I suppose it depends on what you call "hard left". In the context of social issues like race, gender, and sexuality (which I think is what you are getting at) then I agree with you. There are certainly those on the Left who play the bigot card given the slightest provocation without the slightest bit of critical thought put forward considering maybe there's some other explenation. (Disclaimer: Yes discrimination along the lines listed above happens and people should stand up to it. I've seen some claims of it though that are just terrible on the part of the accusers.)
In my above post I was refering to hard left more in the realm of economics (I didnt make that clear at all though) and things like gun control, law and order, and education.
Hmmm, I think that depends on the issues. In regards to social issues (like gay marriage as a single example) our Left is a good ways to the left by international standards, although not to any kind of crazy extreme in my opinion.
l like looking out for the less well off as much as the next Lefty but your post is nonsense.
1/3 of American voters cant vote for something because rich people dont let them? How does that even work?
Republicans draw a ton of support from poorer Americans who are therefor, paradoxically, voting against their own economic interests. That's the nut that has to be cracked to get socialized medicine in this country.
No, the US doesnt have public healthcare because a major portion of our country is far more conservative than any other western country when it comes to things like this. Europe has plenty of major corperations and political corruption too, how they differ from us is in political demographics. Our Left are Europe's moderates and it goes right from there. Since insurance company's have gradually become far larger and more influential then when Europe was adopting public healthcare we would certainly see some push back from them but the real road block to socialized medicine in this country is the US voter.
Personally, I'm 100 percent in favor of socialized medicine. I think it's a great idea both morally and fiscally. I just think we should have a proper view of our obstacles in trying to achieve it.
Of course first generation immigrants in the US (both illegal and legal) are significantly less likely to commit crimes (outside of illegal immigration in the case of illegal immigrants obviously) than native born citizens.
Not that I think such a pesky thing as reality will change your mind as "racial purity" is a system of belief that inherently doesnt allow foriegn views.
You seem to be running with the assumption that "compromise" means "give Trump everything he wants". If the Republicans invited the Dems into the bill's planning and both sides were willing to compromise we might have had a bill that corrected some of the problems the ACA has (and it does have problems) while putting it in the context of a bipartisan effort making it far less likely to be repealed in the future and thus easier to ad on to in politically friendlier times for the Democrats. At the same time he could have marginalized the pain in the ass freedom caucus who even other Republicans cant stand.
I dont. In the last Ukrainian election pro Western candidates won by overwhelming margins. One can spin conspiracy theories all day that the Ukrainian uprising was US sponsored but there's just no evidence of that.
What there is evidence of is Russia invading Crimea and providing quite a lot of "aid" to the "rebels" (if by "aid" and "rebels" you mean the Russians rolling troops, artillery, and tanks in to fight the Ukrainians). The Ukrainians are fighting to preserve their borders here. End of story.
What, are you getting paid by the Russians for that post? How on earth is that "The most logical cause for the fire"? You've furnished zero evidense to support your claim.
It could very well have been a Russian or seperatist drone as, in case you missed it, there is a war happening over there. I will, however, hold off judgement until there is actual evidense .
If the Democrat's filibustering Gorsuch would prove they are unfit to govern then the Republican's already proved as such. Obama's pick was very uncontroversial as well and the Republicans refused to even hold session on the topic of his appointment. Just because what they did doesnt have a neat name like "filibuster" doesnt mean it doesnt boil down to the exact same thing.
Part of me wants the Dems to filibuster because "Fuck'em, if the Republicans are going to play that game then let the seat sit vacant. You reap what you sow assholes". However, the more rational side of me hopes they dont as I feel the filibuster mechanic is generally a healthy device in our government (for both parties) that prevents massive swings in government ideology and the Republicans might just get rid of it entirely to get their way.
No she didnt as that doesnt even seem possible under current conditions. Health insurance rates going up, which the Republicans site as the end of ACA, is not happening because of some arbitrary reason. The rates are going up to offset ACA costs.
I dont agree with that at all as he most likely has businesses that use foreign labor in the US, both legally and illegally. I think he "cares", as with many of the things he says, because he thought it would get him elected (and it did).
Mod up a hundred times. We have too many politicians who are unwilling to compromise to make progress. The only form of government where somebody gets everything they want is a dictatorship.
When you have an answer to "There are people in Washington whose literal job is to understand stuff like this." get back to me. It's been 7 years and the ACA is not some sort of encrypted Alien transmission.
