Politics

[The359]

I could theoretically see the "He's just coloring with kids" argument.

[Crazed_Insanity]

If he were really dumb, he would not be president now.

I could see W or dan Quayle as dumb, but not so sure about Trump.

He was probably just not paying attention trying to figure out how he can get out of his current mess...

[MR2 Fan]

if he weren't really dumb, he wouldn't have BANKRUPTED CASINOS and been bankrupt overall 6 times after inheriting a massive fortune from his father.

He is VERY DUMB. He's been implicating himself constantly using his tweets, using his Fox "News" appearances...each time saying something stupider and more incriminating. It's obvious to anyone paying real attention.

[G'day Mate]

In the meantime, John McCain has died. He seemed to be one of few republicans with any decency based on what I've seen lately

[FaultyMario]

He showed congruency throughout his life as opposed to the new generation of means-to-an-end republicans. It's hard to pin on his political sins now, right after his death, but he did have them, it's also hard to badmouth one of the few true friends we had in American politics; he was a friend of Mexico.

[Freude am Fahren]

I could theoretically see the "He's just coloring with kids" argument.

I don't know, looks like he's giving it his all...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DlaPS5TV4AA6d56.jpg:small

[speedpimp]

Looks like he used extra Aqua Net to keep the cotton candy tame.

[Tom Servo]

I've got my problems with McCain, though I think he generally did what he thought was best, not which stood to get him the greatest benefit (aside from allowing the GOP to saddle him with Sarah Palin).

In the meantime, Trump nixed the White House prepared statement about McCain in favor of a tweet which never actually says anything about McCain himself: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-rejected-plans-for-a-white-house-statement-praising-mccain/2018/08/26/0d0478e4-a967-11e8-8f4b-aee063e14538_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f0a0d18fe329

[Jason]

https://splinternews.com/the-myth-of-john-mccain-1828587230

This covers my thoughts on McCain.

[FaultyMario]

His legacy would be seen under a completely different light had he died during Obama's presidency. Or Hillary's. McCain's personal decency is needed in times of post-truth.

America needs Mueller to put Trump in prison* ASAP**; this type of politics is skewing reality so far into the fringes of society that the longer it stays there, the more difficult it will be to fix the damage.



* Settled under grand jury, most likely scenario.
**2021 seems plausible.

[MR2 Fan]

...he may pass away of natural causes before then

[Crazed_Insanity]

As long as he passes, don’t really care about causes.

Character of those folks who were in his inner circle should’ve made it very clear that trump has also character issues or just amazing poor judge of character. Given that the orange dude wasn’t born yesterday, former is more likely.

If a public office holder’s closest associates can be convicted criminals, there really should be laws that automatically remove the dude and make sure he can’t pardon himself.

[Tom Servo]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DlovcdaUUAE21h5.jpg:large

[FaultyMario]

“The damage [Mick Mulvaney, Trump's Director of the Office of Management and Budget] have done to the bureau betrays these families [of student debtors] and sacrifices the financial futures of millions of Americans in communities across the country.” (https://apnews.com/5fa24ab9eafb456089fb9ff1a22ec694) Says, CFPB Bureaucrat Seth Frotman in resignation letter.

[neanderthal]

So Trump had announced his seventeenth, that's seven and teenth, round of judicial nominees, and they're all very conservative.
We know he is unlikely to have researched them and vetted them, what with all the golf he has to play at his properties.

So, yeah, remind us again billi why it's important to vote your conscience? And they're still going to try to ram through Kavanaugh.

Citizens United. Roe v Wade. The Voting Rights Act. Gerrymandering. All these are on the line.


Elections matter. Voting matters. Your conscience doesn't. Not at fucking election time.

[Crazed_Insanity]

“The damage [Mick Mulvaney, Trump's Director of the Office of Management and Budget] have done to the bureau betrays these families [of student debtors] and sacrifices the financial futures of millions of Americans in communities across the country.” (https://apnews.com/5fa24ab9eafb456089fb9ff1a22ec694) Says, CFPB Bureaucrat Seth Frotman in resignation letter.

Resigning is the only way to fight against it? Sigh...

Who am I to be critical, I resigned to vote for any major party candidate...

[FaultyMario]

The United Federation of North American Planets really is a complex thing. As California Becomes First State To End Cash Bail After 40-Year Fight (https://www.npr.org/2018/08/28/642795284/california-becomes-first-state-to-end-cash-bail), which I believe is something unthinkable in other regions.

I'm of the opinion that Obama catastrophically failed to address how some of the dynamics in certain parts of the country are in complete conflict with some of the solutions that could benefit a majority, and whence some social tensions escalated. And that's taking into account that Obama is an intelligent man with principles! I guess that means that some institutional reform is needed, not a change of ruling party or ruling elite, but an overhaul of the rules of the game of governing the Union.

[FaultyMario]

Trump Org CFO Allen Weisselberg granted immunity.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/trump-org-cfo-allen-weisselberg-given-immunity-prosecutors-testify-n903566

White House Counsel Don McGahn set to leave post (https://www.huffingtonpost.com.mx/entry/don-mcgahn-departure-white-house-counsel_us_5b868cafe4b0cf7b0030c536). The announcement comes 11 days after it was made public he spent 30 hours being interviewed by the Mueller team.

[Phil_SS]

Max Cherry must be pissed........ofcourse he is probably retired by now. Though I wouldn't want to upset Winston either.......

[FaultyMario]

The soundtrack would be too good for Trump.

[MR2 Fan]

and in Florida news...speaking about the new Democratic candidate for governor who happens to be black:

"GOP candidate Ron DeSantis warns Florida not to ‘monkey up’ the state by electing his black opponent Andrew Gillum"

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/08/gop-candidate-ron-desantis-warns-florida-not-monkey-state-electing-black-opponent-andrew-gillum/


GREAT choice of words there, there's NO WAY POSSIBLE that could be mis-construed at all!

[drew]

He's a Trump endorsee. Of course he said that.

[Tom Servo]

And you thought you were safe, being a born-in-the-United-States citizen.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/us-is-denying-passports-to-americans-along-the-border-throwing-their-citizenship-into-question/2018/08/29/1d630e84-a0da-11e8-a3dd-2a1991f075d5_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.4f98562a1eb2

[drew]

Saw that too.

WINNING

[FaultyMario]

Sorry for Trump cancelling your pay rise, Jason.

[21Kid]

I think that he works for a contractor, not straight through the Govt.

I can't believe how much the US has regressed in such a short amount of time. 😔

[The359]

I need to check with my union when I get back to work tomorrow to see if this affects the postal cost of living increases.

[Tom Servo]

Hey, that tax cut and the parade ain't gonna pay for themselves.

[The359]

But the economy is booming, right?

[Cam]

I hear it's the best ever.

[Phil_SS]

And if he is removed from office we will all be poor....

[drew]

It's almost fascinating. Almost.

[Jason]

Yeah, the govt workforce is not pleased... They dealt with this during the recovery during the Obama years, and now have to again. It's just going to cause good people to leave for the private sector. Which, I guess is the intent of the right, to sabotage the government as much as possible, so they have an excuse to defund it.

Also, there's this ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

https://mobile.twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1035348264344801282

[Tom Servo]

Next thing you know, they'll take money from police departments to pay for law enforcement.

[FaultyMario]

Also, there's this ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

https://mobile.twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1035348264344801282

Indiana, again?

How do you say "cornered before the midterms" in Trumpspeak?

[drew]

This sums it up fairly well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rm3d43HLyTI

[FaultyMario]

Just in case anybody had doubts about the Morange Fascist being a fascist.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DmLgfyQUYAAJxf8.jpg

People with disabilities, minorities, immigrants, due process, and trade unions.

What does the script say, who does he go after next?

[MR2 Fan]

he actually tweeted againt, not against but looks like he fixed it?

[FaultyMario]

:rolleyes: (https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/mussolini-press)

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DmQjOEbUUAA4t9B.jpg

[Crazed_Insanity]

Sources from a top secret meeting saying Trump wanted a 10 fold increase in nukes.

Trump himself denied it after NBC's report.

Even if the sources are correct and our president is indeed a moron for making such a demand in that meeting, our media should be very proud of the fact that they can leak out top secret info just to prove that our nation's leader is a moron? Way to make America more moronic again. It's not like it's already public information that Trump is a moron. I have to agree with Trump on this one... our media is pretty moronic as well.

Putin is probably laughing all the way to wherever the fuck he's going. Mission accomplished.

[balki]

Absolutely, suppressing the media on something like a vast increase in nukes wreaks of third reich-type shenanigans

[MR2 Fan]

I don't think this was suppressed, wasn't this mentioned over a year ago that he wanted a lot more nukes?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Trump's threat of suppression is pretty much an empty threat.

It is well known that we have a moron at the WH. It's no longer newsworthy. We might as well open up all top secret meeting to become public meetings then.

Is the media practicing true journalism or trying to pick up where wikileak has left off?

NBC and CNN are pretty good at suppressing Bernie Sanders too. Even if Trump succeeded in his empty threat, I wouldn't really miss these political news organizations. Of course, if we're getting rid of major political news orgs, Fox needs to go 1st.

[Tom Servo]

Anonymous "senior administration official" describes "resistance" in the white house, including derailing Trump's more damaging impulses.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/trump-white-house-anonymous-resistance.html

[FaultyMario]

Wow. Not my guy, but that is a recipe for disaster.

[MR2 Fan]

So, I find it interesting in the first day of the Kavanaugh stuff that a bunch of protestors wore outfits from some show or movie called The Handmaid's Tale from what I've read.

As I've discussed in other threads, this is where some things can get lost in translation with so many choices for shows, movies, games...overall entertainment, I know NOTHING about the subject matter and why being dressed like that is important to the protest.

Yes, I can look it up, but just saying in general that may be lost on a lot of people vs. being dressed up in something more generally recognizable. This is how society has changed. 30 years ago, dressing up like something in a popular movie or show would probably get a lot more reaction as our entertainment choices were much more limited.

Anyway, just a minor anecdote.

[Dicknose]

It is a show about a fascist USA. It deals mostly with how it works, but also a bit about how easily it can come into being. Its a sexist patriarchy that claims a religious moral stance for justifying a lot of terrible stuff. You know... the path that is currently ahead.

It is popular but not exactly known to everyone. But it is an easy visual to pull off and a pretty strong symbol.
You might not know it, but once you understand what it represents (and thats probably now...) the look should be enough to trigger a response.
Id guess its a much stronger message than holding signs - we are used to people with signs that most dont even look at the signs (or laugh at how badly the message is done in a few words)

(additions...)
the book and now tv show are quickly becoming the "1984" for the current time - Id expect its impact to be similar and last for a long while.
Some terms and the "handmaid look" will probably become a strong and distinctive part of our culture
Like using the 1984 term "big brother" - see we have been using pop culture in this way for a long while (1984 is almost 70 years old)

[Tom Servo]

Well, the show was based on a novel from 33 years ago, so it's not *that* pop culture.

Which actually was the more hilarious part when Trumpers lost their shit over the show, claiming it was written about Trump.

But yeah, I agree that I don't think that it really had much effect, even if you did understand the point they were trying to make. Nobody who understood it was swayed, and everyone who might have been swayed didn't understand it.

[drew]

Best part was DJT stating the NYT "had to hand over the source" under the guise of "national security".

[mk]

Is Woodwards book just election propaganda?

[FaultyMario]

Best part was DJT stating the NYT "had to hand over the source" under the guise of "national security".

It now looks like an elaborate troll. Because ohmygod, what a fucking trollable dill weed.

[drew]

I'm not even sure why they're going through the whole charade of the confirmation shit.

In the end, they'll confirm him across party lines. All the last two days have been, are demonstrations of money wasting. Not to be confused with any other day, mind you.

[Jason]

I think it's important for him and his positions to be exposed heading into midterms. Also, he's lied under oath, so he's at risk for being impeached should Democrats gain back power.

[FaultyMario]

Can a SCJ be impeached?

[Jason]

Yes, same process as POTUS impeachment.

[G'day Mate]

It now looks like an elaborate troll. Because ohmygod, what a fucking trollable dill weed.

Oh, really? All I've seen is speculation over who it could be ...

[FaultyMario]

Some reasonable person in the media said that this just fuels the deepstate lunatics.

[SportWagon]

I wonder if Justin Trudeau's personal Canada Goose has a twitter account?

[FaultyMario]

Just to be clear, I meant Michelle.

She sent her husband instead. I guess one can't have it all.


I was also intent on following a wise American tradition of ex-presidents gracefully exiting the political stage and making room for new voices and new ideas. We have our first president, George Washington, to thank for setting that example.

After he led the colonies to victory as General Washington, there were no constraints on him, really. He was practically a god to those who had followed him into battle. There was no constitution. There were no democratic norms that guided what he should or could do. And he could have made himself all-powerful, could have made himself potentially president for life. Instead, he resigned as commander in chief and moved back to his country estate. Six years later, he was elected president. But after two terms, he resigned again and rode off into the sunset.

[Freude am Fahren]

Was intent...


and so now? Is there more?

[MR2 Fan]

I liked Obama's speech, but didn't like where he said that Progressives are trying to stoop to the GOP's levels of arguing or however he said it.

I know he's a corporate democrat and him and others are not big fans of the progressive candidates running (and winning primaries) right now.

[MR2 Fan]

This just in: George Stephanopoulos is going to interview George Papadopoulos on Sunday

I feel bad for the closed captioning people

[Crazed_Insanity]

I don't think he's saying the likes of Bernie Sanders are stooping to lower levels... more like extreme left Antifa types, using hatred to fight hatred. I do agree that we don't need to stoop to the same low levels as the GOP tactics.

Anyway, not sure what kind of progressive friends he has... pretty sure the Sanders, Warren type won't be fighting Trump/GOP at their same low level.

[mk]

My prediction is that tomorrow Swedes have a far right pendelum and after 6-Nov Woodward et al means nothing.

It's like Dems are saying come on voters, be reasonable and marginals answering FU.

[FaultyMario]

Dr. Luca Cavalli Sforza has recently died. He was one of the leaders of the Human Genome Diversity Project and his work serves as the basis to kill scientific racism and the concept of human races as a biological determinant. Here's a excerpt from his 1993 Senate Hearing (https://archive.org/stream/humangenomediver00unit/humangenomediver00unit_djvu.txt).


We have still-limited information on intergroup diversity using data obtained directly from DNA, since the relevant techniques have become available only in the last decade, but we already know enough to be confident that the picture thus obtained is very similar to the older one, but much more clear. The basic conclusion from the study of differences among groups is that they are small compared with the differences within the groups themselves.

The aspiration to "race purity" of classical racism is absurd. A village or a small tribe will show almost the same extent of genetic variation among individuals as will the whole world. Only human populations of very small islands that have been subjected for a long time to very close inbreeding (marriage among close relatives) show a moderate increase in genetic homogeneity.


The real diversity we find is between individuals within a group, but not so much between groups. We are misled by an unfortunate fact, in that we see just the surface of people, the surface being skin color, and the size, and the general body shape and facial shape, etc. But that has been designed by natural selection to respond to differences in climate, and it does not respond to any other thing, except it is the only thing we see.

So from the fact that blacks are black, whites are white, etcetera, more or less uniformly, we argue that every other trait is equally uniform between races, but this is absolutely wrong, and this is the message we already know very well and should be made much more widely known. We also know it is not going to be contradicted by the DNA data, because we already have a substantial amount of information from DNA confirming what we already know from pre-DNA studies. If we make this known on a very wide scale, we will really help to eliminate at least some of the prejudices that accompany and cause racism.

[Crazed_Insanity]

In China, people all look pretty much the same in terms of skin and hair color. However, Chinese are pretty good at stereotyping groups of folks in each province. Parents also would like to see their kids marrying people within the similar 'class'. Don't marry up too much... nor marry somebody too low... Point is people can always find ways to 'discriminate' against other strangers that they don't really quite know. Can't say if it's right or wrong, but it's pretty normal human nature.

Anyway, discrimination happens. It's inevitable. Even til the day we interbreed to the point of have similar skin color, I think there will still be discrimination as in China. It's not all bad, because it could serve to help us protect ourselves. So a stranger judged you unfairly. So what? Maybe it's more of their lost! :p

When you are selecting a partner, whether to marry or just for sex, you 'discriminate' against a pool of people too, right? You won't just go ahead and choose everybody or choose whoever comes your way just because we're all the same genetically, right? ;)

I think people on the far left need to realize that all we need to aim for is equal opportunity for all and not equal outcome for all.

People also need to realize and understand that racism/discrimination will NEVER go away completely... maybe after a few million years of evolving can we outgrow that..., but as long as we can achieve equal opportunity for all in the meantime, we all should be able to get along just fine.

Of course we're not quite there yet with 'equal opportunity', but we have improved quite a bit over the years... Equal opportunity is the fight worth fighting for. Fighting against racism itself is a lost cause IMHO.

[JoshInKC]

Dr. Luca Cavalli Sforza has recently died. He was one of the leaders of the Human Genome Diversity Project and his work serves as the basis to kill scientific racism and the concept of human races as a biological determinant. Here's a excerpt from his 1993 Senate Hearing (https://archive.org/stream/humangenomediver00unit/humangenomediver00unit_djvu.txt).
I had somehow missed the news that he died, and then tweeted about it when I found out - got into a good conversation with a friend about how brilliant he was and how part of why he was amazing was his ability to admit his past mistakes when he realized them and then come up with ways to correct those mistakes in the future. He was a big loss to biological anthropology.

[G'day Mate]

Is he ... bragging?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dm45AkoVsAAN82O?format=jpg

[MR2 Fan]

of course he is, that's all he knows how to do...brag and make EVERYTHING about himself.

[FaultyMario]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dm45AkoVsAAN82O?format=jpg

Documents show the Trump administration took nearly $10 million away from FEMA and other federal agencies to apparently pay for immigration detention centers. (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-redirected-nearly-10-million-fema-funds-immigration-customs-enforcement/)

[MR2 Fan]

now Trump is just completely denying the PR death toll actually happened and that it's a Democratic plot against him, despite an independent investigation and even cronies like Paul Ryan and Rick Scott are saying the numbers are accurate.

[FaultyMario]

Feds holding 12,800 migrant children in detention centers, report says (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/feds-holding-12800-migrant-children-in-detention-centers-report-says/)


The number of migrant children being detained by the government has reached its highest level ever, according to a report by The New York Times.

The increase is not due to an influx of more migrant children, but rather because fewer children are being released into the custody of sponsors. Unaccompanied children have traditionally been placed with sponsors such as parents or extended family members upon entering the U.S.

Many would-be sponsors are undocumented themselves, and therefore are reluctant to be fingerprinted and risk deportation.

Detention facilities such as the one in Tornillo, Texas, are exempt from child welfare inspections that are required at similar facilities. On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced that it would triple the size of the "Tent City" in Tornillo so that it could house around 3,800 children.

[MR2 Fan]

This is GOLD

So Brett Kavanaugh who's up for SCOTUS was just accused of sexual misconduct from a woman he knew during high school, this info was released about a day ago to the public.

SOMEHOW, the Senate Judiciary JUST found 65 women to vouch for his "integrity" during high school. Kavanaugh went to an all-boys catholic school. How would he even know 65 women???

https://twitter.com/senjudiciary/status/1040615293620572161

[FaultyMario]

Now that Manafort has agreed to cooperate with federal investigators and Mueller has referred parts of his inquiry on unregistered foreign agents to prosecutors in New York State it looks like the investigation on Russian interference has crossed party lines.

Which is good, the old cop has conducted a thorough investigation. American Institutions 1 - American Corruption 0.

[Crazed_Insanity]

This is GOLD

So Brett Kavanaugh who's up for SCOTUS was just accused of sexual misconduct from a woman he knew during high school, this info was released about a day ago to the public.

SOMEHOW, the Senate Judiciary JUST found 65 women to vouch for his "integrity" during high school. Kavanaugh went to an all-boys catholic school. How would he even know 65 women???

https://twitter.com/senjudiciary/status/1040615293620572161

So there were at least 66 girls in this all boy school?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Let’s just assume Prof. Ford’s accusation is 100% true, this drunken kid really attempted to rape her, and would’ve been successful if he weren’t that drunk!

Should this incident alone be enough to disqualify a life time of work?

While she should be applauded for her bravery for stepping forward, but I still think me too movement is going a bit too far.

Young, drunk boys tend to have impaired judgment. If there’s a history of similar patterns, then of course we cannot confirm such person, but to go after famous folks for some misdeeds done so long ago and under the influence at such a young age just don’t seem right to me.

Of course if Brett did that to my daughter, hopefully the me too movement would’ve taught my daughter to speak up right away so that I can go kick his ass right there and then and not wait til the day he’s getting ready to be confirmed...

[Tom Servo]

Right now, there are 9 seats in the supreme court. I have full faith that, out of the ~325 million people who live in the United States, we can find 9 that are qualified for the Supreme Court that haven't tried to rape anybody. It doesn't seem like that high of a bar for a lifetime appointment, I'm willing to bet there are hundreds of qualified people who haven't done that. Gorsuch comes to mind...

[Crazed_Insanity]

Let's not forget it's also possible for the me too movement to falsely accuse somebody.

Out of the hundreds of qualified people, it's possible that the opposing party could always come up with some kind of accuser to smear these candidates they don't like. Thus paralyzing the political process.

Why don't you just confirm or not confirm somebody based on merit/qualification only? As long as a person isn't a convicted sexual predator, can we presume that this qualified person is innocent?

I don't care for Brett that much... ,I've heard good stories, but I just don't quite like his face for some reason. Personal emotions aside, the entire confirmation hearing/process is a complete partisan joke. Not much discussions or questions were really about his past work and character..., but to either quickly rush thru it... or quickly dump as much dirt on him as one can find...

[MR2 Fan]

The accuser came forward in June, not this week, just FYI

[Crazed_Insanity]

So it's okay for a drunken sexual predator to be a judge for his entire career, just not supreme court judge? Why is the bar so high all of a sudden... and why was the bar so low for non-supreme court judges?

Anyway, not trying to take sides here, just wondering where should we draw the line. June is okay, but clearly July would be too close, right? ;)

[MR2 Fan]

From @imillhiser on Twitter:

So, to summarize, a confessed serial sexual predator nominated a man who is credibly accused of attempted rape to be the key vote to strip women of reproductive freedom.

[MR2 Fan]

I hate to say this but I'm less worried about Roe v Wade as I am about the president basically being above the law in Kavanaugh's opinion

[Crazed_Insanity]

... president basically being above the law in Kavanaugh's opinionWhat do you mean by that?

