Trump has both a young child (son Baron) and a smart feminine wife (Melania).
He also has his pet of a private business empire, and support of half the American people.
What do you have? Impotent anger and bitter delusions of Trump Nazi Russia?
Government for the Idiots, by the Idiots, and of the Idiots.
Whether 9/10s of what Wolff writes in his book is invention and exaggeration, the fact a guy with his long-established reputation was walking around the White House just baffles me. What the fuck is wrong with Trump's people? Are they all fucking idiots? At every turn, this is an Administration seemingly hell bent on fucking itself over.
Um, you've been watching this administration for the past year or so, right? I'd say the answer is obvious. These people didn't even know they had to hire their own White House staff. https://www.washingtonpost.com... They are completely and profoundly unprepared to do this job.
Political colouration, etc. aside (which is really just pettiness... literally classing billions of people as "one of those two types of people"), how do intelligent people work in blind obedience to service to their nation?
I think the answer is, they buy into the propaganda and the myth of what America is and stands for. They basically believe the reasons we are given for why we go to war. They think that while the US may occasionally behave badly at home or abroad, it is generally a good nation that tries to live up to its ideals.
Personally, I agree with Gen. Butler's view that war is a racket, waged to make money for the corporations involved, extend American power and influence, and to make the world safe for American business. I would never work for the military or intelligence industries, because I do not share their perspectives and values. But for those who take the world at face value, and generally don't look too deeply into what is going on and why, it can be an attractive option.
The atmosphere that is a hundredth of Earth's, where surface gasses evaporate?
Anyone hoping to terraform a planet overnight would be disappointed. An atmosphere would have to be established before the water to prevent it all being stripped away in the first place. If you want water to stay put on the surface, you need an atmosphere first.
You'll also need a magnetic field to keep it there, which Mars currently does not have. Terraforming Mars is a fun idea, but I doubt it will be achievable for a very long time. We can barely get off our own planet, and are currently pretty bad at managing its resources. It will be scores of decades, if not centuries, before we can undertake something like terraforming another planet.
Does anyone remember the author, and name, of a science fiction story about an asteroid named "Pomona Negra", or "Black Apple", which had inexplicably turned red, and was found to be coated with a form of life that kept growing, and spread to the boots of the crew sent to investigate and eventually to the lunar base they returned to?
So I've read the gp's comment, which presents some interesting ideas in a civilized and intelligent manner. I've also read your comment, which is nothing more than a petty, childish insult that's completely void of any real substance. The gp's argument is far more convincing than yours is. The pure hostility you show toward a very reasonable set of ideas additionally makes me think that the gp is correct.
I would advise you to not to base your opinion of an idea on the attitude and tone of its detractors. It is possible for two sides of an argument to both be wrong.
That said, the problem with the GP's reasoning is that he is conflating the transmission of content from one node to another with the display of that content on a node. It's like saying that if we allow all trucks to drive on a road, we must require all businesses to sell whatever the trucks deliver. They are separate issues, but the GP does not seem to get that.
I would like to agree, but watching the senate race in Alabama. The question to me becomes how bad does a person have to be to cause people to vote against their aligned party? While Doug Jones won, he won by less then 1% against a convicted pedophile? With church ministers standing up for this lowlife. How many traditional values is the population willing to give up, just for their party to win?
Now this will happen in Democratic states too, if a popular politician gets in trouble doing something, there is a huge support network trying to protect him, vilify the accusers and the messengers.
We as a nation can deal with people in power with positions that we don't agree with, however we have lost the feeling that these people are working for their constituents and their prosperity. They are in it for their own personal Ego trip Like President Trump, or for the Party Line like many of the Democratic and GOP Congressmen. This is the real tragedy of our nation. We have moved from debating policy to likability of the person, to general party alliance. So now the people in charge are just playing games with our nation to keep their power, by gerrymandering to keep their power, entertaining media show them that they are indeed pure conservative or pure liberal enough for their base, taking advantage of strongly held minority views to win elections...
