Re: Politics and Current Events

by **reboot** Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:16 pm

Enail wrote:Historically, people absolutely will if things get bad enough, so it's more a question of how bad things will get.

And for a good number of people who would want to leave, this is not their first time being a refugee.

by Wondering Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:39 pm

bomaye wrote:I'm wondering if Muslims, Jews, queer folk, and other persecuted groups are prepared to give up their lives in America to live in the Maritimes

Why just the Maritimes? Is this some Canadian thing I'm not getting?

jcorozza wrote:Wondering, Trump's silencing of the press and that relationship in general is perhaps the most terrifying bit to me. Because he could actually be out there encouraging hate crimes, etc., but we might never find out about it. Hopefully because of the internet media is so widespread that information will leak out.

Has he silenced the press? I think he's trying to by saying he won't give them access if they don't write what he wants, but I don't know how well that's going to work. I have a feeling it will work better with the TV news channels than with print news. As such, I signed up for the WaPo this week to financially support them.

reboot wrote:And for a good number of people who would want to leave, this is not their first time being a refugee.

If it's just Muslims, true. If it extends to other groups, including press and academia, then those will likely all be first timers. And America will be over.

by bomaye Mon Nov 28, 2016 6:50 pm

Wondering wrote:
bomaye wrote:I'm wondering if Muslims, Jews, queer folk, and other persecuted groups are prepared to give up their lives in America to live in the Maritimes
Why just the Maritimes? Is this some Canadian thing I'm not getting?

I did one of those Jeopardy jokes where no one else go it Sad

The Maritimes are not where young people want to live or where people want to set down roots and create families because it's cold and in the middle of nowhere and only old people and rednecks live there, so part of Canadian immigration plans are just to send new immigrants there to make up for the declining population. They arrive there and go "WTF" and then try to move to Toronto or Vancouver.

We'd basically be sending American refugees to Canada's Maine to solve our own demographic problems, so part of the joke is that when the American refugees find out they'll be holding a 70 cent dollar and living in the cold middle of nowhere living among rednecks and old people, they may just turn back around because the persecution sucks but at least the purchasing power and weather is a little less shitty in red American states.

by jcorozza Mon Nov 28, 2016 6:52 pm

Well, not yet, but it reads to me like he's threatening to if they don't say nice things about him. Not sure he really has he ability to do that, but the threat on it's own is pretty scary. Not a bad idea - it's going to be harder and harder to find media outlets I can trust.

by WJMorris3 Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:01 pm

I'm fully expecting to be deported for being a Democrat under a Trump administration.

by Wondering Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:05 pm

bomaye wrote:The Maritimes are not where young people want to live or where people want to set down roots and create families because it's cold and in the middle of nowhere and only old people and rednecks live there

I thought that was Saskatchewan. Wink

by **reboot** Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:20 pm

Wondering wrote:
bomaye wrote:The Maritime are not where young people want to live or where people want to set down roots and create families because it's cold and in the middle of nowhere and only old people and rednecks live there

I thought that was Saskatchewan.

Somalis already got sent to Maine, so maybe they would settle right in Smile

On a less light note, only Congress can call an investigation into presidential conflicts of interest, ethical issues, and corruption. We may have Ulysses S. Grant levels of all 3 and a legislative branch that will not investigate

by Wondering Mon Nov 28, 2016 8:49 pm

Which, I know you know, reboot, but I feel compelled to say any time such comparisons are brought up.

This is not comparable to any prior election nor Trump comparable to any prior president.

He has nuclear weapons. We have international treaties. We have the strongest military in the world. We likely have the biggest surveillance network in the world. Trump is the ONLY president who has never been in politics or the military prior to being president.

I think Trump and the GOP are not only interested in undoing everything that Obama did, but everything FDR did, too. (And Nixon's EPA. And LBJ and JFK's civil rights.)

by WJMorris3 Mon Nov 28, 2016 10:21 pm

Side note: with all the hammering Trump's done over Hillary Clinton's emails, how in his right mind is he even considering David Petraeus as Secretary of State?

by WJMorris3 Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:09 am

Likely off base here, but if the proper way to retire a worn U.S. flag is by burning it, why would one want to propose losing one's citizenship for burning the flag?

by Wondering Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:33 am

Thing I saw on the internet today:

General populace: "We're fucked."
Educated populace: "The president can't legally do all these awful things."
Highly educated populace: "We're fucked."

by Wondering Fri Dec 02, 2016 12:34 am

I'm seeing the Pentagon saying they support having women in the draft. So, instead of getting rid of it, we're going to double the number of people in it.

