EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2580
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18828 Posts
Though I must say the idea certainly has its appeal.  | ||
KwarK
United States42774 Posts
Edit: I found a real book that you can buy on Amazon containing the following The NWO leaders would be hard pressed to get the entire country to submit to a new form of government and it would take an act of epic proportions before the people of the United States voluntarily surrendered its sovereignty to a dictatorship. To date, we have only come close to Marshall Law on three separate occasions. This is a 344 page book that uses Marshall Law throughout. I scrolled down a little and randomly found myself at In the destruction of Maldek, billions of lives were lost, and the Maldekians (who were a mix of human and reptillian) had to reincarnate on other planets. The principle of panspermia states.. about the author "He received a Doctorate of Divinity in Spiritual Counseling as well as a Doctorate of Philosophy in Metaphysical Sciences from The University of Metaphysical Sciences." http://www.umsonline.org/ "Marshall Law" in google is my favourite search term. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 01 2015 11:47 IgnE wrote: There's a difference between a typo and a knowing mistake tho. There is a difference between pointing out a mistake and being a huge douche bag too? Kwark has gone full into that area. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
He was using British spelling, obviously  | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 01 2015 12:31 IgnE wrote: Well at least get your accusations straight. Kwark is being a huge douche bag over a mistake because someone took his parking space or some petty shit. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — A judge on Monday temporarily blocked Missouri's health department from revoking the abortion license held by a Planned Parenthood clinic in Columbia as its physician loses hospital privileges required under state law. The clinic stopped terminating pregnancies last week, but Planned Parenthood filed a federal lawsuit Monday in hopes of retaining its abortion facility license from the state Department of Health and Senior Services while its physician regains privileges or the clinic finds a new doctor. U.S. District Judge Nanette K. Laughrey issued her order at the end of a hearing by telephone conference call. Laughrey's order will remain in effect only until Wednesday to give attorneys a chance to address several legal issues. The judge scheduled another telephone conference call for Wednesday afternoon. Missouri law requires a physician who performs abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital. Amid an investigation of abortion by the Republican-controlled Legislature, a University of Missouri Health Care system medical staff panel voted in September to discontinue the form of privileges granted to Planned Parenthood doctor Colleen McNicholas, effective Tuesday. That action prompted the health department to notify Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri that the abortion facility license for its Columbia clinic would be revoked, also effective Tuesday. Missouri now has only one clinic performing abortions, in St. Louis. Source | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On December 01 2015 12:52 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Missouri now has only one clinic performing abortions, in St. Louis. One abortion clinic for a state with a population of 6 million. Republicans are a disgrace. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 01 2015 13:08 kwizach wrote: One abortion clinic for a state with a population of 6 million. Republicans are a disgrace. Don't worry, someone will burn that one down and then they won't have any. The most important part is that the unborn children are protected so they can not be adopted by the people that protected them. And then those people can complain about those children mooching off the government. And just remember that the anti-abortion rhetoric had nothing to do with the violence or actions of the states currently. Literally zero. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
more on topic one abortion clinic for 6 million people is insane. but unfortunately thats what it's come too | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Ted Cruz on Monday offered his strongest denunciation so far of Marco Rubio's foreign policy views, assailing his Republican presidential rival as a proponent of "military adventurism" that he said has benefited Islamic militant groups. He even tied the Floridian to Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton. "Senator Rubio emphatically supported Hillary Clinton in toppling [Muammar] Qaddafi in Libya. I think that made no sense," Cruz told Bloomberg in a wide-ranging and exclusive interview during a campaign swing through Iowa. He argued that the 2011 bombings that toppled the Libyan leader didn't help the fight against terrorists. "Qaddafi was a bad man, he had a horrible human rights record. And yet ... he had become a significant ally in fighting radical Islamic terrorism." "The terrorist attack that occurred in Benghazi was a direct result of that massive foreign policy blunder," Cruz said during a drive eastward from a town hall near Iowa City to another in the town of Clinton. Cruz drew a marked contrast between his foreign policy views and that of his fellow Cuban American first-term senator, both of whom are rising in the polls and are top contenders for the Republican nomination. The Texan portrayed himself as a third way between the stalwart, non-interventionist views of Senator Rand Paul and pro-interventionist policies in pursuit of spreading democracy and human rights through the Middle East that Rubio espouses. Cruz's belief is that trying to democratize those societies can be counterproductive and that U.S. military might should be focused narrowly on protecting U.S. interests. "If you look at President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and for that matter some of the more aggressive Washington neo-cons, they have consistently mis-perceived the threat of radical Islamic terrorism and have advocated military adventurism that has had the effect of benefiting radical Islamic terrorists," he said. Source | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On December 01 2015 11:17 KwarK wrote: Sorry to be the baron of bad news but I don't need to do or say anything for a post explaining how Trump will disband Congress and declare a 1000 year Reich to be dumb. Reasons why that isn't going to happen are a diamond dozen. However I do think those homonym substitutions are great. Please continue to use Marshall Law. Also I didn't come across the pond. I'm an ex-patriot now. Living in America. Edit: Anyone considering googling Marshall Law will not be disappointed. There are a lot of Texans posting online about Jade Helm and they have some opinions regarding Obozo's plans for a coup. Is that like the Marshall Plan but domestic? I could get behind that. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States4773 Posts
On December 01 2015 15:51 xDaunt wrote: The anti-Trump hysteria is outright laughable. Extrapolating that he's the second coming of Hitler from his politically incorrect remarks? Please. We shouldn't be bothered with this nonsense until he writes his own version of Mein Kampf. The participants of this thread have mastered the art of misinterpretation and faulty extrapolation. In its own way it's really fascinating to read, even if it's not a unique or uncommon ability. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4730 Posts
On December 01 2015 12:32 Plansix wrote: Kwark is being a huge douche bag over a mistake because someone took his parking space or some petty shit. He is like that for quite some time. He must have really loved that parking spot. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
I do wonder how many times he will have to be shown to be incompetent before his campaign message of hypercompetence starts to ring false to the Republican primary electorate...it may just be that words speak louder than actions. Maybe if he's asked to name Secretaries of State other than Hillary Clinton and fails utterly at the next debate, but that probably won't happen. | ||
|
RenSC2
United States1060 Posts
If someone were to become dictator of the United States, it would probably be through a slow process. The slow increase of power of the executive branch through executive orders would be the most likely cause. The process could be hastened by an inability of congress to create a budget, putting the US in a default. After some national hardship due to the default, the president could swoop in and make an executive order declaring a budget (or at least parts of it) and take more power by doing so. Congress wouldn't disappear, but their power would be greatly diminished. I don't think Trump is running with the purpose of becoming dictator of the USA. I do think that he will grab more power for the presidency by using executive orders to their fullest. I don't think he will declare martial law, but I do think he will overstep the power of the office in major ways. Of course, I don't think he will win in the first place. This is Clinton's election to lose. Sanders will push her a little in the primary and force her slightly to the left, but he won't overcome her. Meanwhile, the Republicans will fight a brutal multi-way battle that will tear them all down before they can even face off against Clinton. I think Rubio will come out of it as the winner, but I'm not confident on that and he'll be damaged and was never particularly inspiring to begin with. Clinton will hit him hard in a few battleground states using the Republicans own rhetoric against him plus some left-wing fear mongering and then they'll split the normal states as expected leaving Clinton as the winner. Hope that clears up some things. The real main point of my last big post was to point out that it isn't impossible to create a modern fascist government in the USA. Some people want to put their heads in the sand and pretend like it could never happen, but that's simply not true. People in 1930s Germany probably thought their government could never become fascist because they were a modern enlightened people, yet it did. It did not happen because they tried to elect "evil", but instead because they elected someone who promised to make Germany great by dealing with their problems. In modern America, immigration and/or Islam has become that "problem". The left is too quick to dismiss or mock the issue and pretend that it's some fringe issue. The right has been more willing to address it, but statements that should be fringe statements are gaining large approval. It has become a mainstream issue that needs to be addressed. If the left feels that the current policy is fine, then they need to express why the current policy works. The candidates need to consistently educate people on the immigration process during their speeches and debates. They need to be able to discuss all the agencies that will vet a Syrian refugee before they're granted refugee status in the United States and not have a Rick Perry "oops" moment in the process. Otherwise, it becomes an issue that the right will dominate. If enough fear can be whipped up, it can turn mainstream voters into single issue voters. Trump seems to see it as his ticket to the presidency. Based on the current political landscape that doesn't look good for a Republican, I think he's being very shrewd. He's giving himself a fighting chance. What happens if he actually wins by leaning heavily on an anti-immigrant / anti-Islam platform? Does he follow through? I don't think Trump is the next coming of Hitler, but some of the parallels are scary. | ||
| ||
