US Politics: 2017 Edition

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.

**BigWaaagh**

And some more whining from our "The dog ate my homework." POTUS...

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-obama-is-helping-to-organize-protests-against-his-presidency/ar-AAnCjxj?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=ASUDHP

I cannot wait for him to toss his word salad before Congress tonight.

**Frazzled**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Breotan wrote:

Did you know most brands of steak sauce are just fancy (dark) ketchup? True story.

If I'm at a restaurant and ask for A-1, Worcestershire sauce, bbq sauce or anything like that, it's my own small means of insult/protest: the person who cooked the steak done fethed up on it.

Why? Each person has a particular pallet which changes by age. Unless the chef has done a DNA scan and previous testings with you that is an illogical statement.

For example, a cardiologist will scream if they see the amount of salt and butter I will put on popcorn. Others not so much.

**Ensis Ferrae**

Frazzled wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Breotan wrote:

Did you know most brands of steak sauce are just fancy (dark) ketchup? True story.

If I'm at a restaurant and ask for A-1, Worcestershire sauce, bbq sauce or anything like that, it's my own small means of insult/protest: the person who cooked the steak done fethed up on it.

Why? Each person has a particular pallet which changes by age. Unless the chef has done a DNA scan and previous testings with you that is an illogical statement.

For example, a cardiologist will scream if they see the amount of salt and butter I will put on popcorn. Others not so much.

If you need to sauce a steak, that means it's dry as feth. And a Medium steak should not be dry.

**BigWaaagh**

Sauce/Ketchup on steak is fine. If you're at Sizzler...and you're 12...and with your mom. Any restaurant that feths up cooking a staple foodstuff like steak doesn't deserve A) to be open, or B) a dime of your patronage. If a restaurant served steak is so unpalatable as to need sauce, you're not at a proper steakhouse and you should order something else...BLT perhaps? Yeah, I'm snobby about this, but a well cooked steak requires no accoutrement.

**Frazzled**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Breotan wrote:

Did you know most brands of steak sauce are just fancy (dark) ketchup? True story.

If I'm at a restaurant and ask for A-1, Worcestershire sauce, bbq sauce or anything like that, it's my own small means of insult/protest: the person who cooked the steak done fethed up on it.

Why? Each person has a particular pallet which changes by age. Unless the chef has done a DNA scan and previous testings with you that is an illogical statement.

For example, a cardiologist will scream if they see the amount of salt and butter I will put on popcorn. Others not so much.

If you need to sauce a steak, that means it's dry as feth. And a Medium steak should not be dry.

No, it means a person likes tangier steak. I never heard anyone argue a sauce was because the steak was dry before.

**Ensis Ferrae**

Like BigWaagh above me, I believe that a steak should be juicy on it's own merits. If a person manages to cook the juices out of it, then I use sauce to make it less dry, and therefore at least edible.

I am talking from my own usage... I get that some people like to put sauce on their steaks. I'm just saying, if you see me use it, I'm doing it because it hasn't been cooked right. I'm not arguing from a KC vs. Texas BBQ or Carolina BBQ type deal. This isn't dry rub vs. sauce (IMHO, being from "Not the South" I like both types of BBQ, each has merit) I'm arguing that steak, a naturally juicy cut of beef should still be juicy when it comes off the cooking surface and to my table. If it isn't, it was cooked wrong or too long or something. And if it's dry, it's invariably going to be tough.

**A Town Called Malus**

I'm personally a fan of peppercorn sauce, made using the leftover juices of the steak in the pan of course, on my steak.

However that should not be to mask the dryness of the steak but rather to add to the flavour. I still want a juicy steak, thank you very much

**d-usa**

A Town Called Malus wrote:
I'm personally a fan of peppercorn sauce, made using the leftover juices of the steak in the pan of course, on my steak.

I think that any kind of pan-sauce, that is prepared with and is a part of the steak, is a completely different animal than a bottled sauce added after the fact.

**Ensis Ferrae**

Anyhow, back to politics....

Just read this piece a bit ago, and holy feth this lady is dum.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/education-secretary-devos-makes-the-wrong-case-school-choice

**cuda1179**

I'm one of those wacky guys that likes his steak well-done. I'm not dying of food poisoning because I want more juice in my meat.

**Frazzled**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Anyhow, back to politics....

Just read this piece a bit ago, and holy feth this lady is dum.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/education-secretary-devos-makes-the-wrong-case-school-choice

Oh my.

**Mr. Burning**

Frazzled wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Anyhow, back to politics....

Just read this piece a bit ago, and holy feth this lady is dum.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/education-secretary-devos-makes-the-wrong-case-school-choice

Oh my.

Oh my........

**BobtheInquisitor**

timetowaste85 wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
No-one is upset or up in arms. We're just laughing at him for being an idiot.

Guess we're reading different articles. I'm reading from the news page I get by "swiping right" on my phone. And they're pretty upset he didn't try somewhere new, how childish he is over what he ordered, how he's only promoting his own places, etc etc. A man, even the president, should be allowed to eat whatever and wherever he likes. Even if the meal does sound awful to me too!

So, you mean the type of people who post comments on yahoo and YouTube?

**WrentheFaceless**

Normally I try to stay away from the gak that is Fox News but found this hilarious

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/28/trump-obama-and-former-aides-behind-protests-leaks.html

Apparently the Over-ripe Orange in Chief believes that Obama is organizing these protests against him. Still clearly Obama's fault that people dont like his stupidity, couldnt be him himself.

**Just Tony**

Medium rare is the only correct answer. If you are cooking steak right, it provides the only sauce you need. Oh, and white pepper that gak with some garlic, it's glorious.

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Just Tony wrote:
Why not have tax payer funded tubal ligations? I think it'd be a more long term solution and be less controversial.

I think you cannot have this, simply because even with the best drafted bill for it, this will ALWAYS veer into, or be used for eugenics purposes. Now, that's not to say there's something inherently wrong with eugenics, but when a government is involved, I think it's safe to say it's used in very negative ways.

ELECTIVE socialist funded tubal ligations are eugenically driven? I simply don't have the words...

Frazzled wrote:In other news.
Trump admin dropping actions against Texas about voter ID
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2017/02/27/texas-voter-id-n2291386

Non citizens disenfranchising Americans by voting in Ohio:
http://kxan.com/2017/02/27/investigation-found-385-non-us-citizens-registered-to-vote-82-cast-illegal-ballots-in-ohio/

B... But... But, CNN assured me voter fraud doesn't happen. These links are obviously fake news...

Vaktathi wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

Non citizens disenfranchising Americans by voting in Ohio:
http://kxan.com/2017/02/27/investigation-found-385-non-us-citizens-registered-to-vote-82-cast-illegal-ballots-in-ohio/
82 out of 5,607,641 ballots cast.

Not saying it shouldn't be looked into, it absolutely should and a stop put to it, but 1 in ~70,000 ballots doesn't seem like it's backing up any of the accusations leveled by the GOP or the current administration of widespread voter fraud by the millions turning the tide of elections.

This is making the assumption that ALL voter fraud was caught. Time to be serious. The multi-faceted problem of illegal immigration dips all across the board. Strain on community resources, lack of payment in taxes for services taken advantage of, and by far the myriad forms of identity fraud perpetuated up to and including voter fraud. Anybody thinking it doesn't happen is severely naïve. There are a couple slaughterhouses/meat processing plants in my area that are constantly have INS/ICE show up to deport people, you think none of them vote?

**Vaktathi**

Yeah...every time you thought it couldnt get any crazier, they just keep going deeper.

Trump is increasingly matching Alex Jones' programming. It'd be amusing if it werent so dangerous

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Just Tony wrote:

B... But... But, CNN assured me voter fraud doesn't happen. These links are obviously fake news...

Nobody said it doesnt *ever* happen, people are saying that there is no evidence that it occurs on any meaningful level that sways the outcome of elections.

Vaktathi wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

Non citizens disenfranchising Americans by voting in Ohio:
http://kxan.com/2017/02/27/investigation-found-385-non-us-citizens-registered-to-vote-82-cast-illegal-ballots-in-ohio/
82 out of 5,607,641 ballots cast.

Not saying it shouldn't be looked into, it absolutely should and a stop put to it, but 1 in ~70,000 ballots doesn't seem like it's backing up any of the accusations leveled by the GOP or the current administration of widespread voter fraud by the millions turning the tide of elections.

This is making the assumption that ALL voter fraud was caught.

Sure, but that also assumed all those listed frauds are actually frauds too. More to the point, dozens of investigations at all levels of government over many year have consistently found no evidence of any fraud that would be anywhere even close to large enough to sway an election. No elections anywhere go without fraud or errors of some sort, nothing involving millions of people go by without issues, but none of this is anything but statistical noise.

Time to be serious. The multi-faceted problem of illegal immigration dips all across the board. Strain on community resources, lack of payment in taxes for services taken advantage of, and by far the myriad forms of identity fraud perpetuated up to and including voter fraud. Anybody thinking it doesn't happen is severely naïve.

nobody is saying these things dont happen, but those are also different issues than a negligible level of voter fraud.

On the other hand, plenty of businesses profit tremendously from that labor and nobody seems to go after them, and few people want to pay an extra at the grocery store to buy food at prices that migrant or illegal labor keep low (or other services like landscaping, domestic housework, etc) and nobody wants to address the competitive labor advantage such offers to US companies able to harness that cheap labor over competitors in other nations.

There are a couple slaughterhouses/meat processing plants in my area that are constantly have INS/ICE show up to deport people, you think none of them vote?

I have no idea.

However, given the available evidence from dozens of investigations across many states both Blue and Red, beyond just "do ya think?", the answer is probably "no".

There's lots of evidence showing this sort of thing is extremelyrate to the point of being statistically irrelevant with zero effect on the outcome of elections, and none asserting that it's widespread and swaying election results except GOP talking heads screaming about it with zero evidence.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

My opinion on the steak thing is:

Spoiler:

So of course that means Trump is a murderer. IMPEACHMENT!

**Rosebuddy**

sebster wrote:
The Republicans will always win its share of elections because after a cycle or two of Democrats in power a large chunk of their base will get angry that they haven't gotten their free ice cream and unicorns and not turn up to vote, thereby letting the Republicans win their way back in to power.

This is why Democrats lose elections. Condescension towards people who simply want an economic policy that benefits rather than harms them is not exactly engaging. Losing faith in the Democratic Party because of their unwillingness to stand up to the police state, to economic exploitation, the misery of collapsing schools and lack of healthcare and their general incompetence is perfectly rational, not the result of childish expectations.

**angelofvengeance**

This just in... oh boy... this is gonna be a gak show...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/28/trump-sign-orders-waters-rule-black-colleges/98512864/

WASHINGTON — President Trump's newest executive orders will target a water protection rule and elevate an initiative on historically black colleges and universities into the White House.

Trump will sign the executive orders in back-to-back signing ceremonies at the White House on Tuesday. The first will seek to undo the Waters of the United States rule, an Obama administration regulation that sought to reinterpret the Clean Water Act to extend federal protections to smaller rivers and streams.

The plan of attack is similar to an earlier Trump order aimed at a consumer protection regulation called the Fiduciary Duty rule. Because the rule was finalized in 2015, the Trump administration will have to start the regulatory process from the beginning to remove it from the books. The executive order will instruct the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to do just that, asking them to reconsider whether federal jurisdiction extends to non-navigable streams, according to a senior administration official who helped draft the order. The official spoke on condition of anonymity Monday under ground rules set by the White House.

But unlike the Fiduciary Duty Rule, which was scheduled to go into effect April 10, the Waters of the United States rule has already been blocked by a federal appeals court in Cincinnati. The executive order will also ask the Justice Department to put that appeal on hold while the administration reconsiders the rule, the official said.

Delaware Sen. Tom Carper, the top Democrat on the Environment and Public Works Committee, did not sound optimistic the rule would survive.

"If this were an objective review, I think that would be fine," he said. "If this is a review that the Trump administration has already decided what the outcomes going to be, that's not good."

A second executive order will move the federal initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities into the White House Domestic Policy Council from the Department of Education, where it was housed under the Obama administration.

Since President Jimmy Carter in 1980, every president has signed an executive order reorganizing the initiative. "We think that those HCBU initiatives before lost track because they didn’t have the fuill force of the White House behind them," said another senior administration official who would not be named under White House rules.

The new order comes the day after Trump hosted the presidents of historically black colleges at the White House — cramming 64 of them into the Oval Office for a meeting. “"I don't think we've ever had this many people in the Oval Office,” Trump said to laughter. “This could be a new record, forever. "I don't think we've ever had this many people in the Oval Office,” Trump said. “This could be a new record, forever."

Later, Vice President Pence met with the college presidents. "This administration is committed to making sure our historically black college and universities get the credit and attention they deserve," he said.

**BobtheInquisitor**

Rosebuddy wrote:
sebster wrote:
The Republicans will always win its share of elections because after a cycle or two of Democrats in power a large chunk of their base will get angry that they haven't gotten their free ice cream and unicorns and not turn up to vote, thereby letting the Republicans win their way back in to power.

This is why Democrats lose elections. Condescension towards people who simply want an economic policy that benefits rather than harms them is not exactly engaging. Losing faith in the Democratic Party because of their unwillingness to stand up to the police state, to economic exploitation, the misery of collapsing schools and lack of healthcare and their general incompetence is perfectly rational, not the result of childish expectations.

So, then the next perfectly rational state is to vote for someone even more hostile to all of your concerns? Really? "I can't have everything I want in a candidate, so I might as well have the guy promising to burn it all down"? That's rational?

**Verviedi**

Why. Why do these misanthropic bastards feel the need to destroy our environment like this? You can't eat or drink money.

**whembly**

Verviedi wrote:
Why. Why do these misanthropic bastards feel the need to destroy our environment like this? You can't eat or drink money.

Why do you feel the need to give the EPA jurisdiction over streams/puddles on non-federal land?

**angelofvengeance**

BigWaaagh wrote:
And some more whining from our "The dog ate my homework." POTUS...

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-obama-is-helping-to-organize-protests-against-his-presidency/ar-AAnCjxj?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=ASUDHP

I cannot wait for him to toss his word salad before Congress tonight.

I'm looking forward to this also, lol. It's gonna be "the largest congressional gathering ever!"

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
Verviedi wrote:
Why. Why do these misanthropic bastards feel the need to destroy our environment like this? You can't eat or drink money.

Why do you feel the need to give the EPA jurisdiction over streams/puddles on non-federal land?

Cause people dump horrific crap into them and cause harm to local folks and wildlife.

On a different note- like a true narcissist, Trump gives himself an A for effort so far and a C- for delivery of his message. He'd be getting an Unclassified grade from me

**Frazzled**

angelofvengeance wrote:
This just in... oh boy... this is gonna be a gak show...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/28/trump-sign-orders-waters-rule-black-colleges/98512864/

WASHINGTON — President Trump's newest executive orders will target a water protection rule and elevate an initiative on historically black colleges and universities into the White House.

Trump will sign the executive orders in back-to-back signing ceremonies at the White House on Tuesday. The first will seek to undo the Waters of the United States rule, an Obama administration regulation that sought to reinterpret the Clean Water Act to extend federal protections to smaller rivers and streams.

The plan of attack is similar to an earlier Trump order aimed at a consumer protection regulation called the Fiduciary Duty rule. Because the rule was finalized in 2015, the Trump administration will have to start the regulatory process from the beginning to remove it from the books. The executive order will instruct the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to do just that, asking them to reconsider whether federal jurisdiction extends to non-navigable streams, according to a senior administration official who helped draft the order. The official spoke on condition of anonymity Monday under ground rules set by the White House.

But unlike the Fiduciary Duty Rule, which was scheduled to go into effect April 10, the Waters of the United States rule has already been blocked by a federal appeals court in Cincinnati. The executive order will also ask the Justice Department to put that appeal on hold while the administration reconsiders the rule, the official said.

Delaware Sen. Tom Carper, the top Democrat on the Environment and Public Works Committee, did not sound optimistic the rule would survive.

"If this were an objective review, I think that would be fine," he said. "If this is a review that the Trump administration has already decided what the outcomes going to be, that's not good."

A second executive order will move the federal initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities into the White House Domestic Policy Council from the Department of Education, where it was housed under the Obama administration.

Since President Jimmy Carter in 1980, every president has signed an executive order reorganizing the initiative. "We think that those HCBU initiatives before lost track because they didn’t have the fuill force of the White House behind them," said another senior administration official who would not be named under White House rules.

The new order comes the day after Trump hosted the presidents of historically black colleges at the White House — cramming 64 of them into the Oval Office for a meeting. “"I don't think we've ever had this many people in the Oval Office,” Trump said to laughter. “This could be a new record, forever. "I don't think we've ever had this many people in the Oval Office,” Trump said. “This could be a new record, forever."

Later, Vice President Pence met with the college presidents. "This administration is committed to making sure our historically black college and universities get the credit and attention they deserve," he said.

Whats the issue? Live by the EO die by the EO.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cause people dump horrific crap into them and cause harm to local folks and wildlife.

Then thats a state issue. Next question?

**Spinner**

Verviedi wrote:
Why. Why do these misanthropic bastards feel the need to destroy our environment like this? You can't eat or drink money.

Nowhere in this quote is anything indicating he isn't talking about state or local governments that don't give a gak how much industrial runoff comes out of your tap as well.

"Misanthropic bastards" is a pretty wide category.

**Ustrello**

whembly wrote:
Verviedi wrote:
Why. Why do these misanthropic bastards feel the need to destroy our environment like this? You can't eat or drink money.

Why do you feel the need to give the EPA jurisdiction over streams/puddles on non-federal land?

Implying you give a gak about the environment and from your posting we know you don't so why even ask?

**Rosebuddy**

BobtheInquisitor wrote:

So, then the next perfectly rational state is to vote for someone even more hostile to all of your concerns? Really? "I can't have everything I want in a candidate, so I might as well have the guy promising to burn it all down"? That's rational?

No, the rational thing would be to vote for someone who does represent you or to not vote at all. The latter is what Clinton had trouble with.

**gorgon**

BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
sebster wrote:
The Republicans will always win its share of elections because after a cycle or two of Democrats in power a large chunk of their base will get angry that they haven't gotten their free ice cream and unicorns and not turn up to vote, thereby letting the Republicans win their way back in to power.

This is why Democrats lose elections. Condescension towards people who simply want an economic policy that benefits rather than harms them is not exactly engaging. Losing faith in the Democratic Party because of their unwillingness to stand up to the police state, to economic exploitation, the misery of collapsing schools and lack of healthcare and their general incompetence is perfectly rational, not the result of childish expectations.

So, then the next perfectly rational state is to vote for someone even more hostile to all of your concerns? Really? "I can't have everything I want in a candidate, so I might as well have the guy promising to burn it all down"? That's rational?

To a 6 year old, sure.

"I want what I want or I'm taking my ball and going home!"

**A Town Called Malus**

Rosebuddy wrote:
BobtheInquisitor wrote:

So, then the next perfectly rational state is to vote for someone even more hostile to all of your concerns? Really? "I can't have everything I want in a candidate, so I might as well have the guy promising to burn it all down"? That's rational?

No, the rational thing would be to vote for someone who does represent you or to not vote at all. The latter is what Clinton had trouble with.

Actually, when faced with one of two distinct outcomes, one of which is measurably worse for your intended goals than the other, the rational thing would be to ensure that outcome does not come to pass as it moves your goals even further away.

**Frazzled**

Ustrello wrote:
whembly wrote:
Verviedi wrote:
Why. Why do these misanthropic bastards feel the need to destroy our environment like this? You can't eat or drink money.

Why do you feel the need to give the EPA jurisdiction over streams/puddles on non-federal land?

Implying you give a gak about the environment and from your posting we know you don't so why even ask?

Answer the question and quit attacking the poster.