I agree with the overall point you are making. Politics and governing should be more than a team sport. But I would also point out that the two parties are not equal here. The Democrats drummed out Al Franken while the Republicans rallied around and defended Moore. Heck, some of them said they believed Moore's accusers, but would vote for him anyway.
I am registered Independent. But from where I sit the Republicans seem much more willing to overlook wrongdoing to gain or maintain power. Donald Trump could never get the Democratic nomination and if he did, the Democrats would not be so negligent in their responsibilities to hold him accountable. The Democrats have their problems and faults, no doubt. But I think the Trump era has really put on full display the fact that the Republicans really only care about power. Literally everything else is secondary.
So let's see if I've got this right. In you're eyes, lack of evidence presumes guilt? Wow. Fascist much? You're ideas honestly terrify me. I do not want to subscribe to your newsletter, and I fear for free societies everywhere if anybody does.
LOL, I haven't even told you my ideas! You just made assumptions and got all scared about it.
I honestly don't know the veracity of all of the accusations against Moore. The women seem credible to me, but who knows. I do know that Moore is a major asshole, what with his defying higher courts and the Constitution, and his far-right views. I'm glad he was defeated, regardless of the creeper stuff.
Is that more or less of a dick move then promising them pensions that would come from future tax revenue? If you can't fully fund pensions today, you are demanding money from the future to pay for today. That's a dick move to me. Taking it away when the dollars don't magically appear in the future isn't a dick move, it's reality.
This is ridiculous. You expect the state should have all the money on hand now to pay for pensions that won't kick in for 30 years? How is that at all reasonable?
Look at your SS deduction, or get a statement from them. Then do a Future Value calculation using the average market return for the time you've been in the workforce. How much would you have if instead of going to SS, that money was invested in the markets every paycheck, Be prepared to be astounded and pissed.
Now do it again and include your employer's SS contribution. Just make sure someone is around to keep you from harming yourself when you see THAT number.
Taxing the currentworkforce to pay for the previous work force is the definition of a Ponzi scheme.
The average market return is speculation, nothing more. What if you had wanted to retire in 2008? Would you still be so enthusiastic if half your investments were suddenly gone?
Look, I have an IRA and 401k to get those possible market returns. The SS benefit is guaranteed, and not subject to the whims of the market. There is value in that. And as long as the government properly funds SS, it will not run out. There are ways to do that like raising the FICA contributions or the income cutoff.
Tu be fair he is a shitty individual in many other ways too, that more than justify not voting for him.
Anyway, it's done now. Let's see how long it takes Trump to turn on him. I haven't checked but there's probably already a tweet.
Oh, there's a tweet, and it didn't take long.
The reason I originally endorsed Luther Strange (and his numbers went up mightily), is that I said Roy Moore will not be able to win the General Election. I was right! Roy worked hard but the deck was stacked against him!
Rationalism is fucking GONE. These people are going to attack this president no matter what. They will say anything. Do anything and run fast and loose with the facts until the day he leaves office. While I deeply loathe Chump I really hope he gets a full eight year term just so that these crazy left wing nutters suffer for eight years.
Hey, Rip Van Winkle, were you around for the Obama administration? Do you remember the bullshit being slung at him for those 8 years? Or do you think Obama was really a secret-Muslim Kenyan Socialist who gave free phones to black people? Seems to me attacking the other side is what politicians do, regardless of party.
Your link only says that the mall does not have records going back that far, and thus cannot say for sure that he was banned. Telling lies will never transform you into a good person.
The rental in the Silicon Valley area are ridiculously high, and one reason being there are way too many people competing for the housing
Nonsense. This is exactly backwards. The problem is supply not demand. The rich liberals want to protect their property values with artificial scarcity by electing city governments and zoning boards that issue nearly zero permits for housing construction.
So the rich get richer, renters get screwed, the poor get squeezed out, and there isn't a Republican in a 50 mile radius to blame.