[MR2 Fan]

What do you mean by that?

haven't you been paying attention? The only reason Trump wants Kavanaugh is because he believes a president cannot be indicted, impeached, etc. while in office for committing crimes.

https://www.thenation.com/article/brett-kavanaugh-argued-sitting-president-law/

[FaultyMario]

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnYM2BKXsAA7JVe.jpg

«Organizer Laura Garduño Garcia says undocumented immigrants seeking help during Florence are seeing emergency responders arriving in Customs & Border Patrol vehicles and uniforms: "Immigrant families are not able to trust in federal agencies looking out for their well-being"»

[MR2 Fan]

Meanwhile, Marco Rubio has decided to launch a targeted harassment/doxxing campaign against Salt Bae because he served Venezuelan Dictator Nicolas Maduro.

@marcorubio


This guy @nusr_ett who admires dictator @NicolasMaduro so much actually owns a steakhouse in, of all places, #Miami. It’s called NUSR-ET STEAKHOUSE MIAMI located at 999 Brickell Avenue, Miami, FL 33131
The phone number is 1 305 415 9990 in case anyone wanted to call.


Look, if I was serving a ruthlessly violent dictator I'd probably be nice to him as well!

[FaultyMario]

"I lay there, annoyed that I was getting fucked by a guy with Yeti pubes and a dick like the mushroom character in Mario Kart."

- Stormy Daniels.

[FaultyMario]

Marco Rubio

This guy,


Marco Rubio

was


Marco Rubio

this ][ close


Marco Rubio

to being


Marco Rubio

POTUS


Marco Rubio

Let that sink in.

[MR2 Fan]

still better than Trump

[FaultyMario]

Uy...



Uy, uy.

[Crazed_Insanity]

haven't you been paying attention? The only reason Trump wants Kavanaugh is because he believes a president cannot be indicted, impeached, etc. while in office for committing crimes.

https://www.thenation.com/article/brett-kavanaugh-argued-sitting-president-law/

Hmm, I guess I haven't been paying attention...

But after reading that article, surprisingly I actually agree with Kavanaugh. Probably not to the point of not even impeaching the president for treason, but for the usual legal stuff, I think the public can wait 4 to 8 years to put him in prison after his term, right?

Take Bill Clinton's inappropriate sex thing for example. It's morally bad, but is that a threat to national security? Will the Republicans waste as much taxpayer's money going after Bill Clinton when he's no longer the sitting president? If not, then it proves that this matter is purely political, not really about the rule of law.

Still, Brett is being hypocritical though, he did go after a sitting president Bill Clinton. Maybe he realized his mistake for doing so, that's why the switch in position? I don't know.

Regardless, I do kinda agree with not distracting a sitting president. We can set up some sort of legal que, just case(s) waiting to prosecute him with after he is no longer in office. For example, Mueller can continue to investigate and build his case while Trump is in office, Stormy Daniels can get her case ready, folks who's been robbed by Trump University can try to get ready a class action law suit..., but legal actions can only happen when Trump is out of the white house.

Of course in Mueller's case, if they can prove without a doubt that Trump is actually a Putin puppet, then of course a sitting president can and should be impeached for the sake of national security.

Otherwise, I do agree that a sitting president shouldn't be distracted by something like the me too movement. Any politically motivated false accusation could render a sitting president useless. If the misdeed is real, just prosecute the shit out of the ex-president later. How about this, convicted ex-presidents will lose secret service protection privileges, pensions and health benefits... it'll be safer for him to just stay in prison for the rest of his life. Hopefully this will be enough to deter this 'king' from doing too much misdeeds?

Anyway, we really need to have a stricter qualification requirements too. Some one who has pending/ongoing investigations or lawsuits... someone who's afraid to show tax returns and doesn't have a plan to resolve conflict of interest issues... shouldn't even be allowed to run in the 1st place. It is kinda scary to allow somebody like Trump to be "king" even just for 4 years.

My sentiment is more for 'typical' presidents...., yes, even Hillary would qualify as 'typical'.

[speedpimp]

WTF is a Salt Bae?

[MR2 Fan]

WTF is a Salt Bae?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_Bae

[FaultyMario]

Not to be reiterative but, the way in which Mr. Trump conducts himself towards Mrs. Ford is an indication of his general attitude for the law.

And it is shameful.

[FaultyMario]

Rosenstein Suggested He Secretly Record Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment
(https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/21/us/politics/rod-rosenstein-wear-wire-25th-amendment.html)

Mr. Rosenstein made the remarks about secretly recording Mr. Trump and about the 25th Amendment in meetings and conversations with other Justice Department and F.B.I. officials. Several people described the episodes, insisting on anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The people were briefed either on the events themselves or on memos written by F.B.I. officials, including Andrew G. McCabe, then the acting bureau director, that documented Mr. Rosenstein’s actions and comments.

[Tom Servo]

Rod Rosenstein has been called to the White House. WH claims that he's offered to resign, Justice Department saying that he refuses to resign and if Trump wants him gone, he'll have to fire him.

EDIT: It sounds like Trump's not even at the White House, so he'd be meeting with Kelly. I'm also not super familiar with this, but apparently if he resigns, then Trump can just put whoever he wants in that position, whereas he can't if Rosenstein is fired. I'll see if I can learn a little more about that.

[Tom Servo]

And now that's morphed into Sanders saying that Trump had an extended conversation about recent news stories, but he is so very busy at the UN General Assembly that he'll meet with Rosenstein on Thursday.

[FaultyMario]

How many more accusations of being a terrible human being does Kavanaugh accumulate before Rosensteing is fired?

I say 2.

[MR2 Fan]

Rod Rosenstein is apparently Schrodinger's Deputy Attorney General...both is and isn't fired and is and isn't resigning.

Meanwhile Brett Kavanaugh and his wife go on the network where NO ONE has EVER had sexual harassment issues associated with them...Fox News :lol:

[Tom Servo]

We do not have a policy of separating families at the border. Period.

We just have a policy that we know will result in that many, many times. There's a difference, dammit.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/adolfoflores/immigratiom-homeland-security-family-separation-foia-dhs

[Leon]

The UN was laughing "with" Trump.

Yeah, right.

[tigeraid]

My favourite part was when he called that one guy the "Kurd."

[Crazed_Insanity]

This latest senate hearing had achieved nothing except destroyed the life of both Dr. Ford and the honorable Kevinoff. (Isn’t it interesting trump likes Russian sounding names?)

Anyway, it remains he said she said. Right vs left.

Not sure how this event will affect voters... probably just energize both sides and end up with zero net gain... and we’ll be stuck with a split nation with a comedian president...

[The359]

Kavanaugh isn't remotely Russian. Do you not even know the name of the guy?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Just sounds Russian that’s all... anyway, who cares what his name is or what he has done career-wise. What’s the most important is how much beer he drank and what did he do in that drunken party in 1982!

[JoshInKC]

If he sexually assaulted a girl, then I would say 'Yeah, that fucking matters when he's being considered for a lifetime position on the highest court in the country.' Your minimizing it by placing it next to "how much beer he drank" and "party in 1982" is pretty fucked up.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Assuming story is true, should we really judge a person’s character while drunk?

A drunk driver who couldn’t drive straight is enough info for us to know that this person is a bad driver?

Shouldn’t we be more concerned whether if Judge Kavanaugh still have a drinking problem 1st? If yes, then the answer should be clear that he’s unfit for the job.

All of these things should be done in a closed confidential meeting.

Whoever dragged all of these things out in the open for political purposes really should be shot.

[The359]

Yes, we should judge a person's character when they're drunk, Billi.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Character is immutable under the ‘influence’? People who’ve fucked things up while drunk must be because he’s a bad mother fucker? Good person end up drunk would never do anything bad?

Let go a step further and say he was in some sort of drunken rage and end up murdering somebody and convicted guilty of murder. However, after serving time and totally repented and worked hard subsequently do not have any drinking related issues... would you continue to believe this person is not trustworthy?

Once tarnish, forever tarnished? No matter how good you become later, you’re still a bad character?

Would you like others to judge your character while under the influence?

This is all assuming the allegations are true. What if they’re not true?

2 families destroyed for what?

Which ever side wins, half the nation will be upset and vote stupidly.

And we’ll end up with more fucked up politicians.

[Leon]

Yes, we should judge a person's character when they're drunk, Billi.

Yes. This.

[Freude am Fahren]

Wow, that is a special kind of stupid, billi

[FaultyMario]

If you're interviewing someone for a lifetime job from which there's little difficulty getting fired from, you kinda want to get one of those non-raping, non-tarnished folks. Just in case.

[JoshInKC]

Billi, do you understand that this isn't a question of whether we should invite a relative to a wedding or birthday party?
This is, as I put it in my last post "a lifetime position on the highest court in the country." That means that the appointee will make rulings on laws that affect literally every American for the next several decades. And there are only nine of this position - they are arguably more important than senators.
I'm pretty sure that if they looked hard enough, they could come up with at least one person who can't be credibly charged sexual assault.

*It would also be great if it was somebody who didn't have written opinions stating that a sitting president is above the law, but I know you've got a hard-on for that idea.

[FaultyMario]

People for high office should be held to high standards.

And like Josh said, the SCOTUS was designed with the highest standards in mind.

[MR2 Fan]

and quite possibly the highest standard for any office in the world at least that's how I see it, though some can tell me if they feel otherwise.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Do you guys know why we should judge somebody while drunk?

To test somebody’s character, best way is to get him or her drunk and see how the person avoid poor choices under the influence? I don’t know, I’ve never been drunk, but best case scenario is the person passes out and sleep and pretty much the rest won’t be able to make good decisions. Are you guys pretty darn sure that you yourselves won’t do anything you’ll regret when drunk? You guys are that strong mentally?

[Crazed_Insanity]

I don’t even like Kavanagh that much, but at least he is qualified for the high post.

If he still has a drinking problem, then we definitely should disqualify him, but to judge him solely on what he possibly has done as a drunken 18yr old is too much IMHO.

Anyway, I suppose like he said, what goes around comes around, he enjoyed dragging Clinton and Lewinsky thru the mud and made that a public spectacle...

[MR2 Fan]

https://danashby04.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/double-facepalm.jpg?w=820

[tigeraid]

Most drunk people are just themselves, turned up to 11. Booze reveals the truth of themselves.

And I still, STILL, cannot understand the argument of "innocent until proven guilty." This is not happening in a court of law. Nor should it. It's a goddamn job interview, for one of the highest offices in the land. Of COURSE your character should be judged.

[FaultyMario]

Most drunk people are just themselves, turned up to 11. Booze reveals the truth of themselves.

Exhibit A, Dr. Winograd and her colleagues (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3109/16066359.2015.1029920) found that most people (40%) have the same personality when drunk.


The primary purpose of this study was to assess the degree to
which levels of sober and drunk personality traits can be
grouped into meaningful clusters (i.e. ‘‘drunk types’’), with
the second aim being to examine the association between
cluster membership and negative alcohol-related harms.
Essentially we aimed to test the commonly-held lay assumption
that multiple ‘‘types of drunks’’ exist and, if types
emerged, determine if members of certain clusters were more
likely to endorse symptoms of an AUD or alcohol-related
consequences.



For descriptive purposes to highlight key aspects of alcoholrelated
transformations, we labelled our clusters as follows:
Cluster 1, ‘‘Hemingway’’ (who was reputed to show minimal
signs of intoxication despite prodigious drinking; Laing,
2014).


The first group, labelled ‘‘Hemingway,’’ was by
far the largest and included those who reported only slightly
changing when intoxicated. Specifically, members of
this group reported decreasing less in Conscientiousness
(e.g. being prepared, organized, prompt) and Intellect
(e.g. understanding abstract ideas, being imaginative) than
the rest of the sample. Notably, two previous studies have
found that, on average, these two factors reportedly decrease
the most with intoxication (Winograd et al., 2012, 2014), so
the moderate decreases demonstrated by this group make its
members stand out as being ‘‘less affected’’ than drinkers in
some of the other groups, much like the author Ernest
Hemingway, who claimed that he could ‘‘drink hells any
amount of whiskey without getting drunk’’ (Baker, 2003, p.
169).


Conclusions and implications
Most would agree that the main problem with alcohol
consumption – aside from the health complications that can
result from excess use – is that some drinkers respond to
intoxication in ways that cause harm. For example, some
people are known to get angry and violent, careless and
irresponsible, or weepy and inconsolable when drinking, and
that is often what earns them the label of being a ‘‘problem
drinker.’’ However, until now, there has been no empirical
investigation into the unique types of personality-like changes
that people undergo when drinking, leaving the personality
and alcohol research literature with few points of contact with
lay perspectives and common folklore. Results from this study
demonstrate that self-reported personality data do produce
meaningful ‘‘types of drunks,’’ and that there is a certain type
– what we have labelled the Mr. Hydes – that reports a
particularly harmful transformation when intoxicated.


Exhibit b, Same team, newer study, different experiment, similar conclussions. (https://europepmc.org/articles/pmc5544024)


To test if individuals’ self-reported ratings of the five factor traits (measured in the pre-session IPIP survey) differed based on whether they were reporting on their “typical” sober or drunk personality, a three level omnibus multilevel model was estimated. In this model, Level 1 corresponded to intraindividual reports for each of the 5 personality factors when sober and when drunk (10 total per person), Level 2 corresponded to individual participants (156 total), and Level 3 corresponded to the friend group that would later be present in the testing session (43 total). Reported condition (i.e., sober or drunk) and factor (i.e., Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional stability, and Intellect-imagination) served as the predictor variables, as well as the interaction of the two. In the presence of a significant condition by personality factor interaction, follow-up analyses with each of the five factors as separate dependent variables were modeled to examine the source(s) of the effect. In these models, reported condition (but not personality factor) served as the predictor variable.


When 5-minute “thin slices” of personality were judged (see Table 2, Row 3), sober and intoxicated participants differed only in Extraversion (F (1, 106) = 4.78, p = .03), with those who received alcohol being rated as higher than those who did not. Differences in Agreeableness (F (1, 106) = .56, p = .46), Conscientiousness (F (1, 106) = .00, p = .95), Neuroticism (F (1, 106) = .40, p = .53), and Openness (F (1, 106) = .79, p = .38) were non-significant.


Comparing entire sessions of sober participants to entire sessions of intoxicated participants with the BFI-10-Observer (see Table 2, Row 4), Extraversion was again the only factor that significantly differed across groups (F (1, 106) = 11.11, p = .002), with those who received alcohol being rated as higher than those who did not). Differences in Agreeableness (F (1, 106) = 1.93, p = .17), Conscientiousness (F (1, 106) = .00, p = .99), Neuroticism (F (1, 106) = .65, p = .42), and Openness (F (1, 106) = .00, p = .96) were non-significant.


Indeed, the trait-level effect on Extraversion was driven by differences in the facets of Gregariousness, Assertiveness, and Activity (but not Warmth or Positive emotions). This finding is consistent with the existing research on the effects of alcohol on sociability just referenced (e.g., Abe, 1968; Babor et al., 1983) and the lack of effect of alcohol on positive affect more generally (e.g., Gilman et al., 2008; though results on positive affect are mixed – others have found that that alcohol does increase positive affect specifically [e.g., Goldberg, 1966; McCollam et al., 1980; aan het Rot et al., 2008]). Differential effects of alcohol on distinct aspects of Extraversion is consistent with work connecting Extraversion to both agentic and communal positive emotion (PEM-A, PEM-C; Tellegen, 1985). Based on these facet level findings, one could speculate that intoxication may be more related to increased PEM-A (social potency, dominance, achievement, well-being, etc.) than to PEM-C (social closeness, warmth, interpersonal connectedness, etc.) but our study was not designed to examine this issue in a highly resolved way. Additionally, the difference in Assertiveness, specifically, is supported by past research on alcohol’s role in shifts in internal states, such as power motivation and the need for dominance over others (e.g., McClelland, 1972). Though social assertiveness, a documented effect of intoxication (Southwick et al., 1981) is distinct from aggression, which implies intent to harm, the two qualities could be viewed as sharing a boundary, and may therefore be rooted in similar alcohol-induced causes. For example, the neurologically disinhibiting effects of ethanol may facilitate particularly assertive, firm, or bold behavior “not by ‘stepping on the gas but rather paralyzing the brakes’” (Muehlberger, 1956, p. 40).

[Tom Servo]

Yes, we should judge a person's character when they're drunk, Billi.

I cannot believe this needed to be said. Also, even if you believe that you shouldn't judge a person when they're drunk, I can absolutely judge him by the fact that he has done absolutely nothing to stop being drunk so he stops being a bad person. It doesn't sound like he's made any attempt to drink less, he actually just sounds like he's using it as an excuse to behave badly rather than a "Oh crap, I behave badly when drunk, I should probably not drink so much." Given two people who have attempted to rape people but, in the immortal words of the Dead Kennedys appear to have been "too drunk to fuck", I'll judge the one who tried to get help for his problem in a much nicer light than the one who didn't.

Also, it's making me giggle a little bit that we're discussing if it's okay to judge people when that person's trying to be come a supreme court....judge.

[Cam]

Lori's mad as hell today. :eek:

[Crazed_Insanity]

Most drunk people are just themselves, turned up to 11. Booze reveals the truth of themselves.

And I still, STILL, cannot understand the argument of "innocent until proven guilty." This is not happening in a court of law. Nor should it. It's a goddamn job interview, for one of the highest offices in the land. Of COURSE your character should be judged.

When not under the influence, it should be easier to exercise self control. We all have our little demons inside of us and it'll be easier to let them lose under the influence. It'll also be easier to keep them under control when we're sober and clear minded. Character and integrity should be something measured against time, not just at one moment of weakness when you're 18. If we can prove the dude has a habitual drinking/gambling or addiction problem, I can agree that he shouldn't be confirmed. But to drag them both in the mud and made them both public enemies is a shameful way to do it. If it's not the senate democrats who leaked the letter, then I'd blame the liberal media for this circus.

The problem with the me too movement is that it has a tendency to make people guilty until proven innocent. It's much too easy to slander people. As we've all can see, all the liberal celebs or politicians who made the slightest hint of apologies to whatever accusations were immediately thrown under the bus. Conservatives have now learned that no matter what, just deny deny deny and blame it on the liberals conspiring against them and hopefully their stupid base still okay with that.

With the event happening so long ago, neither of their memory can be that reliable, not to mention a drunken man's memory. They can both conceivably be convinced that they are telling the truth, but obviously one of them is not... perhaps both didn't tell the truth. Perhaps Ford was indeed assaulted by another guy... and perhaps the honorable Judge did assault another chick in another drunken party. We just cannot know for sure at this point.

I think this fiasco could be easily taken care of with super majority of the vote.

If you just cannot goddamn confirm somebody with a bipartisan effort, then fucking leave this high office vacant.

This political circus is just fucked up. No matter which party wins, America loses.

[The359]

I stand with #metoo. There is no problem with it at all. Guilty people are being called out, this is not a witch hunt.
If you don't want your life ruined, don't abuse women.

The celebs were not thrown under the bus for apologizing, they were thrown under the bus for abusing women.

/thread

[Crazed_Insanity]

Exhibit A, Dr. Winograd and her colleagues (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3109/16066359.2015.1029920) found that most people (40%) have the same personality when drunk.

Exhibit b, Same team, newer study, different experiment, similar conclussions. (https://europepmc.org/articles/pmc5544024)

Alcohol can amplify aggression that's for sure. Not everyone has aggressive personality, but if you're capt of football, baskeball team, most likely you're not timid.

Now, aggression isn't all bad... such personality is probably what's drove him to the top of his class/career...

So, my bet is that most likely he did it and just can't remember it. Early 80's, the fun, carefree time... images of Tom Cruise's Risky Business come to mind...

Anyway, alcohol doesn't make you lose sight of morality or consequences, but it does make you not care. That's the dangerous part.

50% of the murders are supposedly alcohol related. If people don't drink so much, we can reduce the murder rate by about 50%.

I still think it's preferable to judge whether or not if a person has a history of drink problem rather then judge a person by what he's done while drunk. My position has no hidden political agenda.

[Tom Servo]

Dr. Winograd

I can't believe I missed that the first time around - with a name like that it's like the good doctor was born to do this study.

[MR2 Fan]

Soon to be live footage of the GOP ramming through the Kavanaugh nomination

https://steemitimages.com/0x0/https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmTNnKDja7Sgr2443Ynzhx1e1548hsJadyQL1Y3mJA3Vnq/train.gif

[Crazed_Insanity]

I stand with #metoo. There is no problem with it at all. Guilty people are being called out, this is not a witch hunt.
If you don't want your life ruined, don't abuse women.

The celebs were not thrown under the bus for apologizing, they were thrown under the bus for abusing women.

/thread

Like I've said before, I'm happy to see Weinstein thrown under the bus, but to see somebody like Al Franken thrown under the bus was totally unnecessary.

Women definitely should speak out, I just have a problem with the guilty until proven innocent part. We ought to try to convict them and put them in jail if we can, but if not, we have to presume their innocence. What would be the point of destroying somebody's name only, yet not putting them in jail? Isn't that just too politically convenient? Smear smear smear...

In the end, no good men would want to become politicians anymore... only scums like Trump wouldn't mind.

[FaultyMario]

“I will not shut up” is a perfect mantra for Trumpian backlash politics. There is no risk that white men are, en masse, going to be silenced: They occupy the commanding heights of power in every walk of American life. The demands that they be quiet at times are a response to the overrepresentation of their voices, that they understand what life is like for more vulnerable people and then change the way they act accordingly. (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/28/17913774/brett-kavanaugh-lindsey-graham-christine-ford-backlash)

[FaultyMario]

The Jules Winnfield / Kavanaugh montage doing the rounds in twitter is the shit, if albeit technically lacking.

[Tom Servo]

Heh, as Dana Schwartz said on Twitter



"You may say no, but I won't give up, ever" was probably not a great strategy for Brett to go with.

[Cam]

:lol:

[MR2 Fan]

What I interpreted from the Kavanaugh hearing

"I drink beer, maybe lots of beers, too many in fact. have you had beer? beer is good. beer beer beer. What's too many? I don't know...15-20? what's the law say? Blacked out? no, never, I mean I couldn't remember anything for like 16 hours, but I never blacked out. Have you ever blacked out? do you want to? beer is good."

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoIefDWU0AAFWS5.jpg

[George]

I keep waiting for him to say something like, "While I am not guilty of the allegations against me, this has become too much of a distraction to the business of this nation. For the good of the country and the Supreme Court, I'd like to withdraw my name from consideration for this appointment."

But then I remember we live in country in which honor and decency is no longer considered relevant values for our elected officials nor for whom they appoint and confirm.

[drew]

I watched some of this shitshow yesterday. All I saw was someone acting in a way that didn't portray himself as someone with nothing to hide. He was nervous as fuck.


Not to mention, that blow up session. Seriously, try that in your next interview and see if you're asked to start the next week.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I keep waiting for him to say something like, "While I am not guilty of the allegations against me, this has become too much of a distraction to the business of this nation. For the good of the country and the Supreme Court, I'd like to withdraw my name from consideration for this appointment."

But then I remember we live in country in which honor and decency is no longer considered relevant values for our elected officials nor for whom they appoint and confirm.

If only we had a confidential closed door session, it'd would've made it easy for him to withdraw with these allegations... at this point, #MeToo has already destroyed his good name, based on all past experiences..., if you show just a hint of remorse or guilt, not only won't you get nominated, your whole career will be finished anyway. So, might as well just press on forward. Even if he fucking raped her, he has to insist that his innocent. He has nothing left to lose at this point. If you have to choose between possibly becoming the next supreme court justice vs surely becoming the next Weinstein or Al Franken, which would you choose? #MeToo movement has left men with no honorable way out. Once accused, you're as good as dead.

Unfortunately republicans want to rush this thru and democrats want to stop him at all cost.

Like I said, we really need a super majority to confirm supreme court justices... then the senate won't have to worry about this upcoming midterm election so they can select the proper candidate while taking their sweet time. This current political circus is a joke.

No supreme court justice should be confirmed by a single party. If this candidate cannot gain bipartisan support, he's unfit to be a supreme court justice.

If our politicians/American people cannot figure out how to work together, if even judges are so far polarized, just shut down the supreme court and let this nation die.

[The359]

...but to see somebody like Al Franken thrown under the bus was totally unnecessary.

...

I just have a problem with the guilty until proven innocent part. We ought to try to convict them and put them in jail if we can, but if not, we have to presume their innocence...

Except Franken was guilty, literally photographed doing exactly what was stated, yet somehow that is not enough? Not guilty of a crime, but still guilty of something that was wrong for him, in his position, to be doing. Not everything is a legal issue.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Photo fun of a comedian pretending to be grabbing her boobs is the damning evidence that’s enough to prove that he’s unfit to be a senator?

If that was photographed in his senate chamber, you might have a case that we don’t need such silly senator. But as a comedian having fun?

Are you a liberal or are you deep down a conservative?

[The359]

Franken forcibly kissed her on a 2006 USO tour during a rehearsal for a skit. She wrote, "I said 'OK' so he would stop badgering me. We did the line leading up to the kiss and then he came at me, put his hand on the back of my head, mashed his lips against mine and aggressively stuck his tongue in my mouth."[111] She said she pushed him away, feeling "disgusted and violated".

Glossing over the story is lame, Billi.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I see. That story clearly indicated that Franken would be unfit to be a US senator.

Are you foquen kidding me?!?!?!?!

[Tom Servo]

I have a feeling quite a few women would have a different opinion there than you, Billi.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I’m not questioning her negative feelings toward Franken, but she did say OK to the skit. It is pretty disgusting to forcibly rape a girl in the mouth like that...

However, how does that prove that he’s an unfit senator? Were we able to prove anything inappropriate while he was a senator?

[FaultyMario]

Treat others well you must, young Padawan.

Accountability it is called.

[Tom Servo]

Well, that was up to his colleagues and his constituents. And they thought it was enough to make him unfit for the job. It's possible it was a strategic plan - have him resign to give democrats the moral high ground in future situations. Be able to say "We take care of things when this happens on our side." It's possible that there may have been more that hasn't come out and he was becoming a liability. He may have felt that his ability to do his job was compromised, especially given his stance as a defender of women's rights, that he would appear to be a hypocrite and would hurt the cause of women's rights. Who knows, maybe he'll write a book.

That said, I don't know a lot of people who have forced their tongues down women's mouths without their consent. I generally consider those people pretty bad people. I like a lot of what Franken did in the senate, but I also think that he should have known better and that his judgment is questionable, and I would consider that to be a potentially disqualifying factor.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I can agree with everything you said, but there really should’ve been more thorough investigation.

It’s be much easier to spot a ‘habit’ rather than relying on a single incident of he said she said.

It used to be be women getting fucked, now it tends to be the men getting fucked. I just don’t think we need to fuck anybody..., everyone should be treated as fairly as possible.

[Tom Servo]

The most recent data I could find in a very, very quick search was an FBI report on victims of rape, which counted 67,345 female victims in the United States in 2012, or an average of nearly 185 a day, or over 7 an hour.

Per Vox, 219 men have been accused of sexual misconduct since April of 2017, or an average of less than one a day.

We've got a loooooooooooong way to go before it tends to be men that are getting "fucked" rather than women.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Maybe it’s my poor writing ability again, but I think it’s safe to say that men will always be the one doing the physical fucking, even with the female sexual predator, at most she can only fuck us men with a dildo. So men has a biological advantage, you don’t really need pull any data on me regarding this kind of fuck.

The kind of fuck I was talking about is how we can properly determine who’s really guilty and who’s only being smeared... or in certain cases, there may be gray areas we need to figure out how to best deal with... Point is not all powerful men are like Weinstein or Cosby. We don’t need to treat them all the same.

[neanderthal]

If only 3rd party voters had voted for the better candidate in 2016. We wouldn't be having this shit show right now.

Fixed it for you. You can see where the problem was; i bolded the correction.

[neanderthal]

Maybe it’s my poor writing ability again, but I think it’s safe to say that men will always be the one doing the physical fucking, even with the female sexual predator, at most she can only fuck us men with a dildo. So men has a biological advantage, you don’t really need pull any data on me regarding this kind of fuck.

The kind of fuck I was talking about is how we can properly determine who’s really guilty and who’s only being smeared... or in certain cases, there may be gray areas we need to figure out how to best deal with... Point is not all powerful men are like Weinstein or Cosby. We don’t need to treat them all the same.

None of us buy your "poor writing excuse." NONE.

You make yourself quite clear, each time. And you've made yourself quite clear that you're ok with sexual assault, especially unwanted advances. You don't quite seem to be ok with rape, but you're not exactly running away from it either.

I wonder if this (sexual assault) is a conversation you've had with your wife. I wonder if you've actually talked to her about it. listened to her.

[Tom Servo]

Maybe it’s my poor writing ability again, but I think it’s safe to say that men will always be the one doing the physical fucking, even with the female sexual predator, at most she can only fuck us men with a dildo. So men has a biological advantage, you don’t really need pull any data on me regarding this kind of fuck.

The kind of fuck I was talking about is how we can properly determine who’s really guilty and who’s only being smeared... or in certain cases, there may be gray areas we need to figure out how to best deal with... Point is not all powerful men are like Weinstein or Cosby. We don’t need to treat them all the same.

I have to admit that from your previous statement that I took your usage of fuck as a double entrendre. That it used to be women who were "fucked" (had someone perform sexual intercourse with them, without their consent), and now it's men that are "fucked" (having their lives irrevocably changed in ways they probably would prefer hadn't happened). My reading now is that you might be correcting that to mean "fucked" as in "having their lives irrevocably changed in ways they probably would prefer hadn't happened *and* they didn't do anything to deserve it". If that's the case, then by definition the rate of men being "fucked" drops even below 219 since April of 2017, as nobody who wasn't accused can fall under that definition, so the maximum is still at 219. I understand that you consider Franken to have been "fucked" in that way, which puts the total at 1, unless you have others that you believe have been unfairly accused (maybe Kavanaugh?) That puts it at under 2 a year vs. 67,345 a year, which still doesn't trend towards it being men who are "fucked" right now.

Also, one of my favorite things is being the guy who explains the joke.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Swervo, if you knew what I meant, why did you completely ignore the point I was trying to make the 1st time? So Neanderthal is right, I’m not writing that poorly, don’t have to be that apologetic anymore. It’s just that you enjoy twisting my words for what ever reasons...

Anyway, back to the point. You’re using the identity politics argument. If that’s your preference, cool. But I don’t like that. Rather than putting one group against another, male vs female, black vs white.... why can’t we examine them case by case individually?

Statistics is nice, but we need to use relevant statistics. #metoo movement is after sexual predators, so let’s just stick to all those alleged sexual predators regardless of gender. Since you are the data mining expert, can you determine that of all the persons accused and reputations ruined, how many were actually convicted? If conviction rate were high, I’d be fine with the movement as it is. My suspicion is that it’s not that high, yet people are okay with ruining lives anyway... because clearly those power white males deserved whatever they got!!!

[Tom Servo]

Okay, I'm being 100% sincere here. I thought maybe I didn't know what you meant because you said that maybe I misunderstood. Apparently I understood completely. Which is to say, you said that now it tends to being men being "fucked" rather than women. My point was that a couple hundred men going down for assaulting women isn't even *remotely* close to what happens to tens of thousands of women every year. What did I misunderstand? What did I twist? What did you mean to say if not "it's worse for men now"? Are you insinuating that most of the accusations aren't real?

Why does there have to be a "conviction"? Louis CK admitted to using his position to jack off in front of women who didn't ask for it and certainly didn't want it. It might not even be a crime, does that mean that his reputation is squeaky clean? Sexual harassment in the workplace isn't a crime afaik, does that mean it's fine? I mean, you can't convict someone of it. What if the statute of limitations has passed?

[neanderthal]

Swervo, if you knew what I meant, why did you completely ignore the point I was trying to make the 1st time? So Neanderthal is right, I’m not writing that poorly, don’t have to be that apologetic anymore. It’s just that you enjoy twisting my words for what ever reasons...

Anyway, back to the point. You’re using the identity politics argument. If that’s your preference, cool. But I don’t like that. Rather than putting one group against another, male vs female, black vs white.... why can’t we examine them case by case individually?

Statistics is nice, but we need to use relevant statistics. #metoo movement is after sexual predators, so let’s just stick to all those alleged sexual predators regardless of gender. Since you are the data mining expert, can you determine that of all the persons accused and reputations ruined, how many were actually convicted? If conviction rate were high, I’d be fine with the movement as it is. My suspicion is that it’s not that high, yet people are okay with ruining lives anyway... because clearly those power white males deserved whatever they got!!!

You're talking about "ruined lives" where the person who's "life" is ruined is the person who sexually assaulted someone else? The perpetrator of the misdeed, not the victim. You're a special kind of arsehole!

Nevermind the trauma that poor lady went through; the emotional toil, the years of second guessing if she was responsible, possibly taking action to never go to another comedy show/ party/ concert/ walk in the fucking park where the incident happened, and let's not mention therapy, humiliation, slut shaming or anything else the VICTIM may have undergone.

I say this in the sincerest way possible; fuck you billi. Fuck you with a rusty running chainsaw.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Neanderthal, sorry man, I don’t think I have enough time for you. Probably best for you to keep ignoring my special asshole.

Swervo, I was referring to this post.


The most recent data I could find in a very, very quick search was an FBI report on victims of rape, which counted 67,345 female victims in the United States in 2012, or an average of nearly 185 a day, or over 7 an hour.

Per Vox, 219 men have been accused of sexual misconduct since April of 2017, or an average of less than one a day.

