, is that these folks have business relationships with Weinstein, and the company he founded that has now pushed him out.  But the real reason is that all of these folks coming forward now have known what Weinstein has been doing for a long time.  Think about it; all the feminist whiners of Hollywood have known about Weinstein for years, maybe decades, but they're "coming forward" now, once others have taken the risk.  

What does it say about these folks' "feminist" principles?  Silent in the face of decades of Weinstein.  Weinstein's a creep and deserves what he gets, but there will be a whole lot of folks coming forward that had the ability to say something long ago and didn't.  Could Weinstein have "ruined" them?  The latecomers coming forward who knew all along what was going on are collaborators with Weinstein, whether they believe themselves to be or not.

So Weinstein's a creep and deserves what he gets, yet Trump is president? What about the women who came forward against Trump? What did they get? Nothing but to see him elected as the most powerful man in the world. Perhaps these women who knew about Weinstein were collaborators, and to blame for his behavior. Or perhaps they merely realized that what happened to Trump's accusers would also happen to them.

If these women want to bring suit against Trump, bring it on.  

I'm amazed how they all went away.  I noted that they surfaced at the same time a number of intelligence community figures began to endorse Hillary Clinton.  I also know that Allen Dulles once said that the best covert operations were the ones that remained secret "from inception to eternity".  Now I don't know about you, but I don't think that the emergence of "accusers" that have miraculously disappeared is the kind of covert operation that would tax the abilities of the "Spies for Clinton" committee.

One of them has brought a suit. Trump's lawyers have argued he can't be sued. In any case, why couldn't Weinstein say the same thing? "If these women want to bring a suit, bring it on. It's amazing they didn't speak out for 20 years. etc." Are you say it's unfair he was fired from his own company when a suit hasn't been concluded?

If there is probable cause for some of the allegations I've heard against Weinstein, he should be charged with a crime.

He's not going to be charged with any crimes, however.  Whatever his guilt or innocence, the Weinstein matter is going to be one about folks seeking civil awards.

That doesn't answer the question. Is it fair that he's being fired from his own company when no legal judgements have been handed down? Hollywood may be an ugly and sexist place, but at least it has enough shame to kick Weinstein to the curb once the accusations about his behavior become public. That the GOP still swears fealty to Trump as their nominee and POTUS despite his self-admitted behavior is even worse. That's for the whole world to see, by the way. A Pakistani man who sexually assaults his wife can argue "even the president of the United States did it, why can't I?"

To answer the question, "Is it fair?", depends on the totality of circumstances.

Weinstein isn't a mere employee, and he likely was pushed out of the plane with a golden parachute.  That's a lot different than an ordinary employee of a company getting fired because he commented on somebody's figure in an inappropriate way.  Companies do the Weinsteins like this to minimize liability all the time.

Is it fair?  In and of itself, no, but Weinstein, while a private citizen, also has power and perks that you or I don't enjoy on our jobs.

And if Trump returned to being a private citizen he'd still be about as rich and influential as Weinstein. Again, you won't see me defending the corrupt, hypocritical institution that is Hollywood, it's no more hypocritical than the Trump brigade.
31  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Approximately 100,000 Puerto Ricans Expected to Relocate on: October 10, 2017, 08:56:57 am
Mortimer, Latin American countries are poor because of their institutions, not because of the "extraction" of their people. These institutions were set in place at the countries' founding and have shaped their development ever since. Just look at the difference between North Korea and South Korea to see how, even with the same "extraction", different institutions make the difference between rich and poor.
32  Forum Community / Forum Community Election Match-ups / Re: Describe the previous poster's path to victory in a certain state on: October 09, 2017, 10:38:21 pm
A right-wing third party candidate runs as the "conservative Independent" and takes about half the GOP with him. xingkerui barely squeaks by with 36% of the vote.

D.C.
33  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: SENATE RESOLUTION: End of War Agreement (Debating) on: October 09, 2017, 10:27:50 pm
IT'S V-K DAY! (Victory in Korea)


What a fairy tale ending. Here's the real story.
34  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Communist Party of China Congress, 2017 on: October 09, 2017, 10:21:14 pm
I still stand by everything I said during the last party Congress. If the coming conflagration on the Korean peninsula doesn't shock China into the horrors of hardlinism, nothing will. It's now clear the true magnitude of the evil that occurred in 2012, when the hardliners got everything but still weren't satisfied, and thrice-cursed traitor Zhou Yongkang went and ratted out Jang Sung-Thaek to his nephew in some buffonish attempt to increase his own leverage with the Politburo, and now will result in nuclear war.
35  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: What should the criminal penalty for Rape be? on: October 09, 2017, 09:15:53 pm
It depends. Not all criminal acts, even rapes, are the same; some will be more heinous and others more justifiable. Setting only one penalty for rape is making the same mistake California made with the three strikes law. It's being "tough on crime" while tying the hands of judges and juries to treat different cases with the nuance necessary to ensure just punishment.