Wealthy people want to protect their wealth and the luxuries it provides. It's got nothing to do with political ideology. Both parties serve the wealthy. One is just more blatant about it.
What percentage of them are running around with a smart phone? The cheapest data plan per month will buy a sack of flour, a bag of sugar, and some beans. You can live on that. I have to believe some of this is a matter of priorities
I love how some people think that if the lower class isn't living in the 1800's they aren't trying hard enough. Sure they live in a country with marvelous, empowering technology, but they should be satisfied with eating beans and rice instead. They probably even have electricity! What a luxury! People survived for hundreds of thousands of years without electricity, so they could do it too. But no, they waste their money on frivolous luxuries so they deserve what they get.
Open trade and diplomacy only work when both sides act in good faith. When the only thing NK wants to negotiate is how much they'll get paid to go away this time....Well, it's obvious who the psycho is. The time frame for a good solution is long past. Being firm with NK, in the beginning, would have slowed this down. Previous presidents payed NK off, because they had other things they wanted to deal with. Paying them off was just easier. So that is what NK learned. Make a fuss, and Europe will wet its panties and beg the US to pay off the crazy man with the bad haircut. Wait, they're both doing it again...
If a brief war, killing a 100,000 civilians saves LA or SF or Seattle from becoming Chernobyl you'd call me a psychopath? Really
Yes, really. You have no way of knowing that any war would be brief. And you have no way of knowing for sure that killing 100,000 civilians in one place would save more in another. You don't have a crystal ball and cannot see the future. So what you would be advocating is killing 100,000 people for the possibility that more would live afterwards who otherwise would not. The Trolley Problem is an interesting thought experiment, but nothing more. Any time people start thinking that the ends justify the means, terrible things happen.
Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands in NK have already died under the Kims rule. And more are likely, regardless of the war. I don't see you trying to save them.
No, you don't see me trying to save them. What happens to people on the other side of the world is not my responsibility. But if you think the US position on NK has anything to do with saving North Korean lives, you better ask the people of Iraq how that works out. I know our foreign adventures are often sold as humanitarian endeavors, because we just feel so bad for those poor oppressed people. But US foreign policy is about advancing US interests. The feel-good bullshit is there to get the citizenry on board with the program.
Smart people (aka not democRATS) can tell the difference between guilt and hail mary tactic to try anything get someone to accuse you of something bad for political gain.
And people still insist that perception isn't the only thing. How else do you explain the fact that while you posted this, large majorities of Republicans think Obama was a Kenyan-born secret Muslim and a Socialist? That fact and your post cannot both be true. I mean, the President is on tape bragging about sexually assaulting women, and you can still believe what you do. It's quite astounding, actually. But it shouldn't be, because subjectivity is all we have.
It's called a free market you liberal, left wing commie FUCKS. If you don't like their charges, pick another provider. Jesus christ you people will say and do anything to attack and undermine the effort to make our country recover from liberal excess.
When someone is obviously using their power to the detriment of the people, how do we get them removed from their position of power?
Exactly the purpose of the 2nd Amendment
Go ahead, start shooting at elected officials. See how that works out for you and your revolution. Better yet, ask David Koresh and Randy Weaver how it worked out for them.
Let's just say there were things on her email server that needed to disappear. For example, a certain inconvenient birth certificate that she first brought up in 2008...
Slashdot Mirror
Smart enough to keep her mouth shut and enjoy the luxurious living despite the obvious downsides.
She is enjoying nothing. That woman is obviously miserable. I'd feel bad for her, but she made her bed.
Trump has both a young child (son Baron) and a smart feminine wife (Melania). He also has his pet of a private business empire, and support of half the American people.
What do you have? Impotent anger and bitter delusions of Trump Nazi Russia?
Half of the American people? Not even close, junior. He's polling in the low 30's. http://www.newsweek.com/trumps...
Government for the Idiots, by the Idiots, and of the Idiots.