The Democrats are under the control of the "hard left"? Please, what radicalism has the Democratic party proposed on par with completely dismantling the bulk of our government? By international standards our country has no hard left and the hard right looks downright nutty.
There are 4,100 pages in the US version of the childrens book series Harry Potter, so yeah, how could any one person possibly process 3,500
The Affordable Care Act has been around for 7 years and is currently one of the most contentious political issues in our country. The idea that "no one person understands" it is prepostorous. There are people in Washington whose literal job is to understand stuff like this.
How much does the Russian government pay you to post on their behalf? I ask because it seems strange to me that you so energenically defend Russia but offer zero substance to defend your claims. Furthermore, you're posting a reply on a two day old post that was never modded up and thus hard to find.
You start your post with a completely unsubstanciated claim that the US overthrew Ukraines old government. (that video doesnt even resemble evidence of such.). Furthermore, there isnt even strong circumstancial evidense of the uprising being artificially created by the US as when elections happened next in Ukraine, pro Western political figures overwhelmingly won suggesting a pro Western political stance is in favor amoung Ukrainians.
Then you go on to say "So even if Russia had invaded Ukraine", when literally every country on this planet including Russia recognized Crimea as part of Ukraine prior to the Russian invasion. Even if you want to ignore Russian troops and military hardware running around up North it can not he disputed that Russia invaded and seized control of part of Ukraine. Then you claim Russia in Crimea is the same as modern US military endeavors (which is weird because you're now acknowledging the invasion you denied above)? Preposterous. The US has not annexed another country's territory at any point in modern history.
Literally, your whole post is either completely unsubstanciated, demonstrably false, or both.
So again. Honestly. How much do the Russians pay you?
Slashdot Mirror
I do so love people who think their side's shit doesnt smell
"Silly Con Valley"?
If you do come back please leave your attempts at clever in Idaho.
Are you asking becausing you never hear about it in English language news or because you never hear about it in Spanish language news?
If it's the prior, why would you be hearing about it if it was or wasnt? If it's the later, that might be a vaguely interesting question.
I suppose it depends on what you call "hard left". In the context of social issues like race, gender, and sexuality (which I think is what you are getting at) then I agree with you. There are certainly those on the Left who play the bigot card given the slightest provocation without the slightest bit of critical thought put forward considering maybe there's some other explenation. (Disclaimer: Yes discrimination along the lines listed above happens and people should stand up to it. I've seen some claims of it though that are just terrible on the part of the accusers.)
In my above post I was refering to hard left more in the realm of economics (I didnt make that clear at all though) and things like gun control, law and order, and education.
Hmmm, I think that depends on the issues. In regards to social issues (like gay marriage as a single example) our Left is a good ways to the left by international standards, although not to any kind of crazy extreme in my opinion.
l like looking out for the less well off as much as the next Lefty but your post is nonsense.
1/3 of American voters cant vote for something because rich people dont let them? How does that even work?
Republicans draw a ton of support from poorer Americans who are therefor, paradoxically, voting against their own economic interests. That's the nut that has to be cracked to get socialized medicine in this country.
No, the US doesnt have public healthcare because a major portion of our country is far more conservative than any other western country when it comes to things like this. Europe has plenty of major corperations and political corruption too, how they differ from us is in political demographics. Our Left are Europe's moderates and it goes right from there. Since insurance company's have gradually become far larger and more influential then when Europe was adopting public healthcare we would certainly see some push back from them but the real road block to socialized medicine in this country is the US voter.
Personally, I'm 100 percent in favor of socialized medicine. I think it's a great idea both morally and fiscally. I just think we should have a proper view of our obstacles in trying to achieve it.
Okay, so go do that then. No one is stopping you but yourself.
Or maybe that's just a really dumb thing you just said.
Of course first generation immigrants in the US (both illegal and legal) are significantly less likely to commit crimes (outside of illegal immigration in the case of illegal immigrants obviously) than native born citizens.
To site just a few, easy to find, sources...
https://www.google.com/url?sa=...
http://www.pewresearch.org/fac...
http://www.politifact.com/trut...
Not that I think such a pesky thing as reality will change your mind as "racial purity" is a system of belief that inherently doesnt allow foriegn views.
"Not true, menial labor serves to convince people they don't want to do menial labor and strive for something better."
Of course they probably became criminals because they didnt want to do menial labor so that doesnt hold up so well.
Maybe giving them a little help in finding better uses for their energy is a good thing.
