2801

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 28, 2018, 06:13:41 PM »

From an e-mail I got from Trump himself.... (or just his campaign)

Our accounts took a MASSIVE hit.
 
 Not only did we have to fight off the Democrats in the midterms, we then had to stop them from trying to STEAL elections from us during recounts.
 
 ...I even transferred millions from my re-election campaign to protect our Senate majority.
 
With the very first end-of-month deadline of the 2020 election cycle coming up, I need YOUR help right now replenishing our accounts for our re-election.

Is it legal to transfer campaign funds to the senate?

2802

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 27, 2018, 06:38:01 PM »

And apparently being a legal, permament resident of America, married to an American with American children, doesn't help stop you from being deported.


https://www.npr.org/2018/11/26/662218863/they-know-i-m-different-deportee-struggles-in-iraq-after-decades-living-in-u-s

I am genuinely interested about how someone can explain this away.

He wasn't a true American.  Probably liberal too.  Duh.

2803

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 27, 2018, 07:04:27 AM »

And apparently being a legal, permament resident of America, married to an American with American children, doesn't help stop you from being deported.


https://www.npr.org/2018/11/26/662218863/they-know-i-m-different-deportee-struggles-in-iraq-after-decades-living-in-u-s

2804

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 27, 2018, 06:38:37 AM »

https://read.bi/2AtGQuS
Trump's America News.


Summary: Trump suggested America needs a global, well funded news network to counter CNN in the world and paint America as Great.


I'm not against the government fully funding a non-profit news agency, like NPR, but I don't trust them to not pull funding at the sight of negative stories.

2805

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Holocaust - Why do some people think it's fake?

« on: November 27, 2018, 06:35:57 AM »

Several possibilities:


1. They hate Jews and don't wanna think they were in danger.
2. They can't wrap their heads around genocide, like how anyone could do it, so they assume its false.
3. They don't care to learn anything else.
4. They're idiots.

2806

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 24, 2018, 07:41:00 PM »

Maybe so, but Trump bluntly said he trades integrity for cheap oil.  Its pretty damn depressing to see a president so blatently corrupt (or at least morally loose).

No other US president would be doing anything different right now. When it comes to things like Saudi politics, the West's hands are tied. Sure, another president might be making some feel-good speeches about it, but their actions wouldn't be different.

This is also why the fact that the Saudis made 9/11 happen was buried and we invaded Afghanistan instead. Saudi Arabia is practically invincible right now and they know it. They've been doing shit like this for decades and the only reason you're hearing about it now is because Turkey managed to do something competent for once.

Yeah, I agree he couldn't do anything different, but there's a difference between "I hate it but doing anyhing would cause more harm than good" vs "Its not nice but they give us cheap oil they didn't do anything wrong."  Its all about image.


What did Turkey do?  I missed that bit.

2807

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 24, 2018, 06:47:11 AM »

Maybe so, but Trump bluntly said he trades integrity for cheap oil.  Its pretty damn depressing to see a president so blatently corrupt (or at least morally loose).

2808

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 23, 2018, 08:53:51 PM »

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/22/670267324/trump-roasts-judiciary-defends-saudis-after-televised-thanksgiving-call-to-troop

In other news:
Trump loves The Saudies cause they make us money, even if they do kill journalists. (Though Hillary making money off them is still wrong apparently)Trump also hates judges who aren't biased towards him and thinks there are too many of them.  ("Obama Judges")

2809

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 23, 2018, 09:17:04 AM »

The problem is that such a test is based on whoever holds power.  And since some senators think women can eject unwanted pregnencies automatically, I'm not gonna put my faith in them to write a test.

2810

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 21, 2018, 06:03:08 AM »

Same shit, different day.

2811

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Fallout 76

« on: November 19, 2018, 02:12:41 PM »

https://www.pcgamer.com/fallout-76-players-launch-3-nukes-at-once-crash-server/?utm_content=buffer0ecb3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=buffer-pcgamertw

2812

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 18, 2018, 08:10:32 PM »

Dave, I would like you to think long and hard about which part of the White House acts as law enforcement and actually controls passes.

And who does the Secret Service work for?  Because unless Acosta was a security risk, I'm pretty sure they didn't decide to revoke it on their own.  Yes, I'm sure someone from the Secret Service did, physically, remove his press pass, but ya know... that's not really the point.
(though apparently not even the government knows who did it so...)

I also never said you thought his rights were violated. Please stop inserting words into my posts. People are allowed to point things out that you didn't even bring up. Not everything is about you.

Yes they are allowed to point things out that no one brought up.  But I'm sure you can understand how hard it is to not think you were still talking to me.  A simple "That wasn't to you" would have been helpful. 

Especially when you start talking about his rights not being violated.  Look, it's obvious you don't read my posts.  And the people who claim to but are found to be wrong, just try to BS me into thinking they were right all along or weren't really saying that.  And I may be doubting myself, but I'm also running on poor sleep over the last 5-6 months and really in a bad mood.  So noooot gonna take much more.

2813

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 18, 2018, 01:18:58 PM »

Ok, so, I've been questioning my sanity lately so its possible I'm delusional but I don't recall seeing anything about "rights" in my reply.  Or the first amendent.  Could you point it out?  Maybe bold it for me?  Thanks.

I don't recall saying you said anything about it. Could you point it out? Maybe bold it for me? Read my damn posts instead of just arguing with whatever they happen to say.

He didn't actually rule on whether or not Acosta had his rights violated:


If you know I didn't make any mention of rights, why did you put this in there?  The only two things I'm disagreeing with you on is:
1. Secret service made the call.
2. The ruling was because the Secret Service didn't give him a reason.


Literally the only two things I disagree with.
To which I argued:
1. White house, not secret service.
2. No set of standards or policy is in place for revoking the pass or appealing it, etc...


But instead of arguing those two points, you went off on a tangent of "he didn't have his rights violated" and "He got it back but it can be taken away again."


Neither of those things I disagree with or even mentioned.




I know it was a narrow ruling.  I know it only applied to that specific person in that specific situation.  I know he got his pass back.


Hell, from your own link:

ordered Acosta’s pass returned for now in part because he said CNN was likely to prevail on its Fifth Amendment claim — that Acosta hadn’t received sufficient notice or explanation before his credentials were revoked or been given sufficient opportunity to respond before they were.

So you wanna get upset that I correct you on two minor points, fine.  But how the hell did you come to the conclusion that I thought his rights were violated?  Or was that just pointless words to fill in the post?

2814

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 17, 2018, 09:54:22 PM »

Did we read the same article?  It said the white house revokee it but because it has no standards for behavior set, the revokation was reversed.  The WH needs to make set of rules or standards then can revoke if the journalist violates that standard. 

If you actually read what the judge said.

Wow, it's almost like, CNBC is pushing some kind of narrative! You also didn't seem to read what I actually wrote. The pass was given back. He didn't actually rule on whether or not Acosta had his rights violated:

https://www.apnews.com/5ffb3a155f454a0893dc2d9db18c81d9

But the judge also emphasized the “very limited nature” of his ruling Friday. He noted he had not determined that the First Amendment was violated.

You need to learn how to look up other sources, Dave, since you seem to only use one vague one and make your determinations from there.

Ok, so, I've been questioning my sanity lately so its possible I'm delusional but I don't recall seeing anything about "rights" in my reply.  Or the first amendent.  Could you point it out?  Maybe bold it for me?  Thanks.

He is right.  I mean, they do have nukes, legally.  Maybe nukes need to be legal for personal protection?  Never know when ya need Mutually Assured Destruction to keep the government from arresting you, or a burglar from stealing your TV.

He isn't right, though. He was using nukes to say the government is too powerful to fight, which is wrong for a multitude of reasons. Saying "we're already too powerful, there's no point in fighting us" is exactly the kind of stupid thing that gun banners say.

How silly of me to expect you to get the hint of the tongue in cheek remark I made by referencing using nukes for burglar defense.

2815

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 17, 2018, 06:39:58 AM »

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/16/judge-orders-trump-administration-to-restore-cnn-reporter-jim-acostas-white-house-press-pass.html

haha

If you actually read what the judge said, you'll notice it was a narrow ruling, and that the judge said nothing is stopping Trump from just revoking it again. The only issue was that Secret Service did not officially file a reason why the pass was removed. He didn't actually remark on whether or not this revocation was a violation of Acosta's rights.

Did we read the same article?  It said the white house revokee it but because it has no standards for behavior set, the revokation was reversed.  The WH needs to make set of rules or standards then can revoke if the journalist violates that standard. 

In other news:

https://twitter.com/Rambobiggs/status/1063529017423347712

When you tell gun owners that you'll literally nuke them if they refuse to give up their guns lmao. Swalwell killed his own 2020 presidential run before it even started.

He is right.  I mean, they do have nukes, legally.  Maybe nukes need to be legal for personal protection?  Never know when ya need Mutually Assured Destruction to keep the government from arresting you, or a burglar from stealing your TV.

2816

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Fallout 76

« on: November 16, 2018, 09:17:04 PM »

Wait... its out now?!
Geeze... rushed much?

2817

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 16, 2018, 09:15:19 PM »

Once again, Justice proves it doesn't bend to Trump's will. Even when appointed by him.

A certain Justice will, though.

Maybe.  We'll see.

2818

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 16, 2018, 05:44:02 PM »

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/16/judge-orders-trump-administration-to-restore-cnn-reporter-jim-acostas-white-house-press-pass.html

haha

Once again, Justice proves it doesn't bend to Trump's will. Even when appointed by him.

2819

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 16, 2018, 04:08:40 PM »

Trump doing something I support?
What the fuck is happening?

Well, Republicans want this for some reason.
I suspect a party platform shift is happening.  Probably take a few decades but...

2820

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: American Police vs British Police

« on: November 16, 2018, 12:36:36 PM »

This is one example out 900,000 cops, millions of police interactions per week, and at least 100 million gun owners. The likelihood of this happening is quite rare. Besides, this was a security guard, he was supposed to be armed.

Yes it is.  But the NRA would have us think that everyone should own a gun to kill anyone who tries to shoot someone in public. 
And yes, that's my point. A security guard, whose job it is to have a gun, was killed by police.  So what chance does a citizen in street clothes have?