Set it at life? You'll get stories about drunk college students who had bad lawyers being sentenced to life for what they thought was consensual sex. Set it at a decade? You get stories about child rapists getting released before the children are even adults.

This.

Few things piss me off more than people who are like "rapists should be beheaded, castrated, drawn and quartered, waterboarded, cannibalized, etc. etc." but then when someone is actually accused of rape become "he hasn't been convicted, why is she ruining his life that lying b**ch!!"
36  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton vs Bernie Democratic Primary Rematch? on: October 09, 2017, 08:47:48 pm
Let's be real here, Sanders would probably win. What '16 boiled down to for many Democrat was that Hillary had earned a nomination in '08 and didn't get one, so the party "owed" her, especially after she dropped out, endorsed Obama, then served under him drama-free. To do otherwise than give her the nomination would be effectively to rob the potential first female presidential nominee after she'd earned more primary votes than many real nominees. In a rematch, none of that would apply, as Clinton got her nomination when the party closed ranks behind her to fend of Sanders, and thus cashed in her chips. The house doesn't owe her anything more. And her merits as a candidate at this point aren't as good as Sanders'.
37  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Why isn't Hollywood turning against Harvey Weinstein? on: October 09, 2017, 08:17:29 pm
Most celebrities turned very quickly against Cosby once the allegations against him came out, but they've been rather silent on Harvey Weinstein. Why is that?

The accusations against Cosby were known about for like 20 years at least.

Anyway, is Weinstein accused of rape? Being accused of sexually harassment is very different than being accused of rape. Especially if you give the people you sexually harassed like a million dollars each. If your boss tells you "nice ass", that's bad but I think if he gives you a million bucks afterwards it kind of cancels out the badness.



I just saw a news segment on Weinstein.  The allegation, if true, would be a crime.  

I watched Judi Dench and Meryl Streep comment on Weinstein today.  These are folks that would knock over little old church ladies to get to a microphone to blast Trump for ogling some beach babe 20 years ago, but they sure are deliberate about Weinstein, and it begs the question why?

One reason, of course, is that these folks have business relationships with Weinstein, and the company he founded that has now pushed him out.  But the real reason is that all of these folks coming forward now have known what Weinstein has been doing for a long time.  Think about it; all the feminist whiners of Hollywood have known about Weinstein for years, maybe decades, but they're "coming forward" now, once others have taken the risk.  

What does it say about these folks' "feminist" principles?  Silent in the face of decades of Weinstein.  Weinstein's a creep and deserves what he gets, but there will be a whole lot of folks coming forward that had the ability to say something long ago and didn't.  Could Weinstein have "ruined" them?  The latecomers coming forward who knew all along what was going on are collaborators with Weinstein, whether they believe themselves to be or not.

So Weinstein's a creep and deserves what he gets, yet Trump is president? What about the women who came forward against Trump? What did they get? Nothing but to see him elected as the most powerful man in the world. Perhaps these women who knew about Weinstein were collaborators, and to blame for his behavior. Or perhaps they merely realized that what happened to Trump's accusers would also happen to them.

If these women want to bring suit against Trump, bring it on.  

I'm amazed how they all went away.  I noted that they surfaced at the same time a number of intelligence community figures began to endorse Hillary Clinton.  I also know that Allen Dulles once said that the best covert operations were the ones that remained secret "from inception to eternity".  Now I don't know about you, but I don't think that the emergence of "accusers" that have miraculously disappeared is the kind of covert operation that would tax the abilities of the "Spies for Clinton" committee.

One of them has brought a suit. Trump's lawyers have argued he can't be sued. In any case, why couldn't Weinstein say the same thing? "If these women want to bring a suit, bring it on. It's amazing they didn't speak out for 20 years. etc." Are you say it's unfair he was fired from his own company when a suit hasn't been concluded?

If there is probable cause for some of the allegations I've heard against Weinstein, he should be charged with a crime.

