Switch Theme:

US Politics: 2017 Edition  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 Compel wrote:
I'm not American so i could be setting, but isn't there an added level of irony with the Republicans once being known as the "party of personal responsibility?"


Reagan and Bush Sr. wouldn't recognize this party. inversely Johnson wouldn't conceive of what they've done to his party.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/22 10:29:25


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

In other news, I think Paul Manafort (Trumps former campaign director) might need a lawyer.

AP Exclusive: Manafort had plan to benefit Putin government


Spoiler:
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, secretly worked for a Russian billionaire to advance the interests of Russian President Vladimir Putin a decade ago and proposed an ambitious political strategy to undermine anti-Russian opposition across former Soviet republics, The Associated Press has learned. The work appears to contradict assertions by the Trump administration and Manafort himself that he never worked for Russian interests.

Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and the former Soviet republics to benefit the Putin government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under Republican President George W. Bush grew worse. Manafort pitched the plans to Russian aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska, a close Putin ally with whom Manafort eventually signed a $10 million annual contract beginning in 2006, according to interviews with several people familiar with payments to Manafort and business records obtained by the AP. Manafort and Deripaska maintained a business relationship until at least 2009, according to one person familiar with the work.

"We are now of the belief that this model can greatly benefit the Putin Government if employed at the correct levels with the appropriate commitment to success," Manafort wrote in the 2005 memo to Deripaska. The effort, Manafort wrote, "will be offering a great service that can re-focus, both internally and externally, the policies of the Putin government."

Manafort's plans were laid out in documents obtained by the AP that included strategy memoranda and records showing international wire transfers for millions of dollars. How much work Manafort performed under the contract was unclear.

The disclosure comes as Trump campaign advisers are the subject of an FBI probe and two congressional investigations. Investigators are reviewing whether the Trump campaign and its associates coordinated with Moscow to meddle in the 2016 campaign. Manafort has dismissed the investigations as politically motivated and misguided, and said he never worked for Russian interests. The documents obtained by AP show Manafort's ties to Russia were closer than previously revealed.

In a statement to the AP, Manafort confirmed that he worked for Deripaska in various countries but said the work was being unfairly cast as "inappropriate or nefarious" as part of a "smear campaign."

"I worked with Oleg Deripaska almost a decade ago representing him on business and personal matters in countries where he had investments," Manafort said. "My work for Mr. Deripaska did not involve representing Russian political interests."

Deripaska became one of Russia's wealthiest men under Putin, buying assets abroad in ways widely perceived to benefit the Kremlin's interests. U.S. diplomatic cables from 2006 described Deripaska as "among the 2-3 oligarchs Putin turns to on a regular basis" and "a more-or-less permanent fixture on Putin's trips abroad." In response to questions about Manafort's consulting firm, a spokesman for Deripaska in 2008 — at least three years after they began working together — said Deripaska had never hired the firm. Another Deripaska spokesman in Moscow last week declined to answer AP's questions.

Manafort worked as Trump's unpaid campaign chairman last year from March until August. Trump asked Manafort to resign after AP revealed that Manafort had orchestrated a covert Washington lobbying operation until 2014 on behalf of Ukraine's ruling pro-Russian political party .

The newly obtained business records link Manafort more directly to Putin's interests in the region. According to those records and people with direct knowledge of Manafort's work for Deripaska, Manafort made plans to open an office in Moscow, and at least some of Manafort's work in Ukraine was directed by Deripaska, not local political interests there. The Moscow office never opened.

Manafort has been a leading focus of the U.S. intelligence investigation of Trump's associates and Russia, according to a U.S. official. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because details of the investigation were confidential. Meanwhile, federal criminal prosecutors became interested in Manafort's activities years ago as part of a broad investigation to recover stolen Ukraine assets after the ouster of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych there in early 2014. No U.S. criminal charges have ever been filed in the case.

FBI Director James Comey, in confirming to Congress the federal intelligence investigation this week, declined to say whether Manafort was a target. Manafort's name was mentioned 28 times during the hearing of the House Intelligence Committee, mostly about his work in Ukraine. No one mentioned Deripaska.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Monday that Manafort "played a very limited role for a very limited amount of time" in the campaign, even though as Trump's presidential campaign chairman he led it during the crucial run-up to the Republican National Convention.

Manafort and his associates remain in Trump's orbit. Manafort told a colleague this year that he continues to speak with Trump by telephone. Manafort's former business partner in eastern Europe, Rick Gates, has been seen inside the White House on a number of occasions. Gates has since helped plan Trump's inauguration and now runs a nonprofit organization, America First Policies, to back the White House agenda.

Gates, whose name does not appear in the documents, told the AP that he joined Manafort's firm in 2006 and was aware Manafort had a relationship with Deripaska, but he was not aware of the work described in the memos. Gates said his work was focused on domestic U.S. lobbying and political consulting in Ukraine at the time. He said he stopped working for Manafort's firm in March 2016 when he joined Trump's presidential campaign.

Manafort told Deripaska in 2005 that he was pushing policies as part of his work in Ukraine "at the highest levels of the U.S. government — the White House, Capitol Hill and the State Department," according to the documents. He also said he had hired a "leading international law firm with close ties to President Bush to support our client's interests," but he did not identify the firm. Manafort also said he was employing unidentified legal experts for the effort at leading universities and think tanks, including Duke University, New York University and the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Manafort did not disclose details about the lobbying work to the Justice Department during the period the contract was in place.

Under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, people who lobby in the U.S. on behalf of foreign political leaders or political parties must provide detailed reports about their actions to the department. Willfully failing to register is a felony and can result in up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000, though the government rarely files criminal charges.

Deripaska owns Basic Element Co., which employs 200,000 people worldwide in the agriculture, aviation, construction, energy, financial services, insurance and manufacturing industries, and he runs one of the world's largest aluminum companies. Forbes estimated his net worth at $5.2 billion. How much Deripaska paid Manafort in total is not clear, but people familiar with the relationship said money transfers to Manafort amounted to tens of millions of dollars and continued through at least 2009. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the secret payments publicly.

In strategy memos, Manafort proposed that Deripaska and Putin would benefit from lobbying Western governments, especially the U.S., to allow oligarchs to keep possession of formerly state-owned assets in Ukraine. He proposed building "long term relationships" with Western journalists and a variety of measures to improve recruitment, communications and financial planning by pro-Russian parties in the region.

Manafort proposed extending his existing work in eastern Europe to Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Georgia, where he pledged to bolster the legitimacy of governments friendly to Putin and undercut anti-Russian figures through political campaigns, nonprofit front groups and media operations.

For the $10 million contract, Manafort did not use his public-facing consulting firm, Davis Manafort. Instead, he used a company, LOAV Ltd., that he had registered in Delaware in 1992. He listed LOAV as having the same address of his lobbying and consulting firms in Alexandria, Virginia. In other records, LOAV's address was listed as Manafort's home, also in Alexandria. Manafort sold the home in July 2015 for $1.4 million. He now owns an apartment in Trump Tower in New York, as well as other properties in Florida and New York.

One strategy memo to Deripaska was written by Manafort and Rick Davis, his business partner at the time. In written responses to the AP, Davis said he did not know that his firm had proposed a plan to covertly promote the interests of the Russian government.

Davis said he believes Manafort used his name without his permission on the strategy memo. "My name was on every piece of stationery used by the company and in every memo prior to 2006. It does not mean I had anything to do with the memo described," Davis said. He took a leave of absence from the firm in late 2006 to work on John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign.

Manafort's work with Deripaska continued for years, though they had a falling out laid bare in 2014 in a Cayman Islands bankruptcy court. The billionaire gave Manafort nearly $19 million to invest in a Ukrainian TV company called Black Sea Cable, according to legal filings by Deripaska's representatives. It said that after taking the money, Manafort and his associates stopped responding to Deripaska's queries about how the funds had been used.

Early in the 2016 presidential campaign, Deripaska's representatives openly accused Manafort of fraud and pledged to recover the money from him. After Trump earned the nomination, Deripaska's representatives said they would no longer discuss the case.

___

Associated Press writers Jack Gillum, Eric Tucker, Julie Pace, Ted Bridis, Stephen Braun and Julie Bykowicz contributed to this report in Washington; Nataliya Vasilyeva contributed from Moscow and Kiev, Ukraine; and Jake Pearson contributed from New York.



Spoiler:

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/22 12:09:27


 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




On a surly Warboar, leading the Waaagh!

 Frazzled wrote:
 Compel wrote:
I'm not American so i could be setting, but isn't there an added level of irony with the Republicans once being known as the "party of personal responsibility?"


Reagan and Bush Sr. wouldn't recognize this party. inversely Johnson wouldn't conceive of what they've done to his party.


What a treat to be able to wholeheartedly agree with you on something! Besides dogs being the only real option as a pet, of course.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/22 12:46:41


 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

That might be one of the rare smart 'You're Fired' action has done.

But, I'm finding all of this hysterical.

Psst... Romney wuz right!
Spoiler:



'Murrica... you done fethed up. This guy would've been a much better potus than the 2nd term Obama and especially He Who Shall Not Be Named occupying the WH.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




Didn't Romney show he was nothing but a spineless worm when he stood against Trump all election, only to try and butter him up after he won in the vain hope of a position in the dumpster fire? Pretty sure there is a picture of them looking like he just sold his soul to the devil.
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

lonestarr777 wrote:
Didn't Romney show he was nothing but a spineless worm when he stood against Trump all election, only to try and butter him up after he won in the vain hope of a position in the dumpster fire? Pretty sure there is a picture of them looking like he just sold his soul to the devil.

And he'd still would be better than all of those yahoos.

Furthermore, he'd be a moderating-the-crazy-Trump-train force had he joined the administration much like Mattis/Kelly/McMaster picks.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






lonestarr777 wrote:
Didn't Romney show he was nothing but a spineless worm when he stood against Trump all election, only to try and butter him up after he won in the vain hope of a position in the dumpster fire? Pretty sure there is a picture of them looking like he just sold his soul to the devil.
Romney was invited to dinner by Trump. Once Trump was elected Romney would have to work with him like it or not, so there's nothing wrong with trying to smooth things over to have a better working relationship. I hardly got the sense that Romney made a sudden switch to brown-nosing like Cruz did.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




I'm calling BS. First and formost that manuever showed an incredible lack of integrity. Never means never, not just never till you win. Which is why I have zero respect for a lot of never Trumpers.

Second, where the feth is Mattis/Kelly/McMasters at then if their supposed to be moderating the crazy? The crazy train doesn't have any breaks. No one is at the helm beyond the racsist minotaur who visits Trump in the three hours of sleep he gets.

All Romney did was show he's nothing but bluster and willing to bow to a man he so vehemently opposed for even a chance of power. Words and principals mean something. Then again, I'm in that percent he doesn't care about so what do I know?
   
Made in us
Incorporating Wet-Blending





Houston, TX

Yeah, Romney was and is a pretty moderate pragmatist. Indeed, "Romneycare" was much more similar to "Obamacare" than most Republicans wanted to admit. In comparison to Trump, he is an elder statesman of the party.

However, no matter how many times you trot out an old campaign video, it doesn't change the fact that situations change. Obama did adopt aggressive sanctions towards Russia, which worked. So well, in fact, that Moscow took an active interest in screwing with the US elections. In the last election, it was the Democrat advocating a harder line against Russia, so I don't understand what the point of posting that "Romney was right" is other than to illustrate how wrong the current US president is, and how the party continues to cover for his egregious actions, despite knowing better.

On a related note, the stock market is beginning to stumble as Trump flounders. The hard numbers being released aren't looking good and the optimism built in from Trump's election is fading as he is looking to be an ineffectual president unable to perform on his promises of lower corporate taxes, stimulus spending, etc. Oh, there was the Fed rate hike too. Concerns are that the short term hike in a structurally weak economy (rather than a pushing long term rates higher) could lead to serious problems, potentially a recession.

I doubt Trump will be addressing this in his speeches, however.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/22 13:21:21


-James
 
   
Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN (Currently in WY)

In the old days before Glass-Steagal, recessions happened about every 10 or so years. When did the last recession start again? 2007 you say? Yeah, we are about due considering Glass-Steagal doesn't really exist anymore.

However, i am sure there is someone more knowledgable on the subject with a fancy graph to share somewhere.

Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

For much of the US it never ended.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Incorporating Wet-Blending





Houston, TX

Frazz, that's actually a really good point. The recovery has definitely been lopsided. See this article from 2015 talking about gains in the last 9 years: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-16/the-richest-americans-are-winning-the-economy-recovery

The thing is, Trump was pointing to the post election stock market and still ignoring the larger economic picture. Worse, his rhetoric and proposed budget shows no concern for those who he claimed to champion, namely working class voters. The Republican congressional majorities, likewise, continue to advocate for positions that benefit the ultra wealthy and financial institutions, as large swathes of the population struggle.

Instead of effective governance, they continue to focus on padding their interests and political lies, blaming "fake news" and the "deep state". It really is deplorable, yet certain segments lap it up.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/22 14:02:25


-James
 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 Ouze wrote:
I have several times now considered making a running total of how many times Whembly has referenced "thank Harry Reid" for some gakky thing the GOP is doing, with a running count of someone explaining why Harry Reid had no option but the remove the filibuster option, followed by Whembly repeating it again a little while later. By my count it would be at least 6 by now.

But at the end of the day what would the point be? Hackery gonna hack ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


I've had that exact conversation with him at least a half dozen times just by myself. And wouldn't you know it, this one appears to have ended exactly like all the rest, with whembly just suddenly dropping it and moving on to debate other things. Maybe this time he's dropped it because he's finally seen reason and now understands that Reid's action was in response to a Republican strategy to abuse the filibuster as a purely obstructionist strategy. Or you know, maybe he'll just bring it up in a week or two, appearing to be completely unaware that anyone had ever suggested to him that Reid didn't just remove the filibuster out of the blue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
lonestarr777 wrote:
Didn't Romney show he was nothing but a spineless worm when he stood against Trump all election, only to try and butter him up after he won in the vain hope of a position in the dumpster fire? Pretty sure there is a picture of them looking like he just sold his soul to the devil.


Romney showed he was a spineless worm when he ran in 2012, campaigning against his own achievements as governor and reshaping himself as a weird kind of ultra-conservative fiscal thing.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/22 14:11:00


“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 sebster wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
I have several times now considered making a running total of how many times Whembly has referenced "thank Harry Reid" for some gakky thing the GOP is doing, with a running count of someone explaining why Harry Reid had no option but the remove the filibuster option, followed by Whembly repeating it again a little while later. By my count it would be at least 6 by now.

But at the end of the day what would the point be? Hackery gonna hack ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


I've had that exact conversation with him at least a half dozen times just by myself. And wouldn't you know it, this one appears to have ended exactly like all the rest, with whembly just suddenly dropping it and moving on to debate other things. Maybe this time he's dropped it because he's finally seen reason and now understands that Reid's action was in response to a Republican strategy to abuse the filibuster as a purely obstructionist strategy. Or you know, maybe he'll just bring it up in a week or two, appearing to be completely unaware that anyone had ever suggested to him that Reid didn't just remove the filibuster out of the blue.

So ya'll are sitting there, secure in your knowledge that you aren't hacks spinning for Democrats?

That's cute. Please do go on...

I simply move on to other debates because there are other things to talk about, not out of tactical retreat.

Oh... I still blame Reid for blowing up the filibuster. It's fething asinine to opine that 'he had no choice'.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in se
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan






Sweden

 whembly wrote:


Oh... I still blame Reid for blowing up the filibuster. It's fething asinine to opine that 'he had no choice'.


You complained that you think it's unfair that people expect the Republicans to martyr themselves, and yet you apparently think it's perfectly fine that you think the Democrats should've martyred themselves and let the Republicans shut down the nominations process.

For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back. 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 Easy E wrote:
In the old days before Glass-Steagal, recessions happened about every 10 or so years. When did the last recession start again? 2007 you say? Yeah, we are about due considering Glass-Steagal doesn't really exist anymore.


Glass Steagal wasn't about making the country recession proof. It put controls on the banking sector which made finance driven recessions less likely (but still possible), but recessions get caused by all kinds of things. This doesn't mean I think Glass Steagal or a more powerful modern alternative shouldn't happen, because it should, but just that a measure of its effectiveness won't be the sudden disappearance of recessions.

However, i am sure there is someone more knowledgable on the subject with a fancy graph to share somewhere.


I'm not sure about all of that but I sure do have the graph.



I didn't find a decent one with recessions marked, but you can eyeball them roughly as the bits where the graph dips. The thing to note is that they're not evenly spaced, they don't come routinely every ten years or so. Sometimes they're spaced a couple of years apart, sometimes they stretch out closer to 20 years apart. If things were that regular then macro-economists would have much better reputations than they do

The end result of all that is just because the US hasn't been in recession for a while doesn't mean one is any more likely any time soon. It might happen, there are certainly risks factors in the US economy right now. Stocks certainly seemed primed for a correction. But even if we take that as a strong risk, there's always strong risks in every economy, they don't make recession inevitable.

I'm not saying recession won't happen while Trump is in office. He's got 4 or 8 years, recession is likely enough over that stretch of time. And if it does happen he seems uniquely incapable of handling it, and it seems like it would impact Trump more than most other presidents, given how much he's depended on a kind of vague prosperity appeal.

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

lonestarr777 wrote:
Didn't Romney show he was nothing but a spineless worm when he stood against Trump all election, only to try and butter him up after he won in the vain hope of a position in the dumpster fire? Pretty sure there is a picture of them looking like he just sold his soul to the devil.




You could also substitute any number of Primary opponents in that picture.
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 whembly wrote:
So ya'll are sitting there, secure in your knowledge that you aren't hacks spinning for Democrats?


Yes, because the substance of what is actually said matters. It isn't all just opinions and everyone gets to say their piece with mutual respect for all kumba fething ya. There is an objective reality and people's ability to relate their opinions to that reality determines who is saying sensible things and who is speaking nonsense.

I simply move on to other debates because there are other things to talk about, not out of tactical retreat.


But then you go back to repeating your exact same claims a week or two later, with almost no idea the revious conversation ever happened. It's like debating Guy Pierce in Memento.

Oh... I still blame Reid for blowing up the filibuster. It's fething asinine to opine that 'he had no choice'.


Okay, let's give you a hypothetical. Let's assume you are senate majority leader, with a 55 seat Republican majority. The minority Democrats have said they will filibuster every appointment made by the Republican president, and that's exactly what they've done. Every appointment they have filibustered it, and they state that's what they'll do because they hate this president, they think he is un-american. What do you do, senate majority leader whembly?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Frazzled wrote:
For much of the US it never ended.


While I get your point that some areas are in serious decline and facing awful economic hardship, the detail here matters. Recession is a very different thing. Recession is a passing issue, one in which temporary economic boosts like lower money rates and stimulus spending are appropriate.

What is happening in many rural areas, and some cities in America is not a passing recession, it is a structural issue that requires major structural reform to resolve. It needs the creation of new drivers of economic activity, new industry sectors. Or possibly it needs de-population, a recognition that those areas no longer have the jobs to sustain that level of population.

I'm not nitpicking here, precisely because people are loose with their terminology and their understanding of different kinds of economic activity that passing national recessions get confused with localised economic decline, and nothing is done about the latter.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/22 14:45:33


“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 sebster wrote:

Okay, let's give you a hypothetical. Let's assume you are senate majority leader, with a 55 seat Republican majority. The minority Democrats have said they will filibuster every appointment made by the Republican president, and that's exactly what they've done. Every appointment they have filibustered it, and they state that's what they'll do because they hate this president, they think he is un-american. What do you do, senate majority leader whembly?

Simply asking "what would it take to bring you to the table?".

Don't scoff, it happened before:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_14

Where it was the GOP threatening this time to nuke the filibuster.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

 whembly wrote:
 sebster wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
I have several times now considered making a running total of how many times Whembly has referenced "thank Harry Reid" for some gakky thing the GOP is doing, with a running count of someone explaining why Harry Reid had no option but the remove the filibuster option, followed by Whembly repeating it again a little while later. By my count it would be at least 6 by now.

But at the end of the day what would the point be? Hackery gonna hack ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


I've had that exact conversation with him at least a half dozen times just by myself. And wouldn't you know it, this one appears to have ended exactly like all the rest, with whembly just suddenly dropping it and moving on to debate other things. Maybe this time he's dropped it because he's finally seen reason and now understands that Reid's action was in response to a Republican strategy to abuse the filibuster as a purely obstructionist strategy. Or you know, maybe he'll just bring it up in a week or two, appearing to be completely unaware that anyone had ever suggested to him that Reid didn't just remove the filibuster out of the blue.

So ya'll are sitting there, secure in your knowledge that you aren't hacks spinning for Democrats?

That's cute. Please do go on...

I simply move on to other debates because there are other things to talk about, not out of tactical retreat.

Oh... I still blame Reid for blowing up the filibuster. It's fething asinine to opine that 'he had no choice'.
Whembly...if everything is just going to circle back on Reid every time, with zero acknowledgement of the GOP's complete obstructionist behavior and pretending that such is perfectly reasonable everday politics as intended by the framers and practiced daily for generations, then no conversation is ever going to go anywhere.

Ultimately the GOP chose to essentially break the system of government we will under by refusing to act on anything.

Now they are in power and have the ability to act, and are acting in a way few find either sane or productive. Blaming their current excesses on Reid for removing a once valuable safeguard because it was being abused on a routine basis for purely partisan political reasons, without respect to the qualities of candidates and issuea presented, is, well, a somewhat absurdly stilted view to say the least.


IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

If I spend a year calling everybody on this board an donkey-cave, and then I get banned, is Yak the bad guy for banning me?

(I am aware that there are people who would answer that question with a "yes)
   
Made in gb
Nasty Nob





UK

 whembly wrote:
 sebster wrote:

Okay, let's give you a hypothetical. Let's assume you are senate majority leader, with a 55 seat Republican majority. The minority Democrats have said they will filibuster every appointment made by the Republican president, and that's exactly what they've done. Every appointment they have filibustered it, and they state that's what they'll do because they hate this president, they think he is un-american. What do you do, senate majority leader whembly?

Simply asking "what would it take to bring you to the table?".

Don't scoff, it happened before:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_14

Where it was the GOP threatening this time to nuke the filibuster.


http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/186133-reid-triggers-nuclear-option-to-change-senate-rules-and-prohibit-post-cloture-filibusters

The difference is that in the gang of 14, there were 7 on each side of the spectrum willing to negotiate. It seems that there was no willingness to negotiate when Reid triggered the nuclear option, from either side. The republicans however, were definitely being obstructionist and deploying delaying tactics, and from my link,

Senate Republicans said Reid is right to worry.

“Just wait until they get into the minority!”


I think the idea that Obama and Reid could have approached the GOP to make a deal is probably fantasy football politics. Wembley you said that you would talk, what do you think it would have taken, or what would Obama have been able to say or do, to get the GOP to co-operate?

Six of Bush’s nominees were quickly confirmed, two others withdrew and the “gang” agreed that only “extraordinary circumstances” would prompt a filibuster.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/no-bipartisan-gang-to-save-the-senate-this-time-on-supreme-court-nomination-fight/2016/02/29/710dcb56-dcd7-11e5-925f-1d10062cc82d_story.html?utm_term=.8715aedf106d

So what happened to the fllibuster being only used in extrordinary circumstances when the GOP was blocking Obama? Was every choice he made so terrible that it must be blocked?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/22 16:14:42


"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984 
   
Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN (Currently in WY)

 sebster wrote:


Glass Steagal wasn't about making the country recession proof. It put controls on the banking sector which made finance driven recessions less likely (but still possible), but recessions get caused by all kinds of things. This doesn't mean I think Glass Steagal or a more powerful modern alternative shouldn't happen, because it should, but just that a measure of its effectiveness won't be the sudden disappearance of recessions.

I'm not sure about all of that but I sure do have the graph.






Thanks.

Of course, no legislation will make an economy recession proof. if there was we would probably have passed it all by now! However, as you point out, it minimized the risk of recession due to excessive speculation.

It was my impression that prior to the Great Depression; Bank Runs, Foreclosure Crisis, and similar economic hardships were pretty common due to "wildcat" land speculation and other types of speculative investing. Then, after the reforms post-Depression things began to be more stable. That graph would tell me that my preception of the world Pre-Great depression were not that accurate.

I appreciate it.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/22 16:33:32


Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




On a surly Warboar, leading the Waaagh!

 whembly wrote:
 sebster wrote:

Okay, let's give you a hypothetical. Let's assume you are senate majority leader, with a 55 seat Republican majority. The minority Democrats have said they will filibuster every appointment made by the Republican president, and that's exactly what they've done. Every appointment they have filibustered it, and they state that's what they'll do because they hate this president, they think he is un-american. What do you do, senate majority leader whembly?

Simply asking "what would it take to bring you to the table?".

Don't scoff, it happened before:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_14

Where it was the GOP threatening this time to nuke the filibuster.



Just two years into his presidency, in 2010, Mitch McConnell made it clear that he would deny bipartisanship to President Obama and stated unequivocably that "...our top priority is to make Obama a one term President." There was going to be no give from the right while Obama was POTUS, your wishful thinking otherwise is wrong. Reid had absolutely no choice in his action.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

So when the ACA was making the rounds through Congress, it was the Democrats fault that the GOP did not want to negotiate.

Now the AHCA is making the rounds through Congress, and the GOP doesn't even want to negotiate with each other. Instead Trump is doing his usual "I will make you pay if you don't" routine. Great negotiator we elected there.
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Building a blood in water scent

 d-usa wrote:
If I spend a year calling everybody on this board an donkey-cave, and then I get banned, is Yak the bad guy for banning me?

(I am aware that there are people who would answer that question with a "yes)


It's a way of life.

We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 BigWaaagh wrote:
 whembly wrote:
 sebster wrote:

Okay, let's give you a hypothetical. Let's assume you are senate majority leader, with a 55 seat Republican majority. The minority Democrats have said they will filibuster every appointment made by the Republican president, and that's exactly what they've done. Every appointment they have filibustered it, and they state that's what they'll do because they hate this president, they think he is un-american. What do you do, senate majority leader whembly?

Simply asking "what would it take to bring you to the table?".

Don't scoff, it happened before:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_14

Where it was the GOP threatening this time to nuke the filibuster.



Just two years into his presidency, in 2010, Mitch McConnell made it clear that he would deny bipartisanship to President Obama and stated unequivocably that "...our top priority is to make Obama a one term President." There was going to be no give from the right while Obama was POTUS, your wishful thinking otherwise is wrong. Reid had absolutely no choice in his action.


ER...two years you noted. Thats a whole lot of water under the bridge.
but its ok. So far the Democrats have been as completely intransigent. I don't think it matters who the Pres is. From now on the other party is going to always vote no. Its the Parliamenary System but without Parliament. Yea!

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Legendary Master of the Chapter





SoCal

lonestarr777 wrote:
Didn't Romney show he was nothing but a spineless worm when he stood against Trump all election, only to try and butter him up after he won in the vain hope of a position in the dumpster fire? Pretty sure there is a picture of them looking like he just sold his soul to the devil.


I don't like Romney much. I think he's exactly the kind of arrogant wealthy man the term 'privileged' describes to a T. But I could also believe he had the kind of principles that would lead him to swallow his pride and attempt to join the Trump administration because someone has to rein in Donald's excesses. Or it could be naked ambition. Either or.

   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

 Vaktathi wrote:
Whembly...if everything is just going to circle back on Reid every time, with zero acknowledgement of the GOP's complete obstructionist behavior and pretending that such is perfectly reasonable everday politics as intended by the framers and practiced daily for generations, then no conversation is ever going to go anywhere.


Yes, you have accurately described both nearly every political thread in the OT, and one of the strongest drivers of maintaining that status quo.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Ouze wrote:
 Vaktathi wrote:
Whembly...if everything is just going to circle back on Reid every time, with zero acknowledgement of the GOP's complete obstructionist behavior and pretending that such is perfectly reasonable everday politics as intended by the framers and practiced daily for generations, then no conversation is ever going to go anywhere.


Yes, you have accurately described both nearly every political thread in the OT, and one of the strongest drivers of maintaining that status quo.

Aka, I'm going to ignore/cheer shenanigans my team does, but gleefully prop up the other team as the worst thing ever.

Stay woke ya'll.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: