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 February 04 2017 02:31 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On February 04 2017 02:10 LegalLord wrote:
On February 04 2017 00:40 Biff The Understudy wrote: Brexit is the same. I know people who voted Brexit because they didn't think that Brussels worked well and didn't like the project. Fair enough. But that's not how the thing was sold. The thing was sold with the idea that there are too many brown people, and we don't like them too much, because they are not really as good as us, because they can't integrate and have "fundamentally different values", bla bla, all the usual bullshit. I was in London during the campaign, and that's basically all there were to it.
Do I think voting Brexit makes you a racist? No? Do I think Brexit was sold on a toxic and xenophobic message. Of course.
There were a lot of things for a lot of different people. An election with two options is a battle between two massive coalitions. Some people on each side are despicable, ridiculously petty, short-sighted, etc. Singling out one small group as if they represent the whole isn't very fair.
And I suppose one key difference is that Britain seems to support Brexit overall right now. It's the choice they made, whereas in Trump it's a candidate they are stuck with because they had two bad choices to begin with.
I agree in general; yet there is a dynamic that support both Brexit and Trump that is pretty toxic, and clearly feeds on xenophobia. I think that's all we say. Does that make all Brexit voters or even all Trump supporters toxic and racists. No. There are plenty of reasons, good or bad (can't think of a good one in the case of Trump but that's my perspective) to support a side.
Now, an election can illustrate some tendencies. The fact you win elections by making a nauseating, toxic and pretty racist campaign means that something really serious is happening, and that ideas that were once unacceptable are once again totally open for debate (we discussed in this thread torture a few times with a totally "open mind". I find that unbelievably disturbing. Not to mention the likes of xDaunt find that a really good idea. I used to think that you had to be afficted with a higher degree of psychopathy to support something like that and I think it was the general consensus not longer than two decades ago).
But again. The point is not to single out people. I also don't like it when I am being called "the left" and that stupid, broad generalizations about "the left" are made to attack me.
I'm going to link an earlier post of mine because I think it says what I have to say on these issues in some greater depth than I have time to give right now. The TL;DR is that yes, I see why these developments are seen as highly troubling, but they didn't develop in a vacuum. A long-running failure of the current system to properly take care of many of the marginalized simply led to a situation where people see dangerous populists and other such folk as their only possibility forward. Anything else would just support a degrading status quo.
I agree the statu quo sucks but electing a President enhancing all what is actually wrong is not going forward : more pollution, inequalities, xenophobia, ignorance, that's what he's working for. Feel free to prove me wrong on any of those points.
A more unapologetic supporter like xDaunt
Confirmation that LL is actually a Trump supporter?
I do support certain goals he's highlighted and I don't like Clinton all that much. But I didn't vote for him for a reason.
For now, I'm mostly content to just weather the storm of his presidency and laugh as others suffer for it. Electable.
There it is. You'd gotten through several posts about Clinton without saying "electable," I was worried about you
On February 04 2017 02:31 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On February 04 2017 02:10 LegalLord wrote:
On February 04 2017 00:40 Biff The Understudy wrote: Brexit is the same. I know people who voted Brexit because they didn't think that Brussels worked well and didn't like the project. Fair enough. But that's not how the thing was sold. The thing was sold with the idea that there are too many brown people, and we don't like them too much, because they are not really as good as us, because they can't integrate and have "fundamentally different values", bla bla, all the usual bullshit. I was in London during the campaign, and that's basically all there were to it.
Do I think voting Brexit makes you a racist? No? Do I think Brexit was sold on a toxic and xenophobic message. Of course.
There were a lot of things for a lot of different people. An election with two options is a battle between two massive coalitions. Some people on each side are despicable, ridiculously petty, short-sighted, etc. Singling out one small group as if they represent the whole isn't very fair.
And I suppose one key difference is that Britain seems to support Brexit overall right now. It's the choice they made, whereas in Trump it's a candidate they are stuck with because they had two bad choices to begin with.