He's not going to be charged with any crimes, however.  Whatever his guilt or innocence, the Weinstein matter is going to be one about folks seeking civil awards.

That doesn't answer the question. Is it fair that he's being fired from his own company when no legal judgements have been handed down? Hollywood may be an ugly and sexist place, but at least it has enough shame to kick Weinstein to the curb once the accusations about his behavior become public. That the GOP still swears fealty to Trump as their nominee and POTUS despite his self-admitted behavior is even worse. That's for the whole world to see, by the way. A Pakistani man who sexually assaults his wife can argue "even the president of the United States did it, why can't I?"
38  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Catherine Cortez Masto 2020? on: October 09, 2017, 08:12:53 pm
She's too old.
She's two decades younger than your Cheeto Jesus.

"When they go low, we go high" - what happened to that? This is why no one takes liberals seriously anymore. You guys go on and on being offended by Trump only to throw your own insults out. Trump has exposed the left and there's no going back.

If a Democrat wants to win, they have to be young and exciting. Like JFK, Clinton, Carter, or Obama.

People act in accordance with their environment. If everyone around us is stealing, and not being punished for it, we'll probably steal too. But we'd prefer if no one around had the habit of stealing. That is called social norms, and is an important part of civilization. Trump drags the whole environment of society down.
39  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Why isn't Hollywood turning against Harvey Weinstein? on: October 09, 2017, 07:38:36 pm
Most celebrities turned very quickly against Cosby once the allegations against him came out, but they've been rather silent on Harvey Weinstein. Why is that?

The accusations against Cosby were known about for like 20 years at least.

Anyway, is Weinstein accused of rape? Being accused of sexually harassment is very different than being accused of rape. Especially if you give the people you sexually harassed like a million dollars each. If your boss tells you "nice ass", that's bad but I think if he gives you a million bucks afterwards it kind of cancels out the badness.



I just saw a news segment on Weinstein.  The allegation, if true, would be a crime.  

I watched Judi Dench and Meryl Streep comment on Weinstein today.  These are folks that would knock over little old church ladies to get to a microphone to blast Trump for ogling some beach babe 20 years ago, but they sure are deliberate about Weinstein, and it begs the question why?

One reason, of course, is that these folks have business relationships with Weinstein, and the company he founded that has now pushed him out.  But the real reason is that all of these folks coming forward now have known what Weinstein has been doing for a long time.  Think about it; all the feminist whiners of Hollywood have known about Weinstein for years, maybe decades, but they're "coming forward" now, once others have taken the risk.  

What does it say about these folks' "feminist" principles?  Silent in the face of decades of Weinstein.  Weinstein's a creep and deserves what he gets, but there will be a whole lot of folks coming forward that had the ability to say something long ago and didn't.  Could Weinstein have "ruined" them?  The latecomers coming forward who knew all along what was going on are collaborators with Weinstein, whether they believe themselves to be or not.

So Weinstein's a creep and deserves what he gets, yet Trump is president? What about the women who came forward against Trump? What did they get? Nothing but to see him elected as the most powerful man in the world. Perhaps these women who knew about Weinstein were collaborators, and to blame for his behavior. Or perhaps they merely realized that what happened to Trump's accusers would also happen to them.

If these women want to bring suit against Trump, bring it on.  

I'm amazed how they all went away.  I noted that they surfaced at the same time a number of intelligence community figures began to endorse Hillary Clinton.  I also know that Allen Dulles once said that the best covert operations were the ones that remained secret "from inception to eternity".  Now I don't know about you, but I don't think that the emergence of "accusers" that have miraculously disappeared is the kind of covert operation that would tax the abilities of the "Spies for Clinton" committee.

One of them has brought a suit. Trump's lawyers have argued he can't be sued. In any case, why couldn't Weinstein say the same thing? "If these women want to bring a suit, bring it on. It's amazing they didn't speak out for 20 years. etc." Are you say it's unfair he was fired from his own company when a suit hasn't been concluded?
40  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / Re: Music Megathread on: October 09, 2017, 06:41:39 pm
Who else likes Melanie Martinez?

I've been a fan ever since her appearance on The Voice,  but in the past 2 or so weeks I've really been listening to her a lot.

I listened to her a lot up until about a month ago. Still good stuff.
41  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Why isn't Hollywood turning against Harvey Weinstein? on: October 09, 2017, 06:31:51 pm
Most celebrities turned very quickly against Cosby once the allegations against him came out, but they've been rather silent on Harvey Weinstein. Why is that?