Whether 9/10s of what Wolff writes in his book is invention and exaggeration, the fact a guy with his long-established reputation was walking around the White House just baffles me. What the fuck is wrong with Trump's people? Are they all fucking idiots? At every turn, this is an Administration seemingly hell bent on fucking itself over.
Um, you've been watching this administration for the past year or so, right? I'd say the answer is obvious. These people didn't even know they had to hire their own White House staff. https://www.washingtonpost.com... They are completely and profoundly unprepared to do this job.
Political colouration, etc. aside (which is really just pettiness... literally classing billions of people as "one of those two types of people"), how do intelligent people work in blind obedience to service to their nation?
I think the answer is, they buy into the propaganda and the myth of what America is and stands for. They basically believe the reasons we are given for why we go to war. They think that while the US may occasionally behave badly at home or abroad, it is generally a good nation that tries to live up to its ideals.
Personally, I agree with Gen. Butler's view that war is a racket, waged to make money for the corporations involved, extend American power and influence, and to make the world safe for American business. I would never work for the military or intelligence industries, because I do not share their perspectives and values. But for those who take the world at face value, and generally don't look too deeply into what is going on and why, it can be an attractive option.
The atmosphere that is a hundredth of Earth's, where surface gasses evaporate?
Anyone hoping to terraform a planet overnight would be disappointed. An atmosphere would have to be established before the water to prevent it all being stripped away in the first place. If you want water to stay put on the surface, you need an atmosphere first.
You'll also need a magnetic field to keep it there, which Mars currently does not have. Terraforming Mars is a fun idea, but I doubt it will be achievable for a very long time. We can barely get off our own planet, and are currently pretty bad at managing its resources. It will be scores of decades, if not centuries, before we can undertake something like terraforming another planet.
frankly that's bullshit - it just feels truthiness to you.
Our perception is all we have.
Does anyone remember the author, and name, of a science fiction story about an asteroid named "Pomona Negra", or "Black Apple", which had inexplicably turned red, and was found to be coated with a form of life that kept growing, and spread to the boots of the crew sent to investigate and eventually to the lunar base they returned to?
The Red Stuff by John Wyndham
Oh yes, let's - you first. Which post is modded insightful?
The one that hews more closely to objective reality, frankly.
So I've read the gp's comment, which presents some interesting ideas in a civilized and intelligent manner. I've also read your comment, which is nothing more than a petty, childish insult that's completely void of any real substance. The gp's argument is far more convincing than yours is. The pure hostility you show toward a very reasonable set of ideas additionally makes me think that the gp is correct.
I would advise you to not to base your opinion of an idea on the attitude and tone of its detractors. It is possible for two sides of an argument to both be wrong.
That said, the problem with the GP's reasoning is that he is conflating the transmission of content from one node to another with the display of that content on a node. It's like saying that if we allow all trucks to drive on a road, we must require all businesses to sell whatever the trucks deliver. They are separate issues, but the GP does not seem to get that.
I would like to agree, but watching the senate race in Alabama. The question to me becomes how bad does a person have to be to cause people to vote against their aligned party? While Doug Jones won, he won by less then 1% against a convicted pedophile? With church ministers standing up for this lowlife. How many traditional values is the population willing to give up, just for their party to win?
Now this will happen in Democratic states too, if a popular politician gets in trouble doing something, there is a huge support network trying to protect him, vilify the accusers and the messengers.
We as a nation can deal with people in power with positions that we don't agree with, however we have lost the feeling that these people are working for their constituents and their prosperity. They are in it for their own personal Ego trip Like President Trump, or for the Party Line like many of the Democratic and GOP Congressmen. This is the real tragedy of our nation. We have moved from debating policy to likability of the person, to general party alliance. So now the people in charge are just playing games with our nation to keep their power, by gerrymandering to keep their power, entertaining media show them that they are indeed pure conservative or pure liberal enough for their base, taking advantage of strongly held minority views to win elections...
I agree with the overall point you are making. Politics and governing should be more than a team sport. But I would also point out that the two parties are not equal here. The Democrats drummed out Al Franken while the Republicans rallied around and defended Moore. Heck, some of them said they believed Moore's accusers, but would vote for him anyway.
I am registered Independent. But from where I sit the Republicans seem much more willing to overlook wrongdoing to gain or maintain power. Donald Trump could never get the Democratic nomination and if he did, the Democrats would not be so negligent in their responsibilities to hold him accountable. The Democrats have their problems and faults, no doubt. But I think the Trump era has really put on full display the fact that the Republicans really only care about power. Literally everything else is secondary.
So let's see if I've got this right. In you're eyes, lack of evidence presumes guilt? Wow. Fascist much? You're ideas honestly terrify me. I do not want to subscribe to your newsletter, and I fear for free societies everywhere if anybody does.
LOL, I haven't even told you my ideas! You just made assumptions and got all scared about it.
I honestly don't know the veracity of all of the accusations against Moore. The women seem credible to me, but who knows. I do know that Moore is a major asshole, what with his defying higher courts and the Constitution, and his far-right views. I'm glad he was defeated, regardless of the creeper stuff.
Is that more or less of a dick move then promising them pensions that would come from future tax revenue? If you can't fully fund pensions today, you are demanding money from the future to pay for today. That's a dick move to me. Taking it away when the dollars don't magically appear in the future isn't a dick move, it's reality.
This is ridiculous. You expect the state should have all the money on hand now to pay for pensions that won't kick in for 30 years? How is that at all reasonable?
Pensions, Social Security, both Ponzi schemes.
Look at your SS deduction, or get a statement from them. Then do a Future Value calculation using the average market return for the time you've been in the workforce. How much would you have if instead of going to SS, that money was invested in the markets every paycheck, Be prepared to be astounded and pissed.
Now do it again and include your employer's SS contribution. Just make sure someone is around to keep you from harming yourself when you see THAT number.
Taxing the currentworkforce to pay for the previous work force is the definition of a Ponzi scheme.
The average market return is speculation, nothing more. What if you had wanted to retire in 2008? Would you still be so enthusiastic if half your investments were suddenly gone?
Look, I have an IRA and 401k to get those possible market returns. The SS benefit is guaranteed, and not subject to the whims of the market. There is value in that. And as long as the government properly funds SS, it will not run out. There are ways to do that like raising the FICA contributions or the income cutoff.
Tu be fair he is a shitty individual in many other ways too, that more than justify not voting for him.
Anyway, it's done now. Let's see how long it takes Trump to turn on him. I haven't checked but there's probably already a tweet.
Oh, there's a tweet, and it didn't take long.
The reason I originally endorsed Luther Strange (and his numbers went up mightily), is that I said Roy Moore will not be able to win the General Election. I was right! Roy worked hard but the deck was stacked against him!
Rationalism is fucking GONE. These people are going to attack this president no matter what. They will say anything. Do anything and run fast and loose with the facts until the day he leaves office. While I deeply loathe Chump I really hope he gets a full eight year term just so that these crazy left wing nutters suffer for eight years.
Hey, Rip Van Winkle, were you around for the Obama administration? Do you remember the bullshit being slung at him for those 8 years? Or do you think Obama was really a secret-Muslim Kenyan Socialist who gave free phones to black people? Seems to me attacking the other side is what politicians do, regardless of party.
> ... Your child molesting senate candidate was banned from shopping malls for harassing young girls ...
Telling lies will never transform you into a good person
https://www.snopes.com/2017/11/17/roy-moore-banned-mall-harassing-teen-girls/
Your link only says that the mall does not have records going back that far, and thus cannot say for sure that he was banned. Telling lies will never transform you into a good person.
There was a time where we actually waited for a court to determine the innocence or guilt of an accused person.
I agree. What happened to Al Franken was disgraceful.
But hey, this is 2017, and to your average idiot liberal the three branches of government are the legislature, the executive and CNN.
Imagine my contempt for them.
We don't have to imagine it. It comes through quite clearly in your posts.
The rental in the Silicon Valley area are ridiculously high, and one reason being there are way too many people competing for the housing
Nonsense. This is exactly backwards. The problem is supply not demand. The rich liberals want to protect their property values with artificial scarcity by electing city governments and zoning boards that issue nearly zero permits for housing construction.
So the rich get richer, renters get screwed, the poor get squeezed out, and there isn't a Republican in a 50 mile radius to blame.
Wealthy people want to protect their wealth and the luxuries it provides. It's got nothing to do with political ideology. Both parties serve the wealthy. One is just more blatant about it.
What percentage of them are running around with a smart phone? The cheapest data plan per month will buy a sack of flour, a bag of sugar, and some beans. You can live on that. I have to believe some of this is a matter of priorities
I love how some people think that if the lower class isn't living in the 1800's they aren't trying hard enough. Sure they live in a country with marvelous, empowering technology, but they should be satisfied with eating beans and rice instead. They probably even have electricity! What a luxury! People survived for hundreds of thousands of years without electricity, so they could do it too. But no, they waste their money on frivolous luxuries so they deserve what they get.
Open trade and diplomacy only work when both sides act in good faith. When the only thing NK wants to negotiate is how much they'll get paid to go away this time....Well, it's obvious who the psycho is. The time frame for a good solution is long past. Being firm with NK, in the beginning, would have slowed this down. Previous presidents payed NK off, because they had other things they wanted to deal with. Paying them off was just easier. So that is what NK learned. Make a fuss, and Europe will wet its panties and beg the US to pay off the crazy man with the bad haircut. Wait, they're both doing it again...
There is blame to go around. http://www.independent.co.uk/v...
If a brief war, killing a 100,000 civilians saves LA or SF or Seattle from becoming Chernobyl you'd call me a psychopath? Really
Yes, really. You have no way of knowing that any war would be brief. And you have no way of knowing for sure that killing 100,000 civilians in one place would save more in another. You don't have a crystal ball and cannot see the future. So what you would be advocating is killing 100,000 people for the possibility that more would live afterwards who otherwise would not. The Trolley Problem is an interesting thought experiment, but nothing more. Any time people start thinking that the ends justify the means, terrible things happen.
Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands in NK have already died under the Kims rule. And more are likely, regardless of the war. I don't see you trying to save them.
No, you don't see me trying to save them. What happens to people on the other side of the world is not my responsibility. But if you think the US position on NK has anything to do with saving North Korean lives, you better ask the people of Iraq how that works out. I know our foreign adventures are often sold as humanitarian endeavors, because we just feel so bad for those poor oppressed people. But US foreign policy is about advancing US interests. The feel-good bullshit is there to get the citizenry on board with the program.
Smart people (aka not democRATS) can tell the difference between guilt and hail mary tactic to try anything get someone to accuse you of something bad for political gain.
And people still insist that perception isn't the only thing. How else do you explain the fact that while you posted this, large majorities of Republicans think Obama was a Kenyan-born secret Muslim and a Socialist? That fact and your post cannot both be true. I mean, the President is on tape bragging about sexually assaulting women, and you can still believe what you do. It's quite astounding, actually. But it shouldn't be, because subjectivity is all we have.
It's called a free market you liberal, left wing commie FUCKS. If you don't like their charges, pick another provider. Jesus christ you people will say and do anything to attack and undermine the effort to make our country recover from liberal excess.
Got into the paint thinner again, didn't you?
When someone is obviously using their power to the detriment of the people, how do we get them removed from their position of power?
Exactly the purpose of the 2nd Amendment
Go ahead, start shooting at elected officials. See how that works out for you and your revolution. Better yet, ask David Koresh and Randy Weaver how it worked out for them.
Let's just say there were things on her email server that needed to disappear. For example, a certain inconvenient birth certificate that she first brought up in 2008...
Are people really still fucking this chicken?