We've got a loooooooooooong way to go before it tends to be men that are getting "fucked" rather than women.

You know very well I wasn’t comparing how many times men were fucked vs women.

Since conviction is too stringent of a requirement, we need to draw a line somewhere for ourselves. Let’s use Franken as somebody on the borderline then. I don’t think his sin is worthy of cutting his senate career short, but some disagree. What do you think?

Whatever your opinion is on Franken, Out of the 219 men, how many were worse offenders than Franken?

[MR2 Fan]

In other news, since my apartment was getting fumigated for termites, I stayed with my parents for a few nights...and realized more now than previously that he's the left-wing version of a Fox News watcher. He watches MSNBC for like 6 hours a day at least.

Luckily it's not Fox news, but I can definitely see how people can get swayed by the constant propaganda day in and day out when they're retired and have nothing better to do. MSNBC isn't propaganda like Fox News is, but it's still non-stop opinion and in this era, the anti-president network.

Perhaps there should be a push for people to get their parents to do other things than watching that so many hours a day.

[Tom Servo]

You know very well I wasn’t comparing how many times men were fucked vs women.

Since conviction is too stringent of a requirement, we need to draw a line somewhere for ourselves. Let’s use Franken as somebody on the borderline then. I don’t think his sin is worthy of cutting his senate career short, but some disagree. What do you think?

Whatever your opinion is on Franken, Out of the 219 men, how many were worse offenders than Franken?

I literally don't know that. You said that it used to be one thing, but now it tends to be the other. In what other way am I supposed to interpret that? I interpret it as you saying that one is now more prevalent than the other, how am I getting that wrong?

We don't actually need a specific line drawn. We don't need a bar that says "you harassed or assaulted women by x amount, you're out, but you, you only assaulted them by y amount, so you're okay." Almost none of these people are going to jail. In many cases, they're losing their jobs, which we can let the employers decide on. I was really disappointed by Franken and what he did, just like I was disappointed by Louis CK. I liked them, and I like their work, but I don't see that as a reason to think that it's okay that they did what they did.

Likely most of them were worse than Franken. I don't feel a need to rank them. I agree that his transgressions were not as bad as others, but they were also worse than the vast majority of men who have not jammed their tongue down any woman's throat without knowing that they were okay with that beforehand.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Okay, I think we can all agree that any form of sexual harassment/assault is not okay. Even for non-sexual stuffs like bullying, clearly we don’t want these things to happen and can agree that they are not good. They may not be clearly illegal, but most do agree some sort of punishment is necessary, right? Right, me too!

However, I want to see punishments that fit the crime.

Even assuming all he saids are wrong and all she saids are true, Franken’s punishment(aborting senate career because of past indiscretion as a comedian), really fits the crime?

[Tom Servo]

I'll say yes, it does.

I like Franken a lot. I think he was an incredibly important voice in the senate, one of the few that both can spot bullshit and is willing and able to call it out. I think our country is worse off with him not there.

Then I try to remove that from the equation. What if he was a senator that I don't like. What if McConnell did that? What if the person was a friend of mine? Or a relative? Or my wife?

Whenever I take my personal feelings about Franken out of the equation, it becomes a really easy answer. So, to me, that's the only logical and honorable answer.

I also don't believe that he's the only person in that state would could fill that role that well. I feel like I'd be giving up on humanity if I decide that I just have to let bad behavior go because we can't find someone else just as good who didn't do bad things. I also think he could have done a better job of handling it when it came out. Much like I said about someone who tries to do something about their drinking when they realize it results in bad behavior, you can recover from past transgressions by showing the world that you know better now. I don't feel like he did that.

So, yeah. I think losing the ability to be one of only 100 people in the country due to that fits the crime. He's not broke, his life isn't over, he isn't in jail, he's just not a senator anymore. I'm sad about it, much like I'm sad other heroes of mine have turned out to not be the people I thought they were. But I still think it was the right call.

Hell, as far as I know, there's nothing preventing from running again. He could run saying that he still wants to serve the country and still thinks he's able to do it, and that now that everything is out give the people of his state the chance to make the decision again now that they know it.

Consider this my Jill Stein moment. I don't feel like choosing the lesser of evils and preferring to think there's someone that can take his place who isn't evil.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Fair enough. I can understand your position.

Difference between you and me is that I believe everyone has some evilness hidden inside. Just because this dirty laundry is now revealed won’t all of a sudden make this person worse. We can find dirt on anyone if we dig hard enough. If we keep this up, a lot of competent qualified men who might have some skeletons in their closets will no longer seek public office. Only sleazy folks like trump wouldn’t mind running.

Regarding Kavanaugh, I do not personally like him and my gut feeling is that drinking for sure can turn up his aggressive personality. I also think it is karma that has now drag his name in the mud since he enjoyed dragging Bill and Monica thru the same ordeal. So I have zero sympathy for him.

However, removing my personal bias, unless this person shows a pattern of bad behavior, I still think his academic/professional achievements should be able to qualify him for the job. A single night of drunken indiscretion back when you were 18 doesn’t really define a persons true character/integrity. A single moment’s mistake is more out of character, don’t you think? How many perfectly competent and sinless men are there on this planet?

For Weinstein’s and Cosby, I think their lack of characters’ pretty clear. For men like Franken, I dunno if removal is the best solution. You’re right, if I were him, I just might run again and show people my true character and not let this defeat me. There’s no restrictions for him to not run again I suppose...

OTOH, removal of powerful men just because of the slightest sins could cause significant disturbances not easily foreseen.

Let’s take Saddam Hussein for example. Smeared with the accusation of having WMD. Okay, that was false, but clearly he is not a good dude anyway, so it’s still good that we removed him, right?

Well, can you really be sure that his replacement will be better or less evil? Sure, your hopeful of humanity, but even if your next in line is better, he could just as easily be removed again. The vicious cycle will continue, unless we come up with a better way.

During China’s cultural revolution, that’s basically what happened. Lots of poor, oppressed folks find whatever smears they can find to remove otherwise productive members of society... drag them down to the same low level for the sake of equality... of course we’re not as bad yet, but as we continue to play identity politics, we will degenerate to the same level soon.

I’m not trying to ignore the pain and suffering of women here, just want fairness for all. This current circus show we have now is pretty sad... Justice Kennedy would agree with my assessment:

https://www.newsweek.com/former-justice-anthony-kennedy-warns-democracy-danger-1145017

[Tom Servo]

Also fair enough. I see where you're coming from, especially given the context of the cultural revolution.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Ok, cool. So we can now safely agree to disagree without you also desiring to fuck my special asshole I hope.

[Tom Servo]

We were so close to a normal, human interaction. So....so close.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I don’t think Normality is my username. :p

[Freude am Fahren]

In other news, since my apartment was getting fumigated for termites, I stayed with my parents for a few nights...and realized more now than previously that he's the left-wing version of a Fox News watcher. He watches MSNBC for like 6 hours a day at least.

Luckily it's not Fox news, but I can definitely see how people can get swayed by the constant propaganda day in and day out when they're retired and have nothing better to do. MSNBC isn't propaganda like Fox News is, but it's still non-stop opinion and in this era, the anti-president network.

Perhaps there should be a push for people to get their parents to do other things than watching that so many hours a day.

I saw a post on twitter (I think) where someone was at their parents, and they put the child lock on Fox News, and their parents couldn't figure out how to watch it.

[neanderthal]

I saw a post on twitter (I think) where someone was at their parents, and they put the child lock on Fox News, and their parents couldn't figure out how to watch it.

I must do this everywhere. Except I don't have Fox News watching relatives.

[neanderthal]

Okay, I think we can all agree that any form of sexual harassment/assault is not okay. Even for non-sexual stuffs like bullying, clearly we don’t want these things to happen and can agree that they are not good. They may not be clearly illegal, but most do agree some sort of punishment is necessary, right? Right, me too!

However, I want to see punishments that fit the crime.

Even assuming all he saids are wrong and all she saids are true, Franken’s punishment(aborting senate career because of past indiscretion as a comedian), really fits the crime?


If only we had a confidential closed door session, it'd would've made it easy for him to withdraw with these allegations... at this point, #MeToo has already destroyed his good name, based on all past experiences..., if you show just a hint of remorse or guilt, not only won't you get nominated, your whole career will be finished anyway. So, might as well just press on forward. Even if he fucking raped her, he has to insist that his innocent. He has nothing left to lose at this point. If you have to choose between possibly becoming the next supreme court justice vs surely becoming the next Weinstein or Al Franken, which would you choose? #MeToo movement has left men with no honorable way out. Once accused, you're as good as dead.

Unfortunately republicans want to rush this thru and democrats want to stop him at all cost.

Like I said, we really need a super majority to confirm supreme court justices... then the senate won't have to worry about this upcoming midterm election so they can select the proper candidate while taking their sweet time. This current political circus is a joke.

No supreme court justice should be confirmed by a single party. If this candidate cannot gain bipartisan support, he's unfit to be a supreme court justice.

If our politicians/American people cannot figure out how to work together, if even judges are so far polarized, just shut down the supreme court and let this nation die.

Classic billi, talking out of both sides of his mouth.

You're trash for even thinking ... uh, forget it. It's not worth my time or effort.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I honestly have no idea what’s your beef with me with the bolded part of my words.

I’d be happy to clarify myself if you can elaborate some more now that I’m done explaining to Swervo.

If you couldn’t care less what I really meant, then yeah, forget about it.

I think; therefore, I am. I also couldn’t care less if you think I’m trash... what’s more important is that I don’t think and live my life as a piece of trash. :p

[The359]

#MeToo movement has left men with no honorable way out. Once accused, you're as good as dead.

Again, you're blaming the victim for the rapist's pathetic suffering.

The honorable way out is to not assault women.

The honorable way out is to admit to it when you're accused and not feed your ego to try and stick it out.

You're as good as dead as soon as you do the misdeed, not when you're finally accused.

[FaultyMario]

GOP-hired prosecutor, Rachell Mitchell has issued a memo where she informs the senators that Dr. Ford “has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened,” has “struggled” to identify Kavanaugh by name, and has “no memory of key details”.

It made me sick to my stomach.


Quite frankly, i'm not so sure human extinction is such a bad idea.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Again, you're blaming the victim for the rapist's pathetic suffering.

The honorable way out is to not assault women.

The honorable way out is to admit to it when you're accused and not feed your ego to try and stick it out.

You're as good as dead as soon as you do the misdeed, not when you're finally accused.

Never occurred to you that one could be falsely accused?

Misdeeds can also have more than 50 shades of gray. They are not all like Weinstein and Cosby. Shouldn’t all be thrown under the same bus.

Used to be women always being unfairly treated, such as Anita Hill or Monica Lewinsky... nowadays it seems it’s the men always end up with the short end of the stick. I wouldn’t call Weinstein being treated unfairly, but I do believe Franken was.

Unfair treatment is unfair treatment. You guys really need to stop it with identity politics. This shouldn’t be about women vs men. Look at it case by case please.

[MR2 Fan]

I saw a post on twitter (I think) where someone was at their parents, and they put the child lock on Fox News, and their parents couldn't figure out how to watch it.

yep, and if they ask, just say "Disney bought Fox News and it's not available anymore"....it's not really true, but when did facts matter to Fox News watchers?

[Crazed_Insanity]

GOP-hired prosecutor, Rachell Mitchell has issued a memo where she informs the senators that Dr. Ford “has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened,” has “struggled” to identify Kavanaugh by name, and has “no memory of key details”.

It made me sick to my stomach.


Quite frankly, i'm not so sure human extinction is such a bad idea.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/rachell-mitchell-explains-why-she-wouldnt-prosecute-kavanaugh-in-memo-to-senate-republicans/

She explained why she wouldn’t legally prosecute. Murky memories of certain events also don’t prove that her allegations must be false.

I don’t think she’s implying that she lied or the event never happened, just that it would be difficult to build a solid case to prosecute.

Chill dude.

Glad you are not God, for otherwise we’d be long extinct...

Glad we have Hollywood movies to chronologically record our culture over time... if we go back to early 80s romantic comedic movies, we could easily understand why event such as Dr. Ford described could’ve easily happen and then go unreported... definition of sexual assault/rape has certainly changed over the decades. What used to be funny can now make people sick to their stomach.

Anyway, regardless, I vote for continuing human species please... and of course hopefully we can have a net positive contribution to this universe...

One thing I want to stress is that emotions can impair our judgements just as alcohol. Our current political culture is basically to stir up your anger for the opposing side... amplifying your aggression... making you wish you could wipe out humanity...

Just be careful how you channel your anger. We can use it to motivate ourselves to keep trying to change the world for the better, but it’ll be dangerous if all you can think about is destroying your opposition. Making you want to wipe away all of humanity is even worse! :p

[FaultyMario]

It was a sham. Lindsey Graham creating a distraction when Mitchell was asking the right (or, wrong if you're Kavanaugh) questions was part of the kangaroo-hearing we all witnessed.

[Crazed_Insanity]

There’s no way for it to not be a sham either way.

Which ever way it goes, it’ll be lose lose for America.

We need to confirm a judge with bipartisan support. Not like this.

[FaultyMario]

Wait, I said I was not going to take you seriously on this thread. I intend to keep my word.

[MR2 Fan]

I'm getting really tired of these "debate with billi" threads. It sucks up most of the intelligent conversation.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Sorry, should’ve dragged Swervo to the other thread... my bad!

Still, what other intelligent conversations were going on? :p

[FaultyMario]

Chad Ludington, a Yale classmate of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh:


The fact is, at Yale, and I can speak to no other times, Brett was a frequent drinker, and a heavy drinker. I know, because, especially in our first two years of college, I often drank with him. On many occasions I heard Brett slur his words and saw him staggering from alcohol consumption, not all of which was beer. When Brett got drunk, he was often belligerent and aggressive. On one of the last occasions I purposely socialized with Brett, I witnessed him respond to a semi-hostile remark, not by defusing the situation, but by throwing his beer in the man's face and starting a fight that ended with one of our mutual friends in jail.
I do not believe that the heavy drinking or even loutish behavior of an 18 or even 21 year old should condemn a person for the rest of his life. I would be a hypocrite to think so. However, I have direct and repeated knowledge about his drinking and his disposition while drunk. And I do believe that Brett's actions as a 53-year-old federal judge matter. If he lied about his past actions on national television, and more especially while speaking under oath in front of the United States Senate, I believe those lies should have consequences. It is truth that is at stake, and I believe that the ability to speak the truth, even when it does not reflect well upon oneself, is a paramount quality we seek in our nation's most powerful judges.

Bold, mine.

[Crazed_Insanity]

My previous emphasis was this:

I do not believe that the heavy drinking or even loutish behavior of an 18 or even 21 year old should condemn a person for the rest of his life.

Now, if he knows 1st hand that Kavanaugh as a 50 yr old still has a drinking problem and lied about it, then he definitely cannot be the next Supreme Court Justice!

[FaultyMario]

You idiot!

[Jason]

I'm getting really tired of these "debate with billi" threads. It sucks up most of the intelligent conversation.

That's what the ignore function is for 👍

[MR2 Fan]

That's what the ignore function is for ��

yes, but then I just see tons of replies with no context so it's just as bad

[Crazed_Insanity]

Just start another intelligent conversation already. I'll take a break for a while.

Or you can continue to turn this into complaining about Billi thread... :p

[Tom Servo]

Heh, the quote function doesn't handle unicode the same way the post function does.

[Tom Servo]

How easy is it to be falsely accused of rape?

https://twitter.com/jeremycyoung/status/1046056287929356289

[neanderthal]

There's a graphic somewhere that pictorially represents the number of unreported sexual assault, the number of rapes and sexual assaults, and those who are falsely accused of sexual assault.

The false accusations? Something as remote as 1 in 100000 of all reported cases.

[FaultyMario]

How easy is it to be falsely accused of rape?

https://twitter.com/jeremycyoung/status/1046056287929356289

Thanks for sharing.

[FaultyMario]

"Fuck the law. I don’t give a fuck about the law. I want my fucking money. "

A history of the Trump transition. (https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/sep/27/this-guy-doesnt-know-anything-the-inside-story-of-trumps-shambolic-transition-team)

[MR2 Fan]

Via Twitter:

@politvidchannel

BREAKING: Multiple ethics complaints have been filed against Brett Kavanaugh in The Washington D.C.'s circuit court.

complaints are now under the purview of wait for It

DC Circuit judge Merrick Garland




OH SNAP! Karma Bitch!

[Crazed_Insanity]

That's awesome!

Karma seems to like Judge Kavanaugh very much...

[FaultyMario]

President Trump participated in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud, that greatly increased the fortune he received from his parents, an investigation by The New York Times has found. (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html?smid=tw-share)

NYT, paywalled.

[SportWagon]

Oh. The (almost canonical example of the) Fake News media again. You can't trust anything they say, you know.

[21Kid]

I'm getting really tired of these "debate with billi" threads. It sucks up most of the intelligent conversation.

That's what the ignore function is for 👍

yes, but then I just see tons of replies with no context so it's just as bad
Yeah, I just had to skip almost 2 pages of this thread. The replies aren't worth it either. It's like listening to someone debate a rock.
It's funny for about 2 seconds, but gets real boring, real quick.

[FaultyMario]

Oh. The (almost canonical example of the) Fake News media again. You can't trust anything they say, you know.

If they put an investigative team on it for a year, they ought to be expecting movie rights out of that shit.

[Tom Servo]

Yeah, I just had to skip almost 2 pages of this thread. The replies aren't worth it either. It's like listening to someone debate a rock.
It's funny for about 2 seconds, but gets real boring, real quick.

In my defense, I only clicked "view post" because y'all were saying that he said something especially atrocious.

[Crazed_Insanity]

So I hope you discovered something atrocious to make your troubles worth it? :devil:

[MR2 Fan]

Don't forget all U.S. citizens, at 2:18PM Eastern today will be the test of the Presidential Alert system...your phone will make a loud noise and you can't opt out of it.

The best thing to do is completely turn your phone off until 2:48PM from what I understand if you don't want to get the loud noise/message.

[The359]

The loud noise will just be the normal noise you get when there is a weather alert or amber alert on your phone.

[MR2 Fan]

...which I don't because I've disabled the audio for those alerts, but apparently we're not able to disable this one

[Tom Servo]

Was a little entertaining. I was remoting into a meeting on Hangouts when the alert came in. I sit in a big building with an open floor plan, so there's probably at least 100 phones lying around on this floor. However, I also have loud, annoying coworkers so I have a set of noise-cancelling headphones for when I'm remoted into a meeting. I didn't hear any of the phones around me go off, including the one on my desk, but I did hear all the ones in the meeting room and homes of other people in the hangout over my headphone audio.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Interesting that I did not receive the alert. Apparently he has put me on ignore too!!! :D

[The359]

Mine went off right on time at 2:18 while I was driving. What I didn't expect is that they'd also cut in on the radio at the same time for a test, which did mention the cell phone test.

[Tom Servo]

Oh man, that's dark. "Tiffany Trump Receives First Ever Text From Her Father"

[Cam]

Leave it to Trump to send me a vapid message with bad grammar. :lol:

[Tom Servo]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/the-cruelty-is-the-point/572104/

[21Kid]

In my defense, I only clicked "view post" ...

I hope you now realize your mistake. ;)

[FaultyMario]

Took a quick glance at the Federalist 78 (https://www.congress.gov/resources/display/content/The+Federalist+Papers#TheFederalistPapers-78). This confirmation process could not be more different than the ideal that was set there.

[FaultyMario]

By @CubbyBruin:


Kavanaugh saying he worked his butt off to get into Yale only to learn that his grandfather graduated from Yale, & Trump saying he got a "small loan" from his dad only to learn it was a $450 million tax shelter is the gaslighting working class kids experience all their lives.

We are constantly fed false information about how people got from point A to point B and these folks purposefully leave out data that makes working class folks feel like they just aren't working hard enough or they just aren't smart enough.

Or we blame ourselves for not getting into the right school or right program or right job because its something WE did. We go over our past actions with a fine tooth comb and ask ourselves where exactly did we make the wrong move. We blame ourselves. And we obsess over it.

Little did that teenager version of me know that the system was rigged the entire time. The Kavanaugh drunk in high school who was a complete jerk off got into Yale and you wonder, "whaaaat?" I guess he was just smart and I'm not.

The kid who was constantly in trouble with the law gets into a good school and it turns out they had a trust fund and his grandfather donated money to the school. But you don't know that.

In theory you know "the world is rigged" but the problem is the Kavanaugh's and Trumps of the world really think they are the victims. They are the ones complaining about how blacks or mexicans or women are the ones getting over on them.

And the whole time you think "If I just work hard enough.." you will get to Point B. But you really won't. And its not your fault. But everything we believe culturally is designed to put that failure squarely on our own shoulders.

[Tom Servo]

Very, very long and very, very good on the genesis of the far-right propaganda/misinformation machine (from Gamergate through QAnon) and where it is now.

https://www.wired.com/story/information-terrorists-trying-to-reshape-america/?mbid=social_twitter

[Crazed_Insanity]

Seriously, the main problem I see isn't right or left... it's the 'far' part.

There's really no need for the far left to 'attack' Kavanaugh.

There's also no need for the far right to 'attack' Ford.

He said. She said. FBI can't even figure it out. Why is the public fighting over it as if one side is clearly white and the other side clearly black? If black and white is all you can see in this issue, don't you wonder if you yourself had been 'radicalized' politically?

Like I said, if super majority is needed to confirm a justice, republicans wouldn't be needing to rush things. Democrats wouldn't be needing to trying so hard to block. That seat will either be left empty for a long time or we'll get a judge with bi-partisan support eventually...

We used to need the 60 super majority vote to confirm a justice, but both Republican AND Democratic senators are to blame for allowing the nuclear option to degenerate us into this...

Politics of today has mutilated our constitutional traditions. Politicians are also degenerating and becoming increasingly hypocritical... singing one tune originally and then singing another tune when they achieve power... This is not just a fault of GOP, democrats as well!

Radicalization is leveraging on people's fear and anger. If you're scared and angry about certainly political issue, you are probably just as radicalize as the folks on the other side.

Remember Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s civil rights movement? Was he leveraging on people's fear and anger in order to push civil rights along? We can certainly protest against unjust things, but we gotta also learn to keep our cool.

[Crazed_Insanity]

By @CubbyBruin:

When someone says things like this: you will get to Point B. But you really won't. And its not your fault. But everything we believe culturally is designed to put that failure squarely on our own shoulders.

I wonder what's his intention... Are these encouraging words? Encouraging what exactly?

Or since the system is rigged against us, we can all just play victim?

If Trump and Kavanaugh can play, surely we all can too?

Surely we can all be victims at times, but that's a pretty lame game to play. What would be the point of blaming it on the likes of Trump or Kavanaugh or any other rich/powerful white men? Identity politics is no good. Just as them blaming everything on Muslims, Mexicans, blacks, women, or whatever other minorities.

Rather than identifying a group of folks to blame, we ought to identify the actual problem so we can either fix it or avoid it in the future. Blaming failures on others and then leaving it as that is lame. If 'others' are culpable, surely we should hold them responsible if possible, but the most important part of the process should be focusing and fixing the source of the problem thus making game playing within the system much more interesting for future generations. Isn't that the best way to un-rig the system? Rather than keeping on with identify politics?

[FaultyMario]

In light of those stories of privilege circling around the drunk jock who -in spite of being a serial abuser of his female classmates- had no problem being admitted to Yale, the AP is reporting that the recently deceased Nobel prize-winning physicist Leon Lederman had to sell his medal in order to pay for medical bills.

[Tom Servo]

Well, Murkowski says she's voting no, but Collins says yes and Manchin, a dem from WV, says yes. Looks like Kavanaugh's got the votes. Guess we can look forward to a court that thinks that no matter what Trump does, it's legal.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Interesting that one democrat voting yes and one republican voting no.

I guess that's 'bipartisan' enough in this day and age...

Personally, I still don't think a drunken indiscretion in high school should be a disqualifier, but I'd vote no on Kavanaugh's based on his 'judicial temperament' alone.

Silverlining is that perhaps congress will become more blue post November election...

[drew]

I seriously want to vomit.

Fuck Flake, fuck Collins. Just when you *almost* think someone has some morality, it's party-line.

Fuck these assholes. Maybe we can hope for a SCOTUS impeachment in a few months if they actually turn the shit around.

Fuck.

[FaultyMario]

It was not about a drunken indiscretion of a high schooler. It was the perjury of a grown man, it was the gaslighting by a grown man, it was the lack of composture of a man in a job interview.

[drew]

Exactly. It was an INTERVIEW, that he failed completely and totally. A judge, ANY judge, much less a SCOTUS, should be immediately disqualified the second they read a prepared opening statement about political bias, and being the "victim" of a political agenda/conspiracy.

Fuck this guy.

[George]

I strongly agree with the last two posts.

[neanderthal]

Congratulations billi, this is what you voted for.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, blame it all on Billi. You know I gotha power!!! Hwahaha...

[Jason]

I'm assuming RBG is gonna kick it before Trump is out too, so we're very set for a Conservative revolution for the next 30 years, no matter what the populace actually wants.

[MR2 Fan]

If the dems can somehow pick up a few more seats in the Senate, they may be able to block any new nominations

[Jason]

Dems don't vote in midterms ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Freude am Fahren]

Well, according to Republicans' own rules, we can't get a new SCOTUS Judge after midterms anyway, right?




...right?

[drew]

It's so fucking appalling.

[neanderthal]

I'm assuming RBG is gonna kick it before Trump is out too, so we're very set for a Conservative revolution for the next 30 years, no matter what the populace actually wants.

And there could still be other retirements.

[FaultyMario]

Fuck lifetime appointments. I may be paraphrasing Karl Popper there. May be.

[Crazed_Insanity]

God could strike them dead if He wants. Lifetime ain’t forever.

Plus, when it comes to making a decision to do something you’re not sure of, if you’re going to make a mistake, wouldn’t you play it safe(conservative)?

IMHO , if Supreme Court is going to screw up, I’d rather it screw up on the side of conservatism.

Of course not all conservative issues are truly ‘conservative’, but I don’t know how else to reframe things to make myself feel better...

[neanderthal]

God could strike them dead if He wants. Lifetime ain’t forever.

Plus, when it comes to making a decision to do something you’re not sure of, if you’re going to make a mistake, wouldn’t you play it safe(conservative)?

IMHO , if Supreme Court is going to screw up, I’d rather it screw up on the side of conservatism.

Of course not all conservative issues are truly ‘conservative’, but I don’t know how else to reframe things to make myself feel better...

You mean like in the most important election in our life, the best option would be to be conservative and do the least harm? Therefore you mean you should have voted for the least worst of the two viable candidates, right?

Remind us again what you did?

billi talking out of both sides of his mouth, as always. As you were...

[JoshInKC]

Fuck lifetime appointments. I may be paraphrasing Karl Popper there. May be.

:up:
I'm always on-board for Karl Popper references. Same with Braudel.

[Tom Servo]

Shit, I only know about Karl Pilkington. Time to do some reading.

[21Kid]

Exactly. It was an INTERVIEW, that he failed completely and totally. A judge, ANY judge, much less a SCOTUS, should be immediately disqualified the second they read a prepared opening statement about political bias, and being the "victim" of a political agenda/conspiracy.

Fuck this guy.

My thoughts exactly

[FaultyMario]

One thing I don't understad about the Trump fiasco.

Ok, Trump was not counting on becoming president, there's a couple of accounts saying that he did not have a victory speech ready or that until the last few hours they did not anticipate in him winning. There's also insinuations that he was siphoning money out of the campaign chests to his own personal accounts; there's also descriptions of him running a tight team, a very small operation that did not have the skills or the mindpower to tackle on the bureucratic maze that laid ahead of them.

But on the other hand there's this narrative line of Manafort and the Russian intervention. One where Trump would ask for help to win. But both narratives contradict each other.
Here, the question is why... if he wasn't in it to win it, if He ran to make money, why would he need help to win something he didn't want to win? That makes no sense.

I'm not saying he is innocent, I'm saying the conspiracy was much bigger than him and his circus of thugs and lowlifes. I don't think that Mueller, who I have no doubt is a patriot and is looking for real answers, will get much done to steer America back above the fray of partisan politics.

[The359]

Because the Russians wanted a weakling like Trump to win. And Trump isn't going to turn down free money.

[MR2 Fan]

Trump "won" by 74,000 votes....it was an EXTREMELY close result and it seems the interference, whether actual interference or psychological worked better than they ever dreamed.

[FaultyMario]

Because the Russians wanted a weakling like Trump to win. And Trump isn't going to turn down free money.

That part seems clear. But surely there must be multiple parties with interests in him winning. Is that enough to think that there was a larger conspiracy? It can't just be Roger Stone giving manafort a helping hand. For example, What role did the Republican party play in this? They do play to win, but, did they turn a blind eye in order to win?

[Crazed_Insanity]

One thing I don't understad about the Trump fiasco.

Ok, Trump was not counting on becoming president, there's a couple of accounts saying that he did not have a victory speech ready or that until the last few hours they did not anticipate in him winning. There's also insinuations that he was siphoning money out of the campaign chests to his own personal accounts; there's also descriptions of him running a tight team, a very small operation that did not have the skills or the mindpower to tackle on the bureucratic maze that laid ahead of them.

But on the other hand there's this narrative line of Manafort and the Russian intervention. One where Trump would ask for help to win. But both narratives contradict each other.
Here, the question is why... if he wasn't in it to win it, if He ran to make money, why would he need help to win something he didn't want to win? That makes no sense.

I'm not saying he is innocent, I'm saying the conspiracy was much bigger than him and his circus of thugs and lowlifes. I don't think that Mueller, who I have no doubt is a patriot and is looking for real answers, will get much done to steer America back above the fray of partisan politics.

Things change...; therefore, plans change.

Trump, much like Hitler, is probably feeding off of the crowd's energy or just very good at feeling the crowd. Whatever he said that didn't move the crowd, they won't say them again. Whatever he said that ended up with cheers... they'll stick to those subjects and rile up the crowd and milk it as much as possible. This is why Trump's offscript speeches themselves may conflict each other at different locations.

The guy is very adaptable, therefore, not very consistent.

Anyway, given that Trump now can 'control' how FBI investigates Kavanaugh, I'm worried that Mueller may not be able to fully complete his investigation... Even if Mueller succeeds in removal of Trump... partisan politics is here to stay. After all, Trump didn't create partisan politics... he simply used it to his advantage.

[Tom Servo]

Just in case there's anyone around here who lives in CA and thinks that they might not have enough time to research the propositions, https://www.ballot.fyi/ is here to help.

[FaultyMario]

From NPR's twitter feed:


“Trump is on his hero’s journey right now. He might not have thought he’d have a crazy motherf***** like [me],”


Hero's journey? Is Kanye calling himself a magic black guy or have I been spending too much time on TVTropes?

[The359]

One of my coworkers is freaking out over Taylor Swift making a political endorsement, and that Swift shouldn't post such things and keep politics out of everything. She is a big time Taylor Swift groupie, so this seems to be hitting her hard. She had the gall to actually post that she has more respect for Kanye now than she has for Taylor. Irony!

[speedpimp]

RE: Tay Tay: it means she hates men and fully supports misandry. Yet another liberal elitist entertainer running off at the mouth and giving opinions that no one asked for. If the public truly wanted her opinion, her husband would've spoken for her, yet she doesn't have a husband, therefore she does not support TRADITIONAL family values, does not care about the Judeo-CHRISTIAN traditions of AMERICA and does not care about true Conservatives.
Good for her.

[Tom Servo]

A friend of mine runs vote.org, the site that Swift called out. The celeb effect is real - so far this year they've signed up somewhere around 854,000 new voters, 364,000 of those were in the 72 hours after she posted that. Another fun stat, 62.4% of those 364,000 were under 30 years old.

[Freude am Fahren]

Good for her (and them). Let's hope they don't completely forget about it before the election next month.

[Dicknose]

As a politcial "coming out" it was pretty tame.
I dont like to push my politics but I think voting is important. Although not much point saying that in Oz as its compulsory here! We typically get a 90% turnout.

[FaultyMario]

The celeb effect is real

Any shroud of doubt disappeared on Nov. 9, 2016.

[Tom Servo]

As a politcial "coming out" it was pretty tame.
I dont like to push my politics but I think voting is important. Although not much point saying that in Oz as its compulsory here! We typically get a 90% turnout.

We ended up at about 58% turnout in the 2016 election, about the same as 2012 and below that of 2008 (61.6%). I'm also of the opinion that voting is important, and have yet to miss a chance to vote since I turned 18, so it makes me sad when I see things like our local Los Angeles elections in June got a whopping 8.6% turnout.

[Crazed_Insanity]

As a politcial "coming out" it was pretty tame.
I dont like to push my politics but I think voting is important. Although not much point saying that in Oz as its compulsory here! We typically get a 90% turnout.

How do you guys achieve such high turnout!?!?!?

How can you make it compulsory?

[G'day Mate]

Compulsory voting is easy - everyone just goes and votes and at the end of it you probably can get a sausage.

I'm actually surprised that it's only 90% - I would have thought it'd be much closer to 100.

Also, casting a vote is not actually compulsory for two reasons:
1. You are not required to register to vote (although something like 95% of eligible people are)
2. On voting day if you are registered you could just go, get your name ticked off and leave without casting a ballot

[G'day Mate]

Oh, and when we had a postal-vote "plebiscite" (which is like an optional referendum) on gay marriage something like 80% of people responded. I think we have a culture of voting.

That is, at a national and state level at least. Local council elections though ... they're a different story.

[Crazed_Insanity]

So the 10% that didn’t vote, will they get penalized somehow? Like additional taxes? ;)