I agree in general; yet there is a dynamic that support both Brexit and Trump that is pretty toxic, and clearly feeds on xenophobia. I think that's all we say. Does that make all Brexit voters or even all Trump supporters toxic and racists. No. There are plenty of reasons, good or bad (can't think of a good one in the case of Trump but that's my perspective) to support a side.
Now, an election can illustrate some tendencies. The fact you win elections by making a nauseating, toxic and pretty racist campaign means that something really serious is happening, and that ideas that were once unacceptable are once again totally open for debate (we discussed in this thread torture a few times with a totally "open mind". I find that unbelievably disturbing. Not to mention the likes of xDaunt find that a really good idea. I used to think that you had to be afficted with a higher degree of psychopathy to support something like that and I think it was the general consensus not longer than two decades ago).
But again. The point is not to single out people. I also don't like it when I am being called "the left" and that stupid, broad generalizations about "the left" are made to attack me.
I'm going to link an earlier post of mine because I think it says what I have to say on these issues in some greater depth than I have time to give right now. The TL;DR is that yes, I see why these developments are seen as highly troubling, but they didn't develop in a vacuum. A long-running failure of the current system to properly take care of many of the marginalized simply led to a situation where people see dangerous populists and other such folk as their only possibility forward. Anything else would just support a degrading status quo.
I agree the statu quo sucks but electing a President enhancing all what is actually wrong is not going forward : more pollution, inequalities, xenophobia, ignorance, that's what he's working for. Feel free to prove me wrong on any of those points.
A more unapologetic supporter like xDaunt
Confirmation that LL is actually a Trump supporter?
I do support certain goals he's highlighted and I don't like Clinton all that much. But I didn't vote for him for a reason.
For now, I'm mostly content to just weather the storm of his presidency and laugh as others suffer for it. Electable.
There it is. You'd gotten through several posts about Clinton without saying "electable," I was worried about you
I'll admit, I only said it because you mentioned it a few pages upthread.
Howard Stern said on his program Wednesday that Trump will hate being president and the role will be detrimental to his mental health.
Stern and Trump are long-time friends, with Trump making numerous appearances on Stern's radio show over the years.
"I personally wish that he had never run, I told him that, because I actually think this is something that is gonna be detrimental to his mental health too, because, he wants to be liked, he wants to be loved," Stern said. "He wants people to cheer for him."
"I don't think it's going to be a healthy experience. And by the way, he's now on this anti-Hollywood kick. He loves Hollywood. First of all, he loves the press. He lives for it. He loves people in Hollywood. He only wants hobnob with them. All of this hatred and stuff directed towards him. It's not good for him. It's not good. There's a reason every president who leaves the office has grey hair."
...
The radio host said he also believed Trump ran for president solely to get a larger contract from NBC for "The Apprentice."
"I think it started out as like a kinda cool, fun thing to do in order to get a couple more bucks out of NBC for The Apprentice, I actually do believe that," Stern said.
On February 04 2017 03:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: This man has no idea what he's doing.
I wonder why his friends can't get a loan. I'm sure it's not because they deal in shady business transactions like he does -_-. Greedy fucks will cause another bailout with public money. I'm also pretty sure some of those friends are his sons and son in law.
Donald Trump has filled his administration with Wall Street veterans, who believe that their industry is overregulated. (Financial firms accounted for 30 percent of all corporate profits before the economic crisis, but only 17 percent now, thanks largely to Dodd-Frank’s tighter regulation.) “Americans are going to have better choices and Americans are going to have better products because we’re not going to burden the banks with literally hundreds of billions of dollars of regulatory costs every year,” National Economic Council Director and Goldman Sachs veteran Gary Cohn tells The Wall Street Journal.
Cohn is planning to weaken the fiduciary rule, which he believes robs Americans of their freedom to hire financial advisers who might want to rip them off. “This is like putting only healthy food on the menu,” he tells the Journal, “because unhealthy food tastes good but you still shouldn’t eat it because you might die younger.”
Given that we're still on the topic, here's an interview that Milo gave to Tucker Carlson last night regarding what happened at Cal and his thoughts on how free speech is under attack:
I was particularly amused by the recitation of the headline from the NYTimes regarding the cancellation of the Cal event.