You seem to be running with the assumption that "compromise" means "give Trump everything he wants". If the Republicans invited the Dems into the bill's planning and both sides were willing to compromise we might have had a bill that corrected some of the problems the ACA has (and it does have problems) while putting it in the context of a bipartisan effort making it far less likely to be repealed in the future and thus easier to ad on to in politically friendlier times for the Democrats. At the same time he could have marginalized the pain in the ass freedom caucus who even other Republicans cant stand.
Instead the bill failed epicaly.
I dont. In the last Ukrainian election pro Western candidates won by overwhelming margins. One can spin conspiracy theories all day that the Ukrainian uprising was US sponsored but there's just no evidence of that.
What there is evidence of is Russia invading Crimea and providing quite a lot of "aid" to the "rebels" (if by "aid" and "rebels" you mean the Russians rolling troops, artillery, and tanks in to fight the Ukrainians). The Ukrainians are fighting to preserve their borders here. End of story.
What, are you getting paid by the Russians for that post? How on earth is that "The most logical cause for the fire"? You've furnished zero evidense to support your claim.
It could very well have been a Russian or seperatist drone as, in case you missed it, there is a war happening over there. I will, however, hold off judgement until there is actual evidense .
If the Democrat's filibustering Gorsuch would prove they are unfit to govern then the Republican's already proved as such. Obama's pick was very uncontroversial as well and the Republicans refused to even hold session on the topic of his appointment. Just because what they did doesnt have a neat name like "filibuster" doesnt mean it doesnt boil down to the exact same thing.
Part of me wants the Dems to filibuster because "Fuck'em, if the Republicans are going to play that game then let the seat sit vacant. You reap what you sow assholes". However, the more rational side of me hopes they dont as I feel the filibuster mechanic is generally a healthy device in our government (for both parties) that prevents massive swings in government ideology and the Republicans might just get rid of it entirely to get their way.
No she didnt as that doesnt even seem possible under current conditions. Health insurance rates going up, which the Republicans site as the end of ACA, is not happening because of some arbitrary reason. The rates are going up to offset ACA costs.
I dont agree with that at all as he most likely has businesses that use foreign labor in the US, both legally and illegally. I think he "cares", as with many of the things he says, because he thought it would get him elected (and it did).
Mod up a hundred times. We have too many politicians who are unwilling to compromise to make progress. The only form of government where somebody gets everything they want is a dictatorship.
When you have an answer to "There are people in Washington whose literal job is to understand stuff like this." get back to me. It's been 7 years and the ACA is not some sort of encrypted Alien transmission.
Sure, pushing for a poor candidate is totally the same as not knowing how to govern. I completely agree!
*rolls eyes*
The Democrats are under the control of the "hard left"? Please, what radicalism has the Democratic party proposed on par with completely dismantling the bulk of our government? By international standards our country has no hard left and the hard right looks downright nutty.
There are 4,100 pages in the US version of the childrens book series Harry Potter, so yeah, how could any one person possibly process 3,500
The Affordable Care Act has been around for 7 years and is currently one of the most contentious political issues in our country. The idea that "no one person understands" it is prepostorous. There are people in Washington whose literal job is to understand stuff like this.
No.
Pluto was well established as a planet years ago in the irrefutable context of song.
Pluto- 2 Skinnee Js: http://youtu.be/heRn5n6z-Ck
A also took a dump right when it happened. Since, as you suggest, events with similar timing are linked, how does my shit factor into this?
How much does the Russian government pay you to post on their behalf? I ask because it seems strange to me that you so energenically defend Russia but offer zero substance to defend your claims. Furthermore, you're posting a reply on a two day old post that was never modded up and thus hard to find.
You start your post with a completely unsubstanciated claim that the US overthrew Ukraines old government. (that video doesnt even resemble evidence of such.). Furthermore, there isnt even strong circumstancial evidense of the uprising being artificially created by the US as when elections happened next in Ukraine, pro Western political figures overwhelmingly won suggesting a pro Western political stance is in favor amoung Ukrainians.
Then you go on to say "So even if Russia had invaded Ukraine", when literally every country on this planet including Russia recognized Crimea as part of Ukraine prior to the Russian invasion. Even if you want to ignore Russian troops and military hardware running around up North it can not he disputed that Russia invaded and seized control of part of Ukraine. Then you claim Russia in Crimea is the same as modern US military endeavors (which is weird because you're now acknowledging the invasion you denied above)? Preposterous. The US has not annexed another country's territory at any point in modern history.
Literally, your whole post is either completely unsubstanciated, demonstrably false, or both.
So again. Honestly. How much do the Russians pay you?