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.
On May 07 2016 11:03 Sermokala wrote: Just to clarify we knew that Iraq had chemical weapons as we had sold them to iraq for the iran-iraq war. And we knew that Saddam was willing to use them on his people when he gassed the kurds to his north.
The WMD's that we were led to go to war over were nuclear in origin and were proven to be lias based on a lieing scource that everyone told us was a liar but the administration went forward with it anyway. I know its small potatoes but its important to keep history straight.
Really though we should have went full imperial on the middle east. Ask Korea japan and Germany how the reverse colonial experience works out. Middle east just isn ready for democracy and the bill of rights without a generation of brain washing and reeducation. .
Bahaha, yeah right the world would surely be better off if instead of destroying Iraq you'd have destroyed the whole Middle East.
On May 07 2016 06:37 Velr wrote: Yeah, if the US or any other biggish power wanted, Isis would just get ran over. But this would mean either serious casualties on both sides or bombing the whole place with total disregard to the people there.
Won't happen, the place is just not important enough.
Funny how if we would have just decisively blown the whole thing to space 50 years ago, the total # of deaths would probably be fewer modern day. Our unwillingness to act decisively has only led to more death long term.
If everyone on the planet committed suicide tomorrow we would also see less long term death. Absence of death through absence of life is not preferable to continued life and death. Or are you trying to invoke Schopenhauer or something?
On May 07 2016 08:32 Mohdoo wrote: I dream of a day that Trump gives me a nickname.
Mohdoo? More like Doodoo.
<3
On May 07 2016 08:58 farvacola wrote:
Two of Donald Trump's defeated rivals said Friday that they will not support him in the general election, predicting disaster for the party and asking conservatives to focus on electing Republicans to offices down the ballot.
Former Florida governor Jeb Bush, whom Trump had treated with utter contempt during primary season, announced his decision in a Facebook post. Dismissing Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton as an "untrustworthy liberal politician," Bush said he would "support principled conservatives at the state and federal levels, just as I have done my entire life." To Bush, that does not include Trump.
"The American Presidency is an office that goes beyond just politics," Bush wrote. "It requires of its occupant great fortitude and humility and the temperament and strong character to deal with the unexpected challenges that will inevitably impact our nation in the next four years. Donald Trump has not demonstrated that temperament or strength of character. He has not displayed a respect for the Constitution. And, he is not a consistent conservative. These are all reasons why I cannot support his candidacy."
Earlier on Friday, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) sent reporters a statement explaining his own reasons for rejecting Trump.
"I absolutely will not support Hillary Clinton for President," Graham wrote. "I also cannot in good conscience support Donald Trump because I do not believe he is a reliable Republican conservative nor has he displayed the judgment and temperament to serve as commander in chief."
Straight up splintering of the party. Unreal. I honestly expected everyone to rally. The GOP has always been nothing if not united.
The RINOs are leaving the party en masse. Fuck 'em. No one has any use for those hypocrites.
Trump is basically an orange colored RINO. He's even friends with the other orange RINO, John Boehner.
Don't tell the RINO's that Trump is one of them. They may actually get even more apoplectic. And for what it's worth, I don't think Trump is a RINO. He's something else and quite possibly the harbinger of a new form conservatism.
None of the policy, but all the authoritarianism. He has new answers every day, but the answers are always Trump power and vengeful punishments on those in the out groups. He promises the ingroup that the out group will suffer for wronging them, and only his force of personality can accomplish it.
Today he proposed that he would halve the national debt by simply offering our creditors half the money. Utter madness, but those Chinese creditors are going to get it wont they! Just a few words from Trump and he will halve the national debt.
Chinese creditors? US creditors you mean. Most of it is owned domestically (around 2/3rd). Japan is actually the biggest foreign creditor. The biggest creditors are government entities like Social Security according to Forbes. (2014 numbers tho).
When confronted with the fact that a sizable portion of our national debt comes from having borrowed money from Social Security, "debt hawks" tend to have little in the way of a meaningful response.
On May 07 2016 08:32 Mohdoo wrote: I dream of a day that Trump gives me a nickname.
Mohdoo? More like Doodoo.
<3
On May 07 2016 08:58 farvacola wrote:
Two of Donald Trump's defeated rivals said Friday that they will not support him in the general election, predicting disaster for the party and asking conservatives to focus on electing Republicans to offices down the ballot.
Former Florida governor Jeb Bush, whom Trump had treated with utter contempt during primary season, announced his decision in a Facebook post. Dismissing Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton as an "untrustworthy liberal politician," Bush said he would "support principled conservatives at the state and federal levels, just as I have done my entire life." To Bush, that does not include Trump.
"The American Presidency is an office that goes beyond just politics," Bush wrote. "It requires of its occupant great fortitude and humility and the temperament and strong character to deal with the unexpected challenges that will inevitably impact our nation in the next four years. Donald Trump has not demonstrated that temperament or strength of character. He has not displayed a respect for the Constitution. And, he is not a consistent conservative. These are all reasons why I cannot support his candidacy."
Earlier on Friday, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) sent reporters a statement explaining his own reasons for rejecting Trump.
"I absolutely will not support Hillary Clinton for President," Graham wrote. "I also cannot in good conscience support Donald Trump because I do not believe he is a reliable Republican conservative nor has he displayed the judgment and temperament to serve as commander in chief."
Straight up splintering of the party. Unreal. I honestly expected everyone to rally. The GOP has always been nothing if not united.
There goes ~3% of Republican primary voters
The less neo-Cons the better, Graham and other vultures leaving the party can only be a good thing. And Jeb is a pathetic joke, my only hope is that McCain also commits political suicide like these two.
Edit: Trump will gain voters when they see who is against him in the GOP.
John Rambo McCain is in for a pretty tough reelection campaign in Arizona. He seems to be winning at the moment, but it's possible that he'll go down with the Trump train if it derails.
Or, more likely, he'll get run over by not getting on board the Trump train, and he'll lose like most candidates who don't support their party's choice (e.g. Dems who didn't stand by Obama in 2014).
On May 07 2016 08:32 Mohdoo wrote: I dream of a day that Trump gives me a nickname.
Mohdoo? More like Doodoo.
<3
On May 07 2016 08:58 farvacola wrote:
Two of Donald Trump's defeated rivals said Friday that they will not support him in the general election, predicting disaster for the party and asking conservatives to focus on electing Republicans to offices down the ballot.
Former Florida governor Jeb Bush, whom Trump had treated with utter contempt during primary season, announced his decision in a Facebook post. Dismissing Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton as an "untrustworthy liberal politician," Bush said he would "support principled conservatives at the state and federal levels, just as I have done my entire life." To Bush, that does not include Trump.
"The American Presidency is an office that goes beyond just politics," Bush wrote. "It requires of its occupant great fortitude and humility and the temperament and strong character to deal with the unexpected challenges that will inevitably impact our nation in the next four years. Donald Trump has not demonstrated that temperament or strength of character. He has not displayed a respect for the Constitution. And, he is not a consistent conservative. These are all reasons why I cannot support his candidacy."
Earlier on Friday, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) sent reporters a statement explaining his own reasons for rejecting Trump.
"I absolutely will not support Hillary Clinton for President," Graham wrote. "I also cannot in good conscience support Donald Trump because I do not believe he is a reliable Republican conservative nor has he displayed the judgment and temperament to serve as commander in chief."
Straight up splintering of the party. Unreal. I honestly expected everyone to rally. The GOP has always been nothing if not united.
There goes ~3% of Republican primary voters
The less neo-Cons the better, Graham and other vultures leaving the party can only be a good thing. And Jeb is a pathetic joke, my only hope is that McCain also commits political suicide like these two.
Edit: Trump will gain voters when they see who is against him in the GOP.
John Rambo McCain is in for a pretty tough reelection campaign in Arizona. He seems to be winning at the moment, but it's possible that he'll go down with the Trump train if it derails.
Or, more likely, he'll get run over by not getting on board the Trump train, and he'll lose like most candidates who don't support their party's choice (e.g. Dems who didn't stand by Obama in 2014).
He'll go far right as he usually does in order stay employed then go back to center right, does it all the time.
Bernie Sanders is accusing Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of trying to tip the party convention in Hillary Clinton's favor, saying the chairwoman has packed the committees with Clinton supporters.
In a letter to the chairwoman, Sanders noted that of the 45 names he submitted to Democratic National Convention committees, Wasserman Schultz appointed only three.
"I believe the composition of the standing committees must reflect the relative support that has been received by both campaigns," Sanders wrote in the letter dated May 6. "That was why I was so disappointed to learn that of the over forty people our campaign submitted at your request you chose to select only three of my recommendations for the three standing committees. Moreover, you did not assign even one of the people submitted by our campaign to the very important Rules Committee of the Democratic National Convention."
Umm, no, there's plenty of doubt as to which convention will be "more interesting"; this sort of pre-convention haggling over who gets to have their people in the standing committees happens even when there is a clear presumptive nominee, and whether or not this conflict trumps what may be a Republican convention that tears up Cleveland more than when LeBron left remains to be seen.
On May 08 2016 00:12 farvacola wrote: Umm, no, there's plenty of doubt as to which convention will be "more interesting"; this sort of pre-convention haggling over who gets to have their people in the standing committees happens even when there is a clear presumptive nominee, and whether or not this conflict trumps what may be a Republican convention that tears up Cleveland more than when LeBron left remains to be seen.
Pre-convention haggling happens, just usually the DNC chair isn't so deep in the pocket of one of the candidates that she appoints 90%+ Hillary supporters to the committees, when Bernie's won ~45% of the delegates and on track to close that gap even more.
DWS isn't going to give him fair representation at the convention, so we're going to have to take our issues to the floor (convention will be contested, at least the platform will be). On the republican side the only interesting part will be who Trump picks as VP and maybe his convention speech.
Just like the unprecedented unlikable/not trustworthy numbers are not just typical problems that are just slightly worse for Hillary than usual (worst numbers ever, other than Trump), this isn't typical convention haggling.
In other news, old man throws kitchen sink at cloud.
Also, Hillary seems to have won the Guam caucuses. Since Guam's five superdelegates seem to have indicated they would follow the will of the voters, it looks to be a 9-3 delegate (4-3 in pledged delegates) victory for her.
On May 07 2016 06:37 Velr wrote: Yeah, if the US or any other biggish power wanted, Isis would just get ran over. But this would mean either serious casualties on both sides or bombing the whole place with total disregard to the people there.
Won't happen, the place is just not important enough.
Funny how if we would have just decisively blown the whole thing to space 50 years ago, the total # of deaths would probably be fewer modern day. Our unwillingness to act decisively has only led to more death long term.
If everyone on the planet committed suicide tomorrow we would also see less long term death. Absence of death through absence of life is not preferable to continued life and death. Or are you trying to invoke Schopenhauer or something?
If everyone committed suicide, our species would be extinct. That's not favorable.
On May 08 2016 00:22 oneofthem wrote: go debbie suppress dem sandernistas
Again, this is why many of us Sanders supporters won't be "voting blue no matter who". Maybe he's joking about suppressing opinion, maybe he's not, either way we don't think silencing voters is funny.
but less death in one region due to regional extinction would be? The way I read your previous post to me seems like you think it would be preferable if the middle east had been 'blown to space' 50 years ago because then there would be less death there (and less spillover-death in nearby regions), because there wouldn't be people there to die (or kill). I'm saying that sure, there would be less people dying right now because of it, but there would also have been less people living. Then I am saying that death is bad because it ends life - but that has the obvious implication that never-life is even worse than death, because at least with death there's a period of life.
On May 08 2016 00:48 ticklishmusic wrote: Bernie complaining about the DNC rules smells awfully like the guy who won $2000 for second place complaining that there's a $10,000 first place prize
I'd also be more inclined to agree with him on some things if he didn't literally complain about how everything is rigged against him
It is rigged, I don't know how any serious person could suggest otherwise. But please show me where Bernie "literally complains everything is rigged against him".
On May 08 2016 00:48 ticklishmusic wrote: Bernie complaining about the DNC rules smells awfully like the guy who won $2000 for second place complaining that there's a $10,000 first place prize
I'd also be more inclined to agree with him on some things if he didn't literally complain about how everything is rigged against him
It is rigged, I don't know how any serious person could suggest otherwise. But please show me where Bernie "literally complains everything is rigged against him".
If he was ahead 300 delegates, do you think this situation would be different?
EPT