I wonder why his friends can't get a loan. I'm sure it's not because they deal in shady business transactions like he does -_-. Greedy fucks will cause another bailout with public money. I'm also pretty sure some of those friends are his sons and son in law.
Donald Trump has filled his administration with Wall Street veterans, who believe that their industry is overregulated. (Financial firms accounted for 30 percent of all corporate profits before the economic crisis, but only 17 percent now, thanks largely to Dodd-Frank’s tighter regulation.) “Americans are going to have better choices and Americans are going to have better products because we’re not going to burden the banks with literally hundreds of billions of dollars of regulatory costs every year,” National Economic Council Director and Goldman Sachs veteran Gary Cohn tells The Wall Street Journal.
Cohn is planning to weaken the fiduciary rule, which he believes robs Americans of their freedom to hire financial advisers who might want to rip them off. “This is like putting only healthy food on the menu,” he tells the Journal, “because unhealthy food tastes good but you still shouldn’t eat it because you might die younger.”
Yeah, the highlighted part makes absolute sense. I want to hire people to rip me off. That's always been my goal in life. Get rich and give it to someone who has the intention of stealing all of my money. Fuck yeah!
This Iran diplomacy is a joke, empty posturing tbh. Just add the sanctions instead of tweeting how Iran is "not behaving".. no sovereign nation is going to accept that kind of treatment.
On February 04 2017 04:04 biology]major wrote: This Iran diplomacy is a joke, empty posturing tbh. Just add the sanctions instead of tweeting how Iran is "not behaving".. no sovereign nation is going to accept that kind of treatment.
The office of the President of the USA is now a joke. I can only imagine how many world leaders are laughing their asses of at him tweeting "diplomacy".
Cohn is planning to weaken the fiduciary rule, which he believes robs Americans of their freedom to hire financial advisers who might want to rip them off. “This is like putting only healthy food on the menu,” he tells the Journal, “because unhealthy food tastes good but you still shouldn’t eat it because you might die younger.”
“This is like putting only healthy food on the menu,” he tells the Journal, “because unhealthy food tastes good but you still shouldn’t eat it because you might die younger.”
So he wants to put bad finance on the market so he can kill people faster?
Howard Stern said on his program Wednesday that Trump will hate being president and the role will be detrimental to his mental health.
Stern and Trump are long-time friends, with Trump making numerous appearances on Stern's radio show over the years.
"I personally wish that he had never run, I told him that, because I actually think this is something that is gonna be detrimental to his mental health too, because, he wants to be liked, he wants to be loved," Stern said. "He wants people to cheer for him."
"I don't think it's going to be a healthy experience. And by the way, he's now on this anti-Hollywood kick. He loves Hollywood. First of all, he loves the press. He lives for it. He loves people in Hollywood. He only wants hobnob with them. All of this hatred and stuff directed towards him. It's not good for him. It's not good. There's a reason every president who leaves the office has grey hair."
...
The radio host said he also believed Trump ran for president solely to get a larger contract from NBC for "The Apprentice."
"I think it started out as like a kinda cool, fun thing to do in order to get a couple more bucks out of NBC for The Apprentice, I actually do believe that," Stern said.
Stern has said it a million times. I'm a regular listener, and he seems genuinely baffled as to why a famous billionaire who is on TV would ever want the responsibility of running the country. Stern also speculated that his candicacy was a joke to begin with, and was only intended to help him negotiate when it came to "The Apprentice" but I don't know how he would know that. Howard actually has had a lot of good points about things politically recently, but it seems like the news only wants to cover what could be controversial. Shocker.
On February 04 2017 03:43 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
Cohn is planning to weaken the fiduciary rule, which he believes robs Americans of their freedom to hire financial advisers who might want to rip them off. “This is like putting only healthy food on the menu,” he tells the Journal, “because unhealthy food tastes good but you still shouldn’t eat it because you might die younger.”
“This is like putting only healthy food on the menu,” he tells the Journal, “because unhealthy food tastes good but you still shouldn’t eat it because you might die younger.”
So he wants to put bad finance on the market so he can kill people faster?
I would word it more like "We should allow the market to screw over consumers" but yes, that is basically what he said. And the worst part is that people will read it and go "hey, great".
I'm generally not opposed to taking the safety labels off shit and letting the problem solve itself, but financial products have gotten really complicated (in fact, they're often so complicated that people whose job it is to understand them often don't), so regulating that v seems kinda necessary.
Also, the freedom to be ripped off is not analogous to the freedom to eating unhealthy foods. Wtf?
On February 04 2017 04:04 biology]major wrote: This Iran diplomacy is a joke, empty posturing tbh. Just add the sanctions instead of tweeting how Iran is "not behaving".. no sovereign nation is going to accept that kind of treatment.
Sanctions won't work anymore. Iran held up its end of the deal (mostly) and no one else it really interested in giving up lucrative business deals there just to satisfy a capricious US.
Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner worked to sink LGBT order
Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump helped lead the charge to scuttle a draft executive order that would have overturned Obama-era enforcements of LGBT rights in the workplace, multiple sources with knowledge of the situation told POLITICO.
A draft executive order on LGBT rights — which outlines how to roll back former president Barack Obama’s protections and expand legal exemptions based on religious beliefs — has been circulating among journalists and worried progressive groups this week.
But two sources close to Kushner and Ivanka Trump, who have in the past been supporters of gay rights, said the young couple were both in favor of putting out a clear statement from the president, promising to uphold the 2014 Obama executive order and stopping the momentum for the turnaround in its tracks.
On Tuesday night, the White House released a statement noting that “President Donald J. Trump is determined to protect the rights of all Americans, including the LGBTQ community. President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election.”
Haven't ever heard anything bad about Ivanka which is cool.
President Trump on Thursday warned Israel that constructing new settlements “may not be helpful” to Middle East peace efforts despite--before taking office-- criticizing the Obama administration for not vetoing a United Nations Security Council measure condemning settlements.
The Washington Post reported that the Trump administration also “pulled back somewhat” on its pledge to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
David Halperin, the executive director of the Israel Policy Forum, told the paper that Trump’s move serves as a caution to Netanyahu.
“It’s a warning sign to the Israeli right that their celebration (of the new administration) may be premature,” he said.
The New York Times called Trump's appeal to Israel a "startling shift." The Jerusalem Post called the statement "surprising."
Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner worked to sink LGBT order
Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump helped lead the charge to scuttle a draft executive order that would have overturned Obama-era enforcements of LGBT rights in the workplace, multiple sources with knowledge of the situation told POLITICO.
A draft executive order on LGBT rights — which outlines how to roll back former president Barack Obama’s protections and expand legal exemptions based on religious beliefs — has been circulating among journalists and worried progressive groups this week.
But two sources close to Kushner and Ivanka Trump, who have in the past been supporters of gay rights, said the young couple were both in favor of putting out a clear statement from the president, promising to uphold the 2014 Obama executive order and stopping the momentum for the turnaround in its tracks.
On Tuesday night, the White House released a statement noting that “President Donald J. Trump is determined to protect the rights of all Americans, including the LGBTQ community. President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election.”
Haven't ever heard anything bad about Ivanka which is cool.
apart from the fact that she truly believes she's some sort of self made woman who has succeeded in spite of being born into wealth and power.
President Trump on Thursday warned Israel that constructing new settlements “may not be helpful” to Middle East peace efforts despite--before taking office-- criticizing the Obama administration for not vetoing a United Nations Security Council measure condemning settlements.
The Washington Post reported that the Trump administration also “pulled back somewhat” on its pledge to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
David Halperin, the executive director of the Israel Policy Forum, told the paper that Trump’s move serves as a caution to Netanyahu.
“It’s a warning sign to the Israeli right that their celebration (of the new administration) may be premature,” he said.
The New York Times called Trump's appeal to Israel a "startling shift." The Jerusalem Post called the statement "surprising."
Any foreign country that sees Trump as their "new ally" may find themselves quite surprised that that will not actually be the case. He's just starting shit with allies and adversaries alike.
On February 04 2017 03:51 xDaunt wrote: Given that we're still on the topic, here's an interview that Milo gave to Tucker Carlson last night regarding what happened at Cal and his thoughts on how free speech is under attack:
I was particularly amused by the recitation of the headline from the NYTimes regarding the cancellation of the Cal event.
This professional provocateur, who was banned on Twitter after his harassment last summer of "Saturday Night Live" star Leslie Jones, has been making a name for himself with his "Dangerous Faggot" bus tour. In campus appearances across the nation the openly gay Yiannopoulos has made disparaging remarks about Muslims, minority students, members of the transgender community and other groups -- all in the name of free speech and the fight against political correctness.
His many detractors say he is a hatemonger. But Yiannopoulos believes he offers an important perspective that is missing at universities where liberal ideas typically go unchallenged. And he's inspiring other far-right speakers to visit college campuses in the hopes of swaying young minds. [...]
A transgender UC Davis student, who asked to be identified only as Barbara, told CNN she was too scared to be on campus during Yiannopoulos's scheduled visit and was fearful of his potential effect on her classmates. "The fear is with the folks who are gonna see him," she said. "He leaves. But the folks who are attending (his event) are the folks that I have to sit next to in classrooms." [...]
For his part, Yiannopoulos says he has nothing to do with Spencer or any white nationalists.
"I don't have unsavory opinions about skin color ... what you are seeking to do, by associating me with people who have odious and disgusting opinions, is suggest that I somehow in some way tacitly enable these people," he said. "I don't. F*ck you."
But Oren Segal, director of the Anti-Defamation League's Center on Extremism, believes Yiannopoulos "serves as a gateway" to more dangerous ideas.
"When you see white supremacists hanging outside of Milo's events to poach potential recruits, it speaks to exactly why Milo is potentially dangerous. Milo is bringing his misogyny and hatred and racism onto campus, and people (are) sort of maybe considering it, 'Oh, this is just ironic. He's just being -- you know, pushing the envelope.'" Segal said.
"And so it enables his ideology, his messages to sort of seep in. The next level is maybe an openness to more white supremacist ideas, more hardcore believers. I think that's fundamentally dangerous."
CNN in true CNN fashion calling him the gateway drug to white supremacist ideas. This, sadly, is why we need firebrands on the right, because it didn't start with Milo or Trump, and has been going on for decades. I'd be the first to embrace cold discourse "Why are you opposed to the wall? Is it the cost, effectiveness? Do you want temporary travel bans extended to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan or do you think this whole thing is ineffective and current government screening is good enough?"
We're past that, if it wasn't obvious before, and now America gets Full Trump for at least four years. I don't see a way back (Make American Discourse Great Again) for at least a decade, where calls to let him speak are just as loud as minorities threatening with violence, and backward attempts to say he's inciting violence against GLBTQ people are met with laughter or disbelief.
Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner worked to sink LGBT order
Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump helped lead the charge to scuttle a draft executive order that would have overturned Obama-era enforcements of LGBT rights in the workplace, multiple sources with knowledge of the situation told POLITICO.
A draft executive order on LGBT rights — which outlines how to roll back former president Barack Obama’s protections and expand legal exemptions based on religious beliefs — has been circulating among journalists and worried progressive groups this week.
But two sources close to Kushner and Ivanka Trump, who have in the past been supporters of gay rights, said the young couple were both in favor of putting out a clear statement from the president, promising to uphold the 2014 Obama executive order and stopping the momentum for the turnaround in its tracks.
On Tuesday night, the White House released a statement noting that “President Donald J. Trump is determined to protect the rights of all Americans, including the LGBTQ community. President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election.”
Haven't ever heard anything bad about Ivanka which is cool.
apart from the fact that she truly believes she's some sort of self made woman who has succeeded in spite of being born into wealth and power.
poor little rich girl.
as long as she uses her fortune for others I don't see a problem with it?
EPT