This bodes well for the future. Sad

by WJMorris3 Fri Dec 02, 2016 12:37 am

Wondering wrote:I'm seeing the Pentagon saying they support having women in the draft. So, instead of getting rid of it, we're going to double the number of people in it.

This bodes well for the future.

I support getting rid of the draft myself; that said, if we're going to keep the draft, we shouldn't deny women the opportunity to be drafted. That would be discriminatory against them.

by **reboot** Fri Dec 02, 2016 8:37 am

I agree with WJMorris. If we are going to keep the draft it should include women. Do we need to keep the draft when we already have a capable volunteer military that can fight two complex wars for 5-10 years? No, I do not think we do.

Mattis, the pick for Defense Secretary, is apparently pretty squared away. I wonder how frustrating it will be to be the only cool head in a Cabinet of ideologues and whack jobs?

by WJMorris3 Fri Dec 02, 2016 9:18 am

reboot wrote:I agree with WJMorris. If we are going to keep the draft it should include women. Do we need to keep the draft when we already have a capable volunteer military that can fight two complex wars for 5-10 years? No, I do not think we do.

Mattis, the pick for Defense Secretary, is apparently pretty squared away. I wonder how frustrating it will be to be the only cool head in a Cabinet of ideologues and whack jobs?

But he needs a waiver to become Defense Secretary and I don't know that he gets it.

by **reboot** Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:29 am

Oh yeah, he is 3 years short because he has only been out for 4, but waivers have been given in the past and he has decent support on both sides of the aisle. Considering the other options out there, he is not a bad choice. Although I cannot imagine being a level headed military scholar and veteran and working with Flynn or, worse, being ordered to send in troops based on intelligence filtered through Flynn

by Wondering Fri Dec 02, 2016 12:23 pm

My point was not not a gendered one. It was: Why are we talking about expanding the draft -- doubling the size of it, in fact -- when we do have a capable volunteer army, right when Trump is coming into office. If you're making noises about expanding the draft, the unspoken motivation to me is that you think our current army won't be big enough in the future for all the wars we'll be fighting and that our Mercenary-in-Chief wants to hire them out for.

by **reboot** Fri Dec 02, 2016 3:59 pm

Wondering wrote:My point was not not a gendered one. It was: Why are we talking about expanding the draft -- doubling the size of it, in fact -- when we do have a capable volunteer army, right when Trump is coming into office. If you're making noises about expanding the draft, the unspoken motivation to me is that you think our current army won't be big enough in the future for all the wars we'll be fighting and that our Mercenary-in-Chief wants to hire them out for.

100% with you on this.

by BasedBuzzed Sun Dec 04, 2016 7:03 pm

In the wake of the Austrian fash party getting owned, an interesting turfing exercise: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/22/world/europe/europe-right-wing-austria-hungary.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

Also, #NoDAPL has won (the pipeline is not completely out of the way, but still, good news): https://www.army.mil/article/179095/army_will_not_grant_easement_for_dakota_access_pipeline_crossing

by Wondering Sun Dec 04, 2016 7:44 pm

BasedBuzzed wrote:Also, #NoDAPL has won (the pipeline is not completely out of the way, but still, good news): https://www.army.mil/article/179095/army_will_not_grant_easement_for_dakota_access_pipeline_crossing

Until Trump's in office. I believe he's actually invested in the pipeline company.

by BasedBuzzed Sun Dec 04, 2016 8:15 pm

Sources confirm that: https://trofire.com/2016/11/15/trumps-financial-investments-big-oil-threaten-drown-nodapl-protests/

by **reboot** Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:15 am

This is what happens when "it's just the internet" stops being a justification for whipping up the trolls for lolz. I am just glad no one was hurt this time. Who knows about next time?

by WJMorris3 Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:12 pm

Donald Trump is going to get somebody killed.

by **reboot** Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:44 pm

Russian ambassador assassinated by Turkish policeman I bet Russian targets will become more common

by **reboot** Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:45 am

reboot wrote:Russian ambassador assassinated by Turkish policeman I bet Russian targets will become more common

Aaaaaaand why the fuck did I watch footage of the actual assassination? I

by Sponsored content