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 se
Longtime Dakkanaut




 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Building a blood in water scent

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 Co'tor Shas wrote:
In a lighter note a slightly more complicated of those political standing graphs has popped up if anyone wants to check it out.

http://filteries.com/politics


No option for Constitutional Monarchy.


Yeah, I chose a Multi-party Republic as that is basically what Canada has. The Queen of England is technically our head of state but practically she has no role or influence.

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 se
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan






Sweden

Co'tor Shas wrote:In a lighter note a slightly more complicated of those political standing graphs has popped up if anyone wants to check it out.

http://filteries.com/politics


And there's also no option for "no minimum wage because the Unions will blockade you if you're an ass". That graph generator is rather limited in its scope.

EDIT: And no granularity on state control over things like education or healthcare beyond "oh, and there's a private sector too". I'm sorry to say that graph is rubbish.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/07 22:59:47


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 us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?
   
Made in us
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard




Catskills in NYS

 thekingofkings wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?

That's some grade-A revisionism you got right there. With additional whataboutism.

Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
 kronk wrote:
Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
 sebster wrote:
Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Co'tor Shas wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?

That's some grade-A revisionism you got right there. With additional whataboutism.

Nothing revised about it, but if you are going to claim someone else has bloody hands you should be sure that yours aren't covered in the same.
   
Made in us
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard




Catskills in NYS

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Co'tor Shas wrote:In a lighter note a slightly more complicated of those political standing graphs has popped up if anyone wants to check it out.

http://filteries.com/politics


And there's also no option for "no minimum wage because the Unions will blockade you if you're an ass". That graph generator is rather limited in its scope.

EDIT: And no granularity on state control over things like education or healthcare beyond "oh, and there's a private sector too". I'm sorry to say that graph is rubbish.

I'm not exactly claiming it to be amazing here, it's the same as those "answer a bunch of questions and we'll put you on a political graph" things. Turns out that desigining every little aspect about a government is hard, and if they had enough time to make something that accurate, they'd probebly be running a country.

Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
 kronk wrote:
Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
 sebster wrote:
Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
 
   
Made in se
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan






Sweden

 thekingofkings wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?


That's a tu quoque argument. A better counter would have been to point out the fact that the case should be judged on its own merits even if we accept the implied argument that the US usually is dishonest about its reasons for intervening with force around the world.

 thekingofkings wrote:
 Co'tor Shas wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?

That's some grade-A revisionism you got right there. With additional whataboutism.

Nothing revised about it, but if you are going to claim someone else has bloody hands you should be sure that yours aren't covered in the same.


It's not revised, but it's dishonest in the extreme nonetheless. There's a difference between actively supporting and passively collaborating because you don't want to be next on the chopping block.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/07 23:07:10


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 us
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard




Catskills in NYS

 thekingofkings wrote:
 Co'tor Shas wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?

That's some grade-A revisionism you got right there. With additional whataboutism.

Nothing revised about it, but if you are going to claim someone else has bloody hands you should be sure that yours aren't covered in the same.

So you aren't saying that Sweden supported the Nazis? You aren't completely ignoring the reasons for the decision to stay "neutral" , and the outcomes? You aren't applying a situation from 70 years ago that was completely different? About a person who you do not know, nor was even alive then? You aren't ignoring the original statement in favor of spouting whataboutism?

I might need to get new glasses then.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/04/07 23:14:45


Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
 kronk wrote:
Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
 sebster wrote:
Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?


That's a tu quoque argument. A better counter would have been to point out the fact that the case should be judged on its own merits even if we accept the implied argument that the US usually is dishonest about its reasons for intervening with force around the world.

 thekingofkings wrote:
 Co'tor Shas wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?

That's some grade-A revisionism you got right there. With additional whataboutism.

Nothing revised about it, but if you are going to claim someone else has bloody hands you should be sure that yours aren't covered in the same.


It's not revised, but it's dishonest in the extreme nonetheless. There's a difference between actively supporting and passively collaborating because you don't want to be next on the chopping block.


Too much anti American bias from our supposed allies, the merits of the attack on a base used by the aircraft to launch a wmd attack on their own people should be obvious enough.Barring complete incompetence on the part of the rest of the worlds intelligence agencies it should all be pretty obvious, hell even our worst most unloved and un-trusted "friend" the French admitted as much,. And they hate us more than the Russians do.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/07 23:13:00


 
   
Made in us
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard




Catskills in NYS

 thekingofkings wrote:
Too much anti American bias from our supposed allies, the merits of the attack on a base used by the aircraft to launch a wmd attack on their own people should be obvious enough.Barring complete incompetence on the part of the rest of the worlds intelligence agencies it should all be pretty obvious, hell even our worst most unloved and un-trusted "friend" the French admitted as much,. And they hate us more than the Russians do.

What?


That's possibly the best thing I've heard all day.

Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
 kronk wrote:
Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
 sebster wrote:
Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
 
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut




 thekingofkings wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?


Considering that it was extremely important to bomb Iraq and get rid of Saddam and then also considering that turning out to be based on lies and a complete disaster, the case for keeping a cool head is strong to say the least. The attempts at regime changes in, say, Iran or Libya don't do much to inspire confidence, either.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

There was nothing insane about what was on that declaration, requiring them to defend a chemical strike on civilians out in the open is nothing sinister, though I seriously question the motives of someone who does see something sinister in it.


I seriously question the motives of someone who has no hesitations about the US citing deep humanitarian reasons for why a government must be toppled through military force.


like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?


Considering that it was extremely important to bomb Iraq and get rid of Saddam and then also considering that turning out to be based on lies and a complete disaster, the case for keeping a cool head is strong to say the least. The attempts at regime changes in, say, Iran or Libya don't do much to inspire confidence, either.


damned if we do, damned if we don't. As for based on lies, we are claiming chemical weapons are a WMD, Iraq had plenty, Saddam was every bit the monster we told you he was. I will concede it was folly, we were fools to think we could save or help the Iraqi people, but well meaning fools who would rather have tried and failed than watch that monster continue. This was the same beast who not only assaulted Iran, but also brutalized Kuwait and for an encore tortured and nearly destroyed the Marsh Arab culture and attempted to annihilate the Kurdish people with chemical attacks. I do agree or maybe just stand alone on the idea that regime change must happen from within and its usually a pretty bad idea to impose it from outside (it was England and France that made the current middle east borders, not the USA)
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut




 thekingofkings wrote:

damned if we do, damned if we don't. As for based on lies, we are claiming chemical weapons are a WMD, Iraq had plenty, Saddam was every bit the monster we told you he was. I will concede it was folly, we were fools to think we could save or help the Iraqi people, but well meaning fools who would rather have tried and failed than watch that monster continue. This was the same beast who not only assaulted Iran, but also brutalized Kuwait and for an encore tortured and nearly destroyed the Marsh Arab culture and attempted to annihilate the Kurdish people with chemical attacks. I do agree or maybe just stand alone on the idea that regime change must happen from within and its usually a pretty bad idea to impose it from outside (it was England and France that made the current middle east borders, not the USA)


Iraq didn't have any weapons that weren't already known. The invasion has caused over a million deaths, collapsed the country and created the springboard for IS. There was rather infamously a lot of torturing, kidnapping and black sites going on. Any claims of this all being "well meaning" are insulting.
   
Made in us
Ollanius Pius - Savior of the Emperor






Gathering the Informations.

 Breotan wrote:
 WrentheFaceless wrote:
 Gordon Shumway wrote:
 Breotan wrote:
Wow. The unhinged hatred of President Trump is even more unhinged than usual - and that's saying something. Clearly the apocalypse is upon us and no one outside the usual suspects here in the Dakka OT know or even seem to care. Quick, Robin! To the hyperbolmobile!


Care to direct that to a poster, or just want to leave it as a typical Trump and dump? Care to actually defend the comment you made at all?


I think they know they cant defend the indefensible, not anymore as the crazy goes on

Can't direct my above comment to a single offender as there are several of you popping off at the moment, all to the beat of the same drummer. As for my comment, Neil Gorsuch is an outstanding choice. I applaud his joining the Supreme Court. This would never have happened had Hillary Clinton won the election therefore I feel that my vote against her is vindicated.

Do any of you have anything other than hyperbole? No?

What makes him an "outstanding choice" over Garland?

Nothing, aside from the fact that he is your team's pick and he restores the "balance" that your party feels they are owed.

Keep on rationalizing your vote for this dumpster fire.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/07 23:41:11


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Rosebuddy wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

damned if we do, damned if we don't. As for based on lies, we are claiming chemical weapons are a WMD, Iraq had plenty, Saddam was every bit the monster we told you he was. I will concede it was folly, we were fools to think we could save or help the Iraqi people, but well meaning fools who would rather have tried and failed than watch that monster continue. This was the same beast who not only assaulted Iran, but also brutalized Kuwait and for an encore tortured and nearly destroyed the Marsh Arab culture and attempted to annihilate the Kurdish people with chemical attacks. I do agree or maybe just stand alone on the idea that regime change must happen from within and its usually a pretty bad idea to impose it from outside (it was England and France that made the current middle east borders, not the USA)


Iraq didn't have any weapons that weren't already known. The invasion has caused over a million deaths, collapsed the country and created the springboard for IS. There was rather infamously a lot of torturing, kidnapping and black sites going on. Any claims of this all being "well meaning" are insulting.


Again based on your bias. You can find it insulting if you want to, but if you think something like that is going to be gentle you are just deluding yourself. Iraq is struggling, but the country has not collapsed and it is fighting back against ISIS quite well. Islamic extremism has been there the whole time, Saddam just suppressed it, much like Assad's father did in Hama. If you want to blame all the deaths that happened since the invasion on the US feel free but its just as disingenuous if I were to blame Sweden for all the deaths of the Russian and Ukrainian peasants when you invaded them.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/07 23:56:11


 
   
Made in fi
Confessor Of Sins




 thekingofkings wrote:
like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?


RealPolitik might well be a Swedish invention. Yes, much of the "science" used to justify murdering subhumans did originate in Sweden (and some of it in the USA, where testing venereal diseases on blacks was A-OK) but they were caught between a rock and a hard place just as much as Finland was. Us Finns actually had the easy choice of fighting the crazy dictator we knew wanted to kill us (Stalin) with the aid of another crazy dictator (Hitler) who might be doing some bad stuff far away in his own country but not to us. The Swedes saw Denmark and Norway invaded by Hitler, Finland to their east fighting Stalin who might come through all the way to them - and Hitler wanting some tasty iron ore. I can't blame them for playing their own game to keep their country unoccupied, and neither should anyone else IMO. While they did allow iron ore to move they also took in jewish refugees from a lot of countries and helped the allies with intelligence. They didn't go to war because they weren't crazy, and their perceived neutral Aryan country status probably saved a lot more lives than standing up to Hitler would ever have done.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Spetulhu wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:
like the Nazi regime Sweden supported through WW2? You are ok with dictators who slaughter their own folks with gas?


RealPolitik might well be a Swedish invention. Yes, much of the "science" used to justify murdering subhumans did originate in Sweden (and some of it in the USA, where testing venereal diseases on blacks was A-OK) but they were caught between a rock and a hard place just as much as Finland was.
--no thats second part after realipolitik is pretty much all us, we have always treated our minorities badly and likely will continue that shameful trend for the foreseable future.

Us Finns actually had the easy choice of fighting the crazy dictator we knew wanted to kill us (Stalin) with the aid of another crazy dictator (Hitler) who might be doing some bad stuff far away in his own country but not to us.
--Defending yourselves from the Soviets was honorable and brave, Mannerheim was a man of principle, but you should have avoided the continuation war (not gonna blame you or hold it against you for wanting to reclaim your lost lands) siding with Hitler could have seriously bit you in the ass. The only country I ever regret the US being at war with was you. Finland made it real easy for the western allies to be sympathetic to because of how you conducted yourselves.

The Swedes saw Denmark and Norway invaded by Hitler, Finland to their east fighting Stalin who might come through all the way to them - and Hitler wanting some tasty iron ore. I can't blame them for playing their own game to keep their country unoccupied, and neither should anyone else IMO.
-- I do respect your opinion here even if I don't share it. Material support was something Hitler desperately needed, they should have deprived him of that vital war material. To our own shame we had to provoke the beast into attacking us first before we did the right thing and brought that tyrant down. The US was no superpower in the 30's or even the early 40's but we did supply our allies.

While they did allow iron ore to move they also took in jewish refugees from a lot of countries and helped the allies with intelligence. They didn't go to war because they weren't crazy, and their perceived neutral Aryan country status probably saved a lot more lives than standing up to Hitler would ever have done.

---We did not take in refugees even then, something else to be ashamed of, but again, standing up to Hitler would have done more to help than not, he needed what Sweden had, and likely could not have risked taking it, not without giving the Russians even more breathing room.

   
Made in us
Most Glorious Grey Seer





Everett, WA

 Kanluwen wrote:
What makes him an "outstanding choice" over Garland?

Nothing, aside from the fact that he is your team's pick and he restores the "balance" that your party feels they are owed.

Preventing the Supreme Court swinging left is not a small issue as it would have had vast repercussions for years to come. Garland my be a sharp legal mind but he is also liberal and would essentially have been another Kagen. I don't expect Gorsuch to be as conservative as Justices Scalia or Thomas but from everything I've seen he's a solid originalism and that's a very good thing.

I voted with the hope that Justice Scalia's legacy would be preserved and now it will be.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Keep on rationalizing your vote for this dumpster fire.

I don't have to. Neil Gorsuch will be joining the Supreme Court as its ninth Justice. My decision is vindicated.


 
   
Made in us
Ollanius Pius - Savior of the Emperor






Gathering the Informations.

 Breotan wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
What makes him an "outstanding choice" over Garland?

Nothing, aside from the fact that he is your team's pick and he restores the "balance" that your party feels they are owed.

Preventing the Supreme Court swinging left is not a small issue as it would have had vast repercussions for years to come. Garland my be a sharp legal mind but he is also liberal and would essentially have been another Kagen. I don't expect Gorsuch to be as conservative as Justices Scalia or Thomas but from everything I've seen he's a solid originalism and that's a very good thing.

I voted with the hope that Justice Scalia's legacy would be preserved and now it will be.

"Preventing the Supreme Court swinging right is not a small issue as it would have had vast repercussions for years to come."


 Kanluwen wrote:
Keep on rationalizing your vote for this dumpster fire.

I don't have to. Neil Gorsuch will be joining the Supreme Court as its ninth Justice. My decision is vindicated.


I can only hope that you get as thoroughly shafted by everything going on as you're making others get shafted.
   
Made in nl
Pragmatic Primus Commanding Cult Forces






 thekingofkings wrote:

Too much anti American bias from our supposed allies, the merits of the attack on a base used by the aircraft to launch a wmd attack on their own people should be obvious enough.Barring complete incompetence on the part of the rest of the worlds intelligence agencies it should all be pretty obvious, hell even our worst most unloved and un-trusted "friend" the French admitted as much,. And they hate us more than the Russians do.
What? The Americans think the French hate them more than the Russians do? Soon even the French will be feared more than us... This is a sad day for Russia indeed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/08 01:52:13


Error 404: Interesting signature not found

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





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Kanluwen wrote:
 Breotan wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
What makes him an "outstanding choice" over Garland?

Nothing, aside from the fact that he is your team's pick and he restores the "balance" that your party feels they are owed.

Preventing the Supreme Court swinging left is not a small issue as it would have had vast repercussions for years to come. Garland my be a sharp legal mind but he is also liberal and would essentially have been another Kagen. I don't expect Gorsuch to be as conservative as Justices Scalia or Thomas but from everything I've seen he's a solid originalism and that's a very good thing.

I voted with the hope that Justice Scalia's legacy would be preserved and now it will be.

"Preventing the Supreme Court swinging right is not a small issue as it would have had vast repercussions for years to come."

Yup. Of course.

The SCoTUS pick was one of the reasons why Trump voters pulled the lever for him.


 Kanluwen wrote:
Keep on rationalizing your vote for this dumpster fire.

I don't have to. Neil Gorsuch will be joining the Supreme Court as its ninth Justice. My decision is vindicated.


I can only hope that you get as thoroughly shafted by everything going on as you're making others get shafted.

That's awfully vindictive... doncha think?

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Iron_Captain wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:

Too much anti American bias from our supposed allies, the merits of the attack on a base used by the aircraft to launch a wmd attack on their own people should be obvious enough.Barring complete incompetence on the part of the rest of the worlds intelligence agencies it should all be pretty obvious, hell even our worst most unloved and un-trusted "friend" the French admitted as much,. And they hate us more than the Russians do.
What? The Americans think the French hate them more than the Russians do? Soon even the French will be feared more than us... This is a sad day for Russia indeed.


Admittedly its a tight race, but I think the French got you guys beat primarily because Russia and the US never really pretended to much like each other anyhow (and we don't really have a long history together either, what maybe 100 years?)
   
Made in us
Most Glorious Grey Seer





Everett, WA

 whembly wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
I can only hope that you get as thoroughly shafted by everything going on as you're making others get shafted.

That's awfully vindictive... doncha think?

The hate train has no brakes.


 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

 Breotan wrote:

Preventing the Supreme Court swinging left is not a small issue as it would have had vast repercussions for years to come. Garland my be a sharp legal mind but he is also liberal and would essentially have been another Kagen. I don't expect Gorsuch to be as conservative as Justices Scalia or Thomas but from everything I've seen he's a solid originalism and that's a very good thing.


It's only a good thing when you agree with it. As I've noticed many times, "originalism" is not always what people think it is, and they can often be quite surprised as to how it can result in the exact opposite of what they believe.

"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions






 jreilly89 wrote:
Er go, HRC would have been the same/better than Trump.

Remind me when Trump said that he would impose a no fly zone over Syria? A plan that the US military said would lead to direct military conflict with Russia who were operating aircraft over Syrian airspace?

 d-usa wrote:
We shouldn't be surprised considering that a significant portion of the electorate votes the same way every 4 years based on a very simple principle:

"I'll vote for whoever nominates the conservative SCOTUS justice, and I don't give a feth about anything else."

Is that better or worse than "Vote for Hilary because we only want a woman POTUS and I don't give a feth about anything else and anyone who disagrees with me is a bigot"?

Rosebuddy wrote:
Haley is actually completely insane. Since she and others want to bomb Syria because of these accusations without first checking what's actually going on, the implication is that any country objecting might be the next target for US reprisals.

Lets be generous and uncritically accept your argument that the US would use an open discussion to decide who to target next. The US is still a party in the closed discussions and would know the same information anyway. In fact if the US wanted to gather ammunition for reprisals it would be better to do so behind closed doors and with no easily accessible public record

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/08 03:47:37


 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






 Breotan wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
What makes him an "outstanding choice" over Garland?

Nothing, aside from the fact that he is your team's pick and he restores the "balance" that your party feels they are owed.

Preventing the Supreme Court swinging left is not a small issue as it would have had vast repercussions for years to come. Garland my be a sharp legal mind but he is also liberal and would essentially have been another Kagen. I don't expect Gorsuch to be as conservative as Justices Scalia or Thomas but from everything I've seen he's a solid originalism and that's a very good thing.

I voted with the hope that Justice Scalia's legacy would be preserved and now it will be.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Keep on rationalizing your vote for this dumpster fire.

I don't have to. Neil Gorsuch will be joining the Supreme Court as its ninth Justice. My decision is vindicated.
It seems like your argument is that having a justice in line with your political views is worth the ineptitude of Trump's presidency, is that correct? Honest question.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/08 04:20:15


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
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

Just saw this eye-opening article:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/07/politics/house-swing-seats-congress/index.html

Short version: gerrymandering over the last 20 years has reduced the number of genuinely competitive House seats to a scary low number.

Not surprising, really, but it definitely makes me want to push for a politically independent group to be the one drawing the lines. I don't care if it means I'm still sitting in a red district, right is right (pun not intended).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/08 13:48:01


"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
Nihilistic Necron Lord




The best State-Texas

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Just saw this eye-opening article:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/07/politics/house-swing-seats-congress/index.html

Short version: gerrymandering over the last 20 years has reduced the number of genuinely competitive House seats to a scary low number.

Not surprising, really, but it definitely makes me want to push for a politically independent group to be the one drawing the lines. I don't care if it means I'm still sitting in a red district, right is right (pun not intended).



The Senate map is really bad for Democrats during the midterms as well.I fully expect Republicans to gain at least 4-5 seats.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/08 14:42:33


4000+
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
:Necron: Necron Discord: https://discord.com/invite/AGtpeD4  
   
Made in us
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions






 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Just saw this eye-opening article:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/07/politics/house-swing-seats-congress/index.html

Short version: gerrymandering over the last 20 years has reduced the number of genuinely competitive House seats to a scary low number.

Not surprising, really, but it definitely makes me want to push for a politically independent group to be the one drawing the lines. I don't care if it means I'm still sitting in a red district, right is right (pun not intended).

In an age of almost hyper partisanship, and with the population drifting further apart in their political views, how would one find a politically independent group and keep it's work independent in the face of an inevitable propaganda campaign against it?

 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: