Re: Trump
« Reply #3400 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

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6650
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3401 on: November 17, 2018, 11:20:58 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.

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.

I don't give you the benefit of the doubt in these sorts of engagements anymore. Mostly because of the kind of stuff you said in this very post.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3402 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.


Quote
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:
Quote
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?

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6650
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3403 on: November 18, 2018, 02:35:34 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.

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.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2018, 02:39:37 PM by Rushy »

Re: Trump
« Reply #3404 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...)

Quote
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.


*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 1115
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3405 on: November 20, 2018, 09:26:48 PM »
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5145
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3406 on: November 20, 2018, 10:19:23 PM »
‘Member when the outcry about Hillary was that the Clinton Foundation gave money to the Saudis?  I ‘member. People are such hypocrites.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Online junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8425
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3407 on: November 20, 2018, 11:27:59 PM »
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3408 on: November 21, 2018, 06:03:08 AM »
Same shit, different day.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3409 on: November 23, 2018, 03:02:31 AM »
This human being called Donald Trump will never be my president... except that somehow that is the title he has been declared worthy of by the country I call home. How shall I call this my home when it has declared a head-of-house whom I cannot recognize? One whom I cannot morally or ethically accept even though it is my patriotic duty to do so. What is this blasphemy we call "Trump"? MAGA??? What in the name of god have we done?
« Last Edit: November 23, 2018, 03:04:28 AM by timterroo »
"noche te ipsum"

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."  - Albert Einstein

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5145
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3410 on: November 23, 2018, 03:20:14 AM »
So democracy doesn't work when the guy you don't like gets elected?
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3411 on: November 23, 2018, 03:36:47 AM »
So democracy doesn't work when the guy you don't like gets elected?

First off, majority of America voted the other way... yet somehow this neanderthol gets elected? Did democracy really work? The same thing happened when George W was elected. Popular vote, and even final electoral vote went to Al Gore.... I wonder how different our policies on energy and conservation would be if Gore had won (been allowed the title)...

Second off, sometimes democracy fails. It's a theory, same as anything else, it will sometimes produce bad results. That doesn't mean it doesn't work.

P.S. - Please do not mistake me for an anarchist. I still vote, and follow law and order even IF I do not believe in the leadership that has overtaken this great country.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2018, 03:48:58 AM by timterroo »
"noche te ipsum"

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."  - Albert Einstein

Re: Trump
« Reply #3412 on: November 23, 2018, 07:46:23 AM »
There should be a test before you can vote.
I used to joke about this but I'm increasingly serious about it.
And I don't mean an intelligence test, it's not about that. But FFS show you understand the issues at hand before you put your mark.

The problem with democracy (I think we can all agree that's an excellent way to start a sentence) is that it's built on the premise that everyone gets to have an opinion (which I'm on board with). But it's also based on the premise that everyone's opinion is equally valid. That second part is bullshit. The bloke down the pub who is going to vote for Brexit because of the "bloody Frogs' - his opinion is not as valid as someone who has a degree in EU law and has studied the workings of the EU for years. We all have different expertise and knowledge, our opinions about things are not equally valid, but we all get one vote. I'm sort of arguing for a meritocracy, and that feels wrong to me. But people voting for Brexit as a "protest" or because they're racist idiots, those people shouldn't get a vote. And, for balance, people voting to Remain because they think the sky will fall in if we leave, they probably shouldn't get one either.

Back to Trump. And this relates to my point above about people having different expertise. I see he tweeted about a predicted cold snap and said "where's global warming?". A president who doesn't understand the difference between climate and weather making policies which affect the former. The mind boggles... ???
"This is literally just a few people talking about it for a brief time every day on their spare time. That’s the flat earth movement" - Tom Bishop

Re: Trump
« Reply #3413 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.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3414 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")

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6650
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3415 on: November 24, 2018, 01:34:36 AM »
Saudi Arabia can do whatever they like as long as they control such an enormous portion of the world's energy reserves. No amount of politicians wagging their finger in the Saudi's direction will change that.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3416 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).

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6650
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3417 on: November 24, 2018, 02:32:18 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.

Re: Trump
« Reply #3418 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.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5145
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #3419 on: November 24, 2018, 07:42:24 PM »
Turkey applied all the pressure to uncover the murder of the Saudi journalist.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.