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.

 whembly wrote:
@Vaktathi: I'm willing to concede that the GOP party in it's current state does have issues and is culpable to bad governance. I'm just a bit miffed at the whitewashing of the Democrat's own bad actions that many posters here have largely ignored. Hence why I bang on that Reid Rule drum so hard, because it had serious repercussions.

The dem's arent innocent and Reid's change does put things at greater risk, I dont disagree there, just that the major driver of less than optimal events has merely been made easier rather than caused by that change. Major party politics had gone to wacko world. My big fear at this point is that the Democrats will resort to the same obstructionism and insane populism after seeing it rewarded and we'll have two truly crazy parties. More unfortunate is that I dont see a practical route out for the Democrats other than wanton obstructionism because much of the stuff the GOP is putting out is insane public policy in and of itself on one hand and the tenor of things makes it increasingly impossible to compromise from either side


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Well Chongara explained my views pretty well. Except for this

 Chongara wrote:
Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I'd say there is something mighty wrong with enjoying killing innocent creatures for fun and giggle. As opposed to the few people actually doing it because they don't have any real other way to survive decently. Those people are okay. But they are not you, I'd wager.

Hrm, hunting isnt my thing but it isnt just about killing either. There's the whole experience of being outdoors, tracking or ambushing prey, the skill in making the shot, etc.

There are also situations where mass culling is necessary, such as environmentally damaging and invasive feral boar across the US south for example.

Some people also just prefer some degree of self sufficiency. There's some merit to the idea that hunting yourself instead of getting one's meat from mass farm/slaughter operations is more responsible and environmentally friendly.

It's not all just about killing.

That said, if someone is in it just for the killing or trophies, I do have issues with that, but hunting is not inherently just about killing.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Ahah sure, you could. You could also have internet in your cave! But somehow I am assuming that you live on a house or an apartment, and that you have a job that doesn't involve any hunting and that allows you to buy food in shops and markets.

In my area, local deer populations are out of control since they have very few predators. They often decimate peoples gardens and crops as well as eating the food for other small animals. This causes their population to boom while populations of other animals go down. When their populations boom, they often cross roads at bad times, causing fatal car accidents. Since humans are natural predators for deer, we have to step in and keep their population in check, otherwise they will decimate the local ecosystem.

You should maybe look in to conservation so that you can have an informed opinion.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Ahah sure, you could. You could also have internet in your cave! But somehow I am assuming that you live on a house or an apartment, and that you have a job that doesn't involve any hunting and that allows you to buy food in shops and markets.

...so, how does the meat make it in the shops and markets in the first place?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Ahah sure, you could. You could also have internet in your cave! But somehow I am assuming that you live on a house or an apartment, and that you have a job that doesn't involve any hunting and that allows you to buy food in shops and markets.

In my area, local deer populations are out of control since they have very few predators. They often decimate peoples gardens and crops as well as eating the food for other small animals. This causes their population to boom while populations of other animals go down. When their populations boom, they often cross roads at bad times, causing fatal car accidents. Since humans are natural predators for deer, we have to step in and keep their population in check, otherwise they will decimate the local ecosystem.

You should maybe look in to conservation so that you can have an informed opinion.

Also... feral pigs are becoming a problem in southern IL and MO... in fact, I'm sure it's an issue just about everywhere in the midwest.

Not so much in my area, at least not that I am aware of, we have actually had a lot of issues with the coyote population around here. Which is strange.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Not so much in my area, at least not that I am aware of, we have actually had a lot of issues with the coyote population around here. Which is strange.

No gak? Coyote?!

...wow, that's new. And disturbing, as packs of coyotes are known to go after dogs.

 whembly wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Ahah sure, you could. You could also have internet in your cave! But somehow I am assuming that you live on a house or an apartment, and that you have a job that doesn't involve any hunting and that allows you to buy food in shops and markets.

...so, how does the meat make it in the shops and markets in the first place?

Farms?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Not so much in my area, at least not that I am aware of, we have actually had a lot of issues with the coyote population around here. Which is strange.

No gak? Coyote?!

...wow, that's new. And disturbing, as packs of coyotes are known to go after dogs.

Coyotes are sons of bitches, I hate those fethers. And we have ones with wolf DNA here, making them bigger and more likely to go after large animals.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
In my area, local deer populations are out of control since they have very few predators. They often decimate peoples gardens and crops as well as eating the food for other small animals. This causes their population to boom while populations of other animals go down. When their populations boom, they often cross roads at bad times, causing fatal car accidents. Since humans are natural predators for deer, we have to step in and keep their population in check, otherwise they will decimate the local ecosystem.

This right here is a good reason to hunt. Humans have driven back (or totally exterminated) big predators that would eat these animals. If we don't cull them they'll increase in number, destroy crops, cause car accidents and generally make a nuisance of themself - and finally starve to death most painfully when they've eaten everything they can eat. Our deer population is getting to be a bit of a nuisance but the one we're more concerned about here in Finland is the moose (or elk) - these things are big animals and none too bright. A wolf pack that takes one down has food for a week, and we only have about 40 packs in total, some of which pass over to Russia at times. 40x52=2080. What about the rest of the ~46,000 calfs they produce every year? Some have to be culled, and our hunters don't leave the carcasses lying.

Ofc, even if there's a good reason to hunt it doesn't mean a hunter shouldn't enjoy what he's doing.

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

I think you'll find the idea talking to the other side is a pretty routine thing, mate. The question I'm asking you is what happens when that negotiation has been tried, and failed, and has no hope of happening.

Because in this instance, when you went and talked to the other side, you found the Democrats with no interest in negotiating. They made electoral commitments to their voting base that they would obstruct as much and as often as possible, and polling among the party base shows their current pattern of obstructionism is very popular, particularly over judicial nominees. Any senator who crosses the floor to break the filibuster would stand a high chance of being primaried, or surviving that and going in to a general trying to whip up a base that knows they were lied to. They have only political gain from obstructing, and only political cost from cutting a deal to give you what you want.

You are, in effect, being asked to negotiate with people who have nothing to gain from negotiation.

So what are you going to do? The stack of nominees are mounting, the president is calling you in to the Oval Office on a daily basis to shout at you to get this cleared. What do you do?


Its also more than a bit funny that you'd mention the Gang of 14, in which after a Democratic block on nominees the Republican party moved to the nuclear option. And yet I've never seen you criticise Frist for his willingness to remove the filibuster, which was only avoided because of senate negotiations that Frist took no part in.

The hunting discussion is very interesting but perhaps should be taken to a different thread.

Dreadwinter wrote:Not so much in my area, at least not that I am aware of, we have actually had a lot of issues with the coyote population around here. Which is strange.

whembly wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Not so much in my area, at least not that I am aware of, we have actually had a lot of issues with the coyote population around here. Which is strange.

No gak? Coyote?!

...wow, that's new. And disturbing, as packs of coyotes are known to go after dogs.

I live in the middle of town in West Lafayette, IN. You should recognize the name, it's the home of Purdue University. About a month or so ago my 4 year old daughter and I found a coyote in our back yard under a tree with its throat ripped out. What bothers me more than coyotes roaming around my neighborhood is whatever killed this thing with minimal effort.


And also look up Brown County in Indiana, the deer population needs culled in that county every few years or so. It's pretty bad. And yes, there are families poor enough that they need to supplement their food budget with trapped or hunted animals. I was raised in that sort of environment because of the shitfire that the economy became under Carter. It wasn't until the early to mid 80's that we were able to come up out of that rut. I'll have to look, but I was always sure it was Reaganomics that caused that upturn, but it was probably some social program...

In more ‘Trump is in deep with Russia and shame on anyone who pretends to be surprised about this’ news, CNN is reporting that the FBI has intel that associates of Trump communicated with Russian operatives to co-ordinate the release of information that would damage Clinton’s campaign. The information is under review, and it includes human intel, travel, business and phone records. The information is not considered conclusive at this stage, and so review and further investigation remains on-going.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/22/politics/us-officials-info-suggests-trump-associates-may-have-coordinated-with-russians/index.html?adkey=bn

Meanwhile, in ‘Trump is doing everything he can to deflect from his team’s collusion with Russia and the Republican party is doing everything is can to help him’ news, House Intel Committee Chair Nunes had a private meeting with Trump to brief him on FBI findings. This meeting attempted to substantiate Trump’s claims that his campaign was wiretapped, because surveillance of Russian operatives meant that Trump officials were recorded when the two groups communicated. This has caused Trump to feel ‘somewhat vindicated’, apparently. What's even stranger is that Nunes has said he can't share this intel with the ranking Democratic on the House Intel Committee Adam Schiff, because Nunes doesn't have the reports in his possession. But he can brief Trump on it.

It leaves me wondering if Nunes, Gowdy and the rest of the political hacks working to cover this mess up for Trump actually know what it is they're working to bury, or if they just don't care, because Trump is their way to tax cuts.
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-03-22/nunes-says-trump-team-communications-caught-in-u-s-surveillance

 Easy E wrote:
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.

Yeah. It isn't so much that it reduces the risk but minimises its scale if it does happen. Without banking controls there's a chance that a fall in assets in one place will not only drive a recession, but cause a collapse of one or more major banks, which in turn will create financial havoc throughout the economy, making the recession much greater than it otherwise would have been. This effect played was a major factor in the Great Depression, and it was also the factor that caused a housing price drop in the US to spread via high leveraging and unchecked derivatives exposures in to the global financial crisis.

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.

No problem


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
ER...two years you noted. Thats a whole lot of water under the bridge.

That water was the Koch brothers and Freedomworks running campaigns for maximum opposition to Obama, which eventually coalesced in to the Tea Party movement. And yeah, that water was the healthcare process, in which the Republican strategy was to refuse to take any part in the process, while spreading ridiculous lies about ACA.

And all that worked. Democrats didn't show up in big numbers in the mid-terms, while the Republican base that had looked to have almost collapsed was suddenly re-energised just two years later. Republicans retook the house and made big gains in the senate. At which point McConnell could see what was working, bloody minded obstruction, and so he doubled down on that, resulting in that line about their #1 priority being to make Obama a one term president.

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!

They're going to let Gorsuch through, apparently on nothing more than a promise that if another SC nomination comes up and they want to filibuster, then McConnell promises .

So they're clearly not as obstructionist as the Obama era Republicans were. This isn't to say they aren't being obstructionist, but what happened in the Obama era was really one for the ages. Hell, the Freedom caucus was so rowdy and disruptive they've had teething problems figuring out what to do with a Republican in the Whitehouse, they've even flirted with attacking Trump just as they attacked Obama.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:

Spicer: “To suggest that the President knew who [Manafort’s] clients were from a decade ago is a bit insane.”


Disgraceful.

Yep. You know what's actually insane? Right now there are people trying to argue that there is no pattern of behaviour here. They are trying to claim that, I don't know, Trump was just a bit unlucky in picking campaign and administration staff including Manafort, Flynn, Stone, Page, Tillerson and Ross, all of whom have close financial ties with Russia, in addition to the president's own financial ties with Russia. Trump was also unlucky that two of his selections, Manafort and Flynn, happened to have taken money directly from the Russian government to promote their interests. Meanwhile Russia just happens to take an active interest in the campaign, acting to increase Trump's chance of victory, which some members of Trump's team just happen to know about before hand. And then on top of that you have Flynn and Sessions lying about their contacts with Russian officials during and after the campaign.

No, there's no pattern there at all.

And the repubs. will let it slide for tax breaks for the rich and further restrictions on abortions.

Yep. Everything we're seeing now, including the shameful attempts by Nunes and Gowdry to cover for the Trump admins ethics breaches, is all because they'll do anything for anyone to get their tax cut.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
@Vaktathi: I'm willing to concede that the GOP party in it's current state does have issues and is culpable to bad governance. I'm just a bit miffed at the whitewashing of the Democrat's own bad actions that many posters here have largely ignored. Hence why I bang on that Reid Rule drum so hard, because it had serious repercussions.

Because there's a simple issue of scale. Reid responding to an obstructionist minority by removing a filibuster is nothing at all like Trump administration staff colluding with Russia to gain an election advantage.

This is what I've been saying on this forum for a long time now. The Democrats are a run of the mill establishment party. There's a lot of special interests, some dubious double dealing, but probably the most defining feature is a broad level of mediocrity.

That used to describe the Republicans as well. But over a long period of time the Republicans have slowly transformed in to becoming a deeply dysfunctional, irrational, extremist party.

 sebster wrote:

 whembly wrote:
@Vaktathi: I'm willing to concede that the GOP party in it's current state does have issues and is culpable to bad governance. I'm just a bit miffed at the whitewashing of the Democrat's own bad actions that many posters here have largely ignored. Hence why I bang on that Reid Rule drum so hard, because it had serious repercussions.

Because there's a simple issue of scale. Reid responding to an obstructionist minority by removing a filibuster is nothing at all like Trump administration staff colluding with Russia to gain an election advantage.

This is what I've been saying on this forum for a long time now. The Democrats are a run of the mill establishment party. There's a lot of special interests, some dubious double dealing, but probably the most defining feature is a broad level of mediocrity.

That used to describe the Republicans as well. But over a long period of time the Republicans have slowly transformed in to becoming a deeply dysfunctional, irrational, extremist party.

Democrats like to build three-legged chairs in the name of effectiveness and five-legged chairs in the name of efficiency. Republicans nail four legs to the same corner in the name of small government and blame the other three corners for not standing on their own.

And in the very latest in 'oh will you look at that, it turns out Republicans are only concerned about politicians enriching themselves when they're not Republicans' news, a wealthy power broker, Angela Chen, who specialises in connecting companies with Asian power brokers just bought a $16 million penthouse from from Donald Trump. Now this isn't necessarily an effort to curry favour, she may have just wanted that apartment. $16 million was a little on high side given the apartment and this market, but it wasn't so far out of whack that it had to be a bribe. Basically we can't know her motivation for handing over 16 million, and we can't know what Trump thought of the deal, either.

But this story broke a month ago, and yet not one of the people who repeatedly came here to express their concern about Clinton getting two hundred grand from Wall St for speaking engagements have raised the issue of Trump getting $16 million from a corporate power broker. Funny that.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Democrats like to build three-legged chairs in the name of effectiveness and five-legged chairs in the name of efficiency. Republicans nail four legs to the same corner in the name of small government and blame the other three corners for not standing on their own.

Democrats would keep the existing wobbly three legs, but pay for lots of extra little legs to be nailed to each of the original three legs.

Republicans would then rip off all the little legs and saw another couple of inches of two of the original legs, and given all of that to fanciest of the original legs. Then they would have told everyone that now they had the ‘freedom to sit’.

 Chongara wrote:
There are few reasons for me to eat meat other than that I enjoy it.

I know right, that's why I'm vegetarian.

 Chongara wrote:
I mean guess if like you're like a full-blown super vegan, who hasn't so much been in a house where the drywall uses animal byproduct more power too ya. You can strut around any ol' high horse ya want, you've got standing for that.

Thanks.

 Chongara wrote:
That said I think given overall state of society there isn't anyone in the mainstream with any place to be callin' out folks with a closets full of elmer fudd gear.

Sure, going out of one's way to kill stuff for enjoyment is exactly the same as not taking drastic step to avoid any animal by-products in a society that just isn't designed for it. Sure. Also if you jay-walked how can you call out murderers ?

 Vaktathi wrote:
Hrm, hunting isnt my thing but it isnt just about killing either. There's the whole experience of being outdoors, tracking or ambushing prey, the skill in making the shot, etc.

Sure. You could get all that by replacing your GUN by a CAMERA but it's not about the killing. The killing just happens because shooting stuff dead is more fun than shooting pictures . Oh sorry, the killing happens for very serious population control reason, and people do it with a very heavy heart because they don't like killing at all .

And in “oh look, the Trump campaign continues lie shamelessly” news, Trump is now trying to back away from Flynn and Manafort as fast as possible. Spicer has tried to claim Manafort had “a very limited role” for “a very limited time” on Trump’s campaign – when he was the senior campaign manager from April to August. Spicer also claimed Flynn was just a “volunteer” for the Trump campaign, when he was one of Trump’s most senior advisors and the main source for much of Trump’s foreign policy, and the guy Trump eventually gave the role of national security advisor.

I'm sure Trump backing off from these guys as quick as possible has nothing to do with recent discoveries that Manafort received millions of dollars from a Russian oligarch very close to Putin, paid to Manafort so he would lobby on behalf of Russia in the US (which Manafort never declared this under the Foreign Agents Registration act, he claims the money was paid for him to represent the oligarch's business interests). Nor could it be related to Manafort receiving millions of dollars from a Russian aligned political party in the Ukraine, money paid through shell companies to make it appear to relate to computer sales, and not for lobbying work.

Nor could it be related to Flynn revealing after he was sacked/resigned that he was an unannounced paid foreign agent for Turkey until just a couple of days before he took his role as National Security Advisor. Nor could it be related to the $45k he took from the Russian government owned RT network to attend an event there and sit next to Putin, or the $20k+ he got paid by Russian owned companies in the US. As we've discussed before, there isn't anything inherently wrong with taking money for speaking engagements, but concealing those payments and then getting caught lying about future contacts with Russia makes the wrong doing pretty fething obvious.

It's okay though, because Trump barely knew these guys. He says so himself. What are you gonna do, call the president a liar?

 whembly wrote:
Looks like the whole 'collusion with Russia' narrative is going to die out...

Is there an antonym for "prescient"?

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Looks like the whole 'collusion with Russia' narrative is going to die out...

Is there an antonym for "prescient"?

Trump?

 whembly wrote:
Whatever you say 'Musketeer... (I'll admit, I walked right into that one. )

In other news...Conservatives claim votes to stop GOP Obamacare repeal.

We'll see about that... eh? The vote is scheduled for tomorrow.

Either way, fireworks 'bound to happen...

Indeed fireworks will happen. Because its important that your major legislative act is to screw about a third of the people that voted for you.

Yeah, I was wondering if it would come out that the FBI had been surveilling Russian agents and espionage and Trump and crew got caught in the net. It is one thing that struck me as odd about Trump's tweet- why would you want to advertise that you may have been under surveillance in light of accusation that your campaign colluded with a foreign government? The answer, of course, is that hi is so short sighted that he didn't see how that might boomerang.

Also, for all those crying about Comey's meetings with the previous WH, where is the outrage on Trump being briefed on intel in this case and actively excluding Dems because they are Dems?

 Frazzled wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Whatever you say 'Musketeer... (I'll admit, I walked right into that one. )

In other news...Conservatives claim votes to stop GOP Obamacare repeal.

We'll see about that... eh? The vote is scheduled for tomorrow.

Either way, fireworks 'bound to happen...

Indeed fireworks will happen. Because its important that your major legislative act is to screw about a third of the people that voted for you.

Frazz, a politician's first priority is to screw the American public

 jmurph wrote:
Yeah, I was wondering if it would come out that the FBI had been surveilling Russian agents and espionage and Trump and crew got caught in the net. It is one thing that struck me as odd about Trump's tweet- why would you want to advertise that you may have been under surveillance in light of accusation that your campaign colluded with a foreign government? The answer, of course, is that hi is so short sighted that he didn't see how that might boomerang.

Also, for all those crying about Comey's meetings with the previous WH, where is the outrage on Trump being briefed on intel in this case and actively excluding Dems because they are Dems?

Comey met with the WH? If thats normal no biggie. If its not thats an issue depending on the facts of the meeting.

 Frazzled wrote:

 jmurph wrote:
Yeah, I was wondering if it would come out that the FBI had been surveilling Russian agents and espionage and Trump and crew got caught in the net. It is one thing that struck me as odd about Trump's tweet- why would you want to advertise that you may have been under surveillance in light of accusation that your campaign colluded with a foreign government? The answer, of course, is that hi is so short sighted that he didn't see how that might boomerang.

Also, for all those crying about Comey's meetings with the previous WH, where is the outrage on Trump being briefed on intel in this case and actively excluding Dems because they are Dems?

Comey met with the WH? If thats normal no biggie. If its not thats an issue depending on the facts of the meeting.

I... don't think that's normal. Preibus got slapped for this I think.

EDIT: well... some WH lawyer needs to clear it?
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/reince-priebus-fbi-contact-trump-235351

 Frazzled wrote:
Comey met with the WH? If thats normal no biggie. If its not thats an issue depending on the facts of the meeting.

Not Comey, but Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He said he had intel on Trump staff caught up in the surveillance op, and he privately briefed Trump on it. He refused to share that intel with Democrats on the Intel Committee, because he claims he didn't have the intel in his possession. So it was good enough to inform the president who's staff are under investigation, but not good enough to tell other people in the committee overseeing the investigation.

And no, this is not normal.

 sebster wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Comey met with the WH? If thats normal no biggie. If its not thats an issue depending on the facts of the meeting.

Not Comey, but Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He said he had intel on Trump staff caught up in the surveillance op, and he privately briefed Trump on it. He refused to share that intel with Democrats on the Intel Committee, because he claims he didn't have the intel in his possession. So it was good enough to inform the president who's staff are under investigation, but not good enough to tell other people in the committee overseeing the investigation.

And no, this is not normal.

I think Whembly is actually talking about another situation.

 cuda1179 wrote:


I take it you know little about actual hunting. I've never eaten wolf, but I have bear. It's a bit tough, but there are ways around that.

Must have gotten it (the bear) from near human habitation. I've had bear on a few occasions, and the friend to killed it told us where he got each one. The ones from well away from civilization were sweet and juicy, you could pretty much tasted the berries in the meat, and it was ridiculously tender. The bear he got closer to home was much tougher, from relying on/grabbing food from the dump and more human sources. Generally speaking, he usually turned garbage dump bear into jerky, since it was practically already there



In other news, I saw something yesterday which should give everyone serious pause: Trump wants to give his daughter a clearance, and have her attend briefings with him.


Now, I don't need to explain this to the military guys, but for those without that background there are a number of problems with this. Firstly, she has no official position, she is not a staffer nor cabinet member of any title. Secondly, there is no "need to know" present in her situation because of the first thing. And for basically all clearance situations, you have to have two things in order to gain access to classified material (including attending briefings/meetings): proper clearance AND a need to know.

Banana Republic, here we come.

Well this is ironic
https://www.yahoo.com/news/rick-perry-the-man-in-charge-of-americas-nukes-weighs-in-on-texas-am-student-election-145825577.html

Perry’s complaint was about the process by which Bobby Brooks, who would become the first openly gay student president in the university’s history, won the election last month. Brooks finished 750 votes behind Robert McIntosh, the son of a prominent GOP fundraiser, but McIntosh was disqualified after he was found to violate a campaign finance rule over some glow sticks used in a campaign video. But “Brooks did not win the election,” wrote Perry. “He finished second by more than 750 votes to one Mr. Robert McIntosh.

 Ustrello wrote:
Well this is ironic
https://www.yahoo.com/news/rick-perry-the-man-in-charge-of-americas-nukes-weighs-in-on-texas-am-student-election-145825577.html

Perry’s complaint was about the process by which Bobby Brooks, who would become the first openly gay student president in the university’s history, won the election last month. Brooks finished 750 votes behind Robert McIntosh, the son of a prominent GOP fundraiser, but McIntosh was disqualified after he was found to violate a campaign finance rule over some glow sticks used in a campaign video. But “Brooks did not win the election,” wrote Perry. “He finished second by more than 750 votes to one Mr. Robert McIntosh.

Not seeing how that is related to the politics thread.

It's kinda familiar. Like a certain douchebag losing by 3 million but winning anyway because of stupidity.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
There are few reasons for me to eat meat other than that I enjoy it.

I know right, that's why I'm vegetarian.

 Chongara wrote:
I mean guess if like you're like a full-blown super vegan, who hasn't so much been in a house where the drywall uses animal byproduct more power too ya. You can strut around any ol' high horse ya want, you've got standing for that.

Thanks.

 Chongara wrote:
That said I think given overall state of society there isn't anyone in the mainstream with any place to be callin' out folks with a closets full of elmer fudd gear.

Sure, going out of one's way to kill stuff for enjoyment is exactly the same as not taking drastic step to avoid any animal by-products in a society that just isn't designed for it. Sure. Also if you jay-walked how can you call out murderers ?

 Vaktathi wrote:
Hrm, hunting isnt my thing but it isnt just about killing either. There's the whole experience of being outdoors, tracking or ambushing prey, the skill in making the shot, etc.

Sure. You could get all that by replacing your GUN by a CAMERA but it's not about the killing. The killing just happens because shooting stuff dead is more fun than shooting pictures . Oh sorry, the killing happens for very serious population control reason, and people do it with a very heavy heart because they don't like killing at all .

Well, Humans are omnivores and natural hunters. We do take joy in killing animals because that often brings us food. We are the tip top of the food chain for a reason, because we are the best at what we do. Many people around where I live cannot wait for hunting season every year. They spend months preparing, using trail cams and getting gear ready. Practicing their shooting. But they do not go out and poach. Many people respect that hunting all the time would be devastating to the ecosystem, so they wait, despite their great love of doing it.

Stop trying to paint all hunters as frothing at the mouth crazies. Even if you are vegan, living things have to be hurt or killed for your food. The only difference is plants cannot cry and they do not have cute eyes.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ivanka-trump-family-aspen-skiing-holiday-family-taxpayer-secret-service-agent-a7643246.html

So we don't have enough money to feed the elderly, but we do have enough to let some rich feths go skiing.