The accusations against Cosby were known about for like 20 years at least.

Anyway, is Weinstein accused of rape? Being accused of sexually harassment is very different than being accused of rape. Especially if you give the people you sexually harassed like a million dollars each. If your boss tells you "nice ass", that's bad but I think if he gives you a million bucks afterwards it kind of cancels out the badness.



I just saw a news segment on Weinstein.  The allegation, if true, would be a crime. 

I watched Judi Dench and Meryl Streep comment on Weinstein today.  These are folks that would knock over little old church ladies to get to a microphone to blast Trump for ogling some beach babe 20 years ago, but they sure are deliberate about Weinstein, and it begs the question why?

One reason, of course, is that these folks have business relationships with Weinstein, and the company he founded that has now pushed him out.  But the real reason is that all of these folks coming forward now have known what Weinstein has been doing for a long time.  Think about it; all the feminist whiners of Hollywood have known about Weinstein for years, maybe decades, but they're "coming forward" now, once others have taken the risk. 

What does it say about these folks' "feminist" principles?  Silent in the face of decades of Weinstein.  Weinstein's a creep and deserves what he gets, but there will be a whole lot of folks coming forward that had the ability to say something long ago and didn't.  Could Weinstein have "ruined" them?  The latecomers coming forward who knew all along what was going on are collaborators with Weinstein, whether they believe themselves to be or not.

So Weinstein's a creep and deserves what he gets, yet Trump is president? What about the women who came forward against Trump? What did they get? Nothing but to see him elected as the most powerful man in the world. Perhaps these women who knew about Weinstein were collaborators, and to blame for his behavior. Or perhaps they merely realized that what happened to Trump's accusers would also happen to them.
42  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: If Trumps brings us to war with NK, how does our nation react? on: October 09, 2017, 05:58:09 pm
I love how Beet went from "we must do something even if it makes the destruction of Seoul" type under Obama to "omg the end is near, diplomacy is the only way out" under Trump.

Uh, I've been arguing for diplomacy for 90% of my post history, if you really want to go digging, including under Obama. I mean, Benj was saying that North Korea would overarm "to the point of collapse". That's laughable to think about now.
43  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: If Trumps brings us to war with NK, how does our nation react? on: October 09, 2017, 05:34:31 pm
Trump is now trying to goad them into attacking first, which he would love.

If he attacks first, it would be mass murder on his part. The sickest thing about it, is that he will say "I didn't want it, but I had no choice. I was forced," when that's baloney. He's wanted war from the moment Obama whispered into his ear that it was a big problem. Back in February -- before any of the missile launches or provocations -- North Korea tried to send a diplomatic delegation to New York to feel out the new administration, and they weren't even granted visas. Trump has never made any effort to seek out a diplomatic solution, instead from day one he concluded that since the AF collapsed, it was "25 years of diplomatic failure" despite all the evidence showing the opposite. The North Koreans have been very consistent about what they want - recognition of the reality that they are a nuclear power - which is not unreasonable given the threats being leveled daily now, and an end to the "hostile policy" towards them, which entails a peace treaty ending the Korean War. They have repeatedly implied that if the U.S. withdraws their hostile policy, their raison d'etre for having nuclear weapons will then go away. But Trump is more like an 8-year old boy with an inordinate hatred for East Asians (he came of age when it was the Japan-taking-over-everything in the '70s and '80s) and a joy for big toys that make things go bang bang that he wants to play with. But instead of toys, he has the real most destructive arsenal in the world. And all the so-called "responsible" adults in the world are just letting him sit there and play with it.
44  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: What states support protectionism? on: October 09, 2017, 04:57:18 pm
Birmingham, AL was founded after the Civil War for its proximity to coal, iron ore, and limestone deposits in the area and named after the English industrial city of the same name. These ingredients are rarely found in close proximity, and with the arrival of the railroads, the city was able to export high quality steel. It’s access to poor, rural white and black Alabama labor from the countryside gave the city a competitive low wage workforce. In three decades it’s population grew from almost nothing to over 100,000, and it was nicknamed “the Pittsburgh of the South.”
45  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Russia Recruited YouTubers to Bash ‘Racist B*tch’ Hillary Clinton Over Rap Beats on: October 08, 2017, 10:43:23 pm
Why would they go to such lengths? It's obvious they wanted Trump to win and likely that there was collusion with the Trump campaign, and it is deeply alarming that the threat is dismissed and covered up by the administration now and leaving open the threat of repeated foreign interference in US elections.

I think it's instructive to see how outsiders with a distance from American culture and fights go about weakening this country. They very clearly grasp that fostering racial divisions on both sides is a good way to undermine America.
46  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Pence walks out of NFL game in temper tantrum over Kneeling players on: October 08, 2017, 10:38:39 pm
Good for Pence!

These kneelers are anti-American.  They hate America.  They deserve to experience the negative feedback from the millions they've offended by their behavior.  If their income streams from endorsements all dry up, I wouldn't shed a tear.

Where was all this conservative outrage against political statements on the job when the NYPD turned their backs on de Blasio?

Can't wait until these anti-freedom couch goblins are irrelevant.

The American flag is not the same thing as the mayor of New York City. One is a man, the other is the designated symbol of national unity. Not that I think Fuzzy has any ground to stand on, as I've made clear in the past. He supported a guy who knowingly invited foreign intelligence to attack American citizens, and enjoyed it, on national TV.

The American flag is a symbol of this nation, and kneeling to protest injustice is one of the most American things you can do.

I tend to think that police officers shooting African-Americans in the back is a lot more disrespectful than an abstract act of protest, but expecting the orangutan in the White House (or Fuzzy Bear) to care about the former is clearly futile.

Sure, but you're kneeling against the flag, which represents all that is American, including, ironically, protest itself. You're also politicizing something (sports) that shouldn't be politicized. Trump himself just fanned the flames before the start of the season with his comments in Alabama. Before that, only one tight end kneeled on August 21, 2017. Now it's become a massive controversy. I think Trump is actually happy that the players are protesting, because this is the kind of racial division that he enjoys and which helps him.
47  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Russia Recruited YouTubers to Bash ‘Racist B*tch’ Hillary Clinton Over Rap Beats on: October 08, 2017, 10:27:24 pm
"None of Williams or Kalvin’s Facebook friends are from Atlanta, where the two claim they live on Facebook and in videos. On Facebook, both Williams and Kalvin claim their hometown is Owerri in Nigeria.

In 2015, Williams Johnson claimed he had just spent his “first Thanksgiving with my LIL BROTHER in America!” and attached a since deleted Tweet from Alex Jay, who is a rapper and Instagram model. Jay told The Daily Beast he had never heard of Williams.

Williams and Kalvin’s videos are not particularly rigorous about nuances of American culture and geography. Kalvin, for example, claims that Baton Rouge is in “L.A.” Another video calls LeBron James the best “basket” player of the year."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russia-recruited-youtubers-to-bash-racist-btch-hillary-clinton-over-rap-beats
48  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Steve Bannon's War on the establishment on: October 08, 2017, 09:46:54 pm
Now we need someone to primary all the establishment in the Democratic party.

Unfortunately, most of them have penises, so it won't happen.
49  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Pence walks out of NFL game in temper tantrum over Kneeling players on: October 08, 2017, 04:49:33 pm
Good for Pence!

These kneelers are anti-American.  They hate America.  They deserve to experience the negative feedback from the millions they've offended by their behavior.  If their income streams from endorsements all dry up, I wouldn't shed a tear.

Where was all this conservative outrage against political statements on the job when the NYPD turned their backs on de Blasio?

Can't wait until these anti-freedom couch goblins are irrelevant.

The American flag is not the same thing as the mayor of New York City. One is a man, the other is the designated symbol of national unity. Not that I think Fuzzy has any ground to stand on, as I've made clear in the past. He supported a guy who knowingly invited foreign intelligence to attack American citizens, and enjoyed it, on national TV.
50  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Trump publicly flagellates another Senator on: October 08, 2017, 04:17:47 pm
It's not like Corker's comments actually help. The more you suggest Trump is in the pockets of advisors, the more resistant to those advisors he gets. Someone should suggest he's in the pocket of Stephen Miller or something.

They help in that it's one more brick in building a consensus that reflects reality: Trump is grossly unfit for the office of President.

And once we all agree on that, we can then proceed with legally removing one of the greatest dangers our nation has ever faced.

Wake me up when the 25th Amendment or impeachment begins to be seriously discussed on a bipartisan basis of basic humanity and common sense, where it has nothing to do with being a Republican or Democrat.

Until then, Corker's comments are harmful.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 802


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines