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.
In other news, Facebook counties to undermine our democracy.
You know we do this type of stuff too right? We've all been doing it (with time-relevant technology) for a long time. The US is easily among the top offenders.
As much of a prick Zuckerburg is and as problematic as facebook is, it's only useful to look at in the larger context rather than any specific event in a single election.
Please show me the FB or Russian social-media group, called something like "Heart of Moscow", that was created by an American government operation. We're the "top offenders" of government-run social-media operations to subvert other countries' public-opinions? You sure about that?
And regardless, whether the equivocation is false or not, really doesn't matter, does it?
You would really be surprised to find a US funded (through more rigorous back channels) social media group spouting anti-Putin propaganda (given it's less necessary to wholly fabricate)?
I mean we've funded militias to overthrow legitimately elected leaders, but you think it would either be too hard or too far to run a social media propaganda outlet?
I think the entire discussion is a gigantic waste of time. Does the US fuck with other countries? Yes. Does the US not want other countries to fuck with it? Yes. I expect this out of every country. If you're not swimming, you're drowning.
In other news, Facebook counties to undermine our democracy.
You know we do this type of stuff too right? We've all been doing it (with time-relevant technology) for a long time. The US is easily among the top offenders.
As much of a prick Zuckerburg is and as problematic as facebook is, it's only useful to look at in the larger context rather than any specific event in a single election.
Please show me the FB or Russian social-media group, called something like "Heart of Moscow", that was created by an American government operation. We're the "top offenders" of government-run social-media operations to subvert other countries' public-opinions? You sure about that?
And regardless, whether the equivocation is false or not, really doesn't matter, does it?
You would really be surprised to find a US funded (through more rigorous back channels) social media group spouting anti-Putin propaganda (given it's less necessary to wholly fabricate)?
I mean we've funded militias to overthrow legitimately elected leaders, but you think it would either be too hard or too far to run a social media propaganda outlet?
I think the entire discussion is a gigantic waste of time. Does the US fuck with other countries? Yes. Does the US not want other countries to fuck with it? Yes. I expect this out of every country. If you're not swimming, you're drowning.
Aren't you supposed to float to avoid drowning, not swim?
Anyway, I agree that pointing at something like the Russian facebook thing is a waste of time and was my initial point. That for the conversation to be of value it should be focused on the larger issues of international interference in elections/politics rather than a particular event feeding a dead-horse narrative.
In other news, Facebook counties to undermine our democracy.
You know we do this type of stuff too right? We've all been doing it (with time-relevant technology) for a long time. The US is easily among the top offenders.
As much of a prick Zuckerburg is and as problematic as facebook is, it's only useful to look at in the larger context rather than any specific event in a single election.
Please show me the FB or Russian social-media group, called something like "Heart of Moscow", that was created by an American government operation. We're the "top offenders" of government-run social-media operations to subvert other countries' public-opinions? You sure about that?
And regardless, whether the equivocation is false or not, really doesn't matter, does it?
You would really be surprised to find a US funded (through more rigorous back channels) social media group spouting anti-Putin propaganda (given it's less necessary to wholly fabricate)?
I mean we've funded militias to overthrow legitimately elected leaders, but you think it would either be too hard or too far to run a social media propaganda outlet?
I think the entire discussion is a gigantic waste of time. Does the US fuck with other countries? Yes. Does the US not want other countries to fuck with it? Yes. I expect this out of every country. If you're not swimming, you're drowning.
Aren't you supposed to float to avoid drowning, not swim?
Anyway, I agree that pointing at something like the Russian facebook thing is a waste of time and was my initial point. That for the conversation to be of value it should be focused on the larger issues of international interference in elections/politics rather than a particular event feeding a dead-horse narrative.
It's a reference to a saying about sharks, which I think is more apt considering the subject.
She probably also forgot she approved this commercial
She's falling apart at the seems it appears. Honestly I actually hope she keeps it up, she's been the best at turning Democrats away from the establishment.
The Democratic party is best served if she is a vocal public figure all the way through to 2020. She embodies the detached party leader unconcerned with the needs of her party's base.
In other news, Facebook counties to undermine our democracy.
You know we do this type of stuff too right? We've all been doing it (with time-relevant technology) for a long time. The US is easily among the top offenders.
As much of a prick Zuckerburg is and as problematic as facebook is, it's only useful to look at in the larger context rather than any specific event in a single election.
Please show me the FB or Russian social-media group, called something like "Heart of Moscow", that was created by an American government operation. We're the "top offenders" of government-run social-media operations to subvert other countries' public-opinions? You sure about that?
And regardless, whether the equivocation is false or not, really doesn't matter, does it?
You would really be surprised to find a US funded (through more rigorous back channels) social media group spouting anti-Putin propaganda (given it's less necessary to wholly fabricate)?
I mean we've funded militias to overthrow legitimately elected leaders, but you think it would either be too hard or too far to run a social media propaganda outlet?
I think the entire discussion is a gigantic waste of time. Does the US fuck with other countries? Yes. Does the US not want other countries to fuck with it? Yes. I expect this out of every country. If you're not swimming, you're drowning.
Aren't you supposed to float to avoid drowning, not swim?
Anyway, I agree that pointing at something like the Russian facebook thing is a waste of time and was my initial point. That for the conversation to be of value it should be focused on the larger issues of international interference in elections/politics rather than a particular event feeding a dead-horse narrative.
The sad thing is, for most people here "focused on larger issues of interference" simply equals to russian interference in the US election, even though there's way more to that "issue of interfering" than russia.
One that btw continuously bites you in the ass.
Please show me the FB or Russian social-media group, called something like "Heart of Moscow", that was created by an American government operation. We're the "top offenders" of government-run social-media operations to subvert other countries' public-opinions? You sure about that?
Yugoslavia, 2000? 40 million dollars? That'd be a good start to enter. It went so far that the candidate that you were supporting urged you to stop because it was starting to look weird.
Eight residents at a sweltering nursing home died after Hurricane Irma knocked out the air conditioning, raising fears on Wednesday about the safety of Florida’s 4 million senior citizens amid widespread power outages that could go on for days.
The Hollywood police chief, Tom Sanchez, said investigators believed the deaths at the Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills were heat-related, and added: “The building has been sealed off and we are conducting a criminal investigation.” He did not elaborate.
“It’s a sad state of affairs,” Sanchez said. “We all have elderly people in facilities, and we all know we depend on those people in those facilities to care for a vulnerable elderly population.”
Governor Rick Scott called on Florida emergency workers to immediately check on nursing homes and assisted living facilities to make sure residents were safe. He ordered an investigation into what he called an “unfathomable” situation. “I am demanding answers,” he wrote on Twitter.
The home said in a statement that the hurricane had knocked out a transformer that powered the air conditioning. Exactly how the deaths happened was under investigation, with Sanchez saying authorities had not ruled anything out, including carbon monoxide poisoning from generators. He also said investigators would look into how many windows were open in the nursing home.
Across the street from the nursing home sat a fully air-conditioned hospital, Memorial Regional.
The deaths came as people trying to put their lives back together in hurricane-stricken Florida and beyond confronted a multitude of new hazards in the storm’s wake, including tree-clearing accidents and lethal fumes from generators. Not counting the nursing home deaths, at least 14 people in Florida have died under Irma-related circumstances, and six more in South Carolina and Georgia, many of them well after the storm had passed. The death toll across the Caribbean stood at 38.
The most intense rescue mission continued to be in the Florida Keys, where entire communities have been cut off for days with no access to power, food or water. Search and rescue operations continued in Cudjoe Key, the epicenter of what has been described as a humanitarian crisis in the Keys, where the eye of the hurricane landed on Sunday morning.
In an echo of the trauma that had befallen the residents of the nursing home in Hollywood, concern was mounting for an older couple in Cudjoe who were reported by neighbors to the Guardian to be in trouble. An older man, described as in his late 60s or early 70s, had spent 26 hours lying on the floor of his house after his wheelchair had toppled over during the category four storm with his wife, who has Alzheimer’s, unable to assist.
He spent 26 hours on the floor before he was rescued by the neighbor, Tony Pothul, who had heard his cries for help while passing the house.
Military and civilian emergency reserves are now piling into the Keys, which bore the brunt of Irma’s force. Federal Urban Search and Rescue teams are also going house to house in Cudjoe, Big Pine and other communities where there are fears that older and vulnerable people might still be in danger.
At least five people died and more than a dozen were treated after breathing carbon monoxide fumes from generators in the Orlando, Miami and Daytona Beach areas. A Tampa man died after the chainsaw he was using to remove trees kicked back and cut his carotid artery.
In Hollywood, three residents were found dead at the nursing home early Wednesday after emergency workers received a call about a person with a heart attack, and five more died later, police said.
Altogether, more than 100 residents there were found to be suffering in the heat and were evacuated, many on stretchers or in wheelchairs. They were treated for dehydration, breathing difficulties and other heat-related ills, authorities said.
Nursing homes in Florida are required by state and federal law to file emergency plans that include evacuation plans for residents. Any plan submitted by the Hollywood center was not immediately available.
Calls to the owner and other officials at the Hollywood home were not immediately returned, but the facility’s administrator, Jorge Caballo, said in a statement that it was “cooperating fully with relevant authorities to investigate the circumstances that led to this unfortunate and tragic outcome”.
Through a representative, Carballo told the Sun Sentinel newspaper that the home had a back-up generator but that it did not power the air conditioning.
The nursing home was bought at a bankruptcy auction two years ago after its previous owner went to prison for Medicare fraud, according to news reports at the time of the sale.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which regulates nursing homes, gives the Hollywood center a below-average rating, two stars on its five-star scale. But the most recent state inspection reports showed no deficiencies in the area of emergency plans.
Florida, long one of America’s top retirement destinations, has the highest proportion of people 65 and older of any state: one in five of its 20 million residents. As of 2016, Florida had about 680 nursing homes.
As of Tuesday, the number of people without electricity in the steamy late-summer heat had dropped to 6.8 million, about a third of Florida’s population. Utility officials warned it could take 10 days or more for power to be fully restored. The number of people remaining in shelters fell to under 13,000.
On September 14 2017 07:45 LegalLord wrote: I dunno, I ask European looking people where they're from as well. As of yet the only people I've seen who get offended are the people who go out of their way to be offended. Plenty of people asked me the same and I never cared. Mostly just makes for good conversation.
How does a "European looking" person look like as opposed to European Americans (white people)?
There are signs if you know what to look for.
On September 14 2017 08:07 GreenHorizons wrote: Also don't presume because people were polite to you despite you being rude (doesn't matter if you think it's rude) that they weren't offended.
lol
Please, do tell. I'm terribly curious.
There are notable facial features that distinguish someone from "decidedly American" in favor of "recent European ancestry." Beyond that there are mannerisms, dress choices, etc., that are a dead giveaway. Sort of similar story for Japanese/Chinese/Korean differences. Subtle, but given a pretty high accuracy rate in being able to determine who's from where I suspect it's not nothing.
Names or accents are a blatantly obvious factor, of course. It's all about knowing what to look for. And 90% of people are very much happy to talk about it if prodded - though generally not without some degree of intrigue about being asked.
On September 14 2017 07:45 LegalLord wrote: I dunno, I ask European looking people where they're from as well. As of yet the only people I've seen who get offended are the people who go out of their way to be offended. Plenty of people asked me the same and I never cared. Mostly just makes for good conversation.
It's not so much asking where someone's from, it's the "where are you *really* from" follow-up that's annoying like they don't take your response at face value. If I said I'm from the US, I mean I'm from the US. If you want to ask my ethnicity, then cool, ask me that. But don't ask me where I'm from and then act like I'm not telling you the truth because it doesn't match your assumptions.
"Where are you from?" is fine. "No, where are you *really* from?" after I already answered your question? Fuck off.
That's more an issue of being rude. I wonder how many people would be offended by, "what country does your family hail from?" or something similar.
On September 14 2017 08:27 TheYango wrote: EDIT: From your responses Legal, it seems like you don't get what people find annoying about this situation because you've never been in it. I don't care that people ask me where I'm from. I care that people don't take my response as genuine because I look like I'm from somewhere in the world that doesn't match their up-front assessment of me based on my skin color. You probably don't do this, but I've definitely encountered people who do.
I mean, I'm as much a pure-blooded whitey as anyone could be, but I do get similar stuff more adapted for my specific situation. No "where are you really from?" because I make no effort to hide where I'm from for people who are interesting enough to engage in conversation in the first place, but it comes with it's own brand of shit ("are you a KGB spy?" and variations thereof, I have run into). Though from a CYA HR perspective I would give a different advice, as a matter of being personally offended or not I would simply say that it's best not to just find excuses to be offended at every random bullshit thing you come across.
Is Schumer possessed by demons? What's the secret of his legislative powers? That Trump is starting to ditch Republicans is hilarious. I hope his numbers go up now and the Democrat mole theory proves right after all.
On September 14 2017 11:30 Nyxisto wrote: Is Schumer possessed by demons? What's the secret of his legislative powers? That Trump is starting to ditch Republicans is hilarious. I hope his numbers go up now and the Democrat mole theory proves right after all.
They are the party of no, which isn't a viable solution for someone who wants accomplishments under his belt.
Democrats say they agreed to make a DACA deal with Trump — without the border wall
-Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released a statement following a White House dinner with President Donald Trump -"We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that's acceptable to both sides," they said
The top congressional Democrats on Wednesday night said they reached a deal with President Donald Trump to shield about 800,000 young immigrants from deportation — without the president's proposed border wall as a condition.
"We had a productive meeting at the White House with the President. The discussion focused on DACA," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement following a White House dinner with Trump.
"We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that's acceptable to both sides," they added.
The leaders specifically agreed to pair the DREAM Act — legislation that offers the young immigrants an eventual path to permanent residency and citizenship that's previously failed in Congress — with other border security provisions, a person briefed on the meeting said.
White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders disputed the Democrats' version of events, saying, "excluding the wall was certainly not agreed to."
Last week, Trump ended the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, with a six-month delay to encourage Congress to pass its protections into law. The policy shields certain undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children and authorizes them to work for two years.
Congressional leaders from both parties and Trump have recently supported passing the protections into law. But Trump's potential insistence on making funding for his proposed wall a condition of a bill — a nonstarter for Democrats — could have threatened a measure to protect so-called dreamers.
Schumer and Pelosi did not specify which border security provisions would be included as part of the DACA bill.
Earlier Wednesday, House Speaker Paul Ryan said kicking out the immigrants protected by DACA "is not in our nation's interest." He added, however, that he wanted any legislation protecting them to get paired with border security measures.
The agreement announced by Schumer and Pelosi comes amid a period of increased engagement between Trump and Democrats. Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell did not attend the dinner on Wednesday night.
Last week, Trump struck a deal with Democratic leaders to attach hurricane aid to a debt ceiling extension and government funding, both for only three months — over the objections of Republican leaders.
S.H.Sanders says the wall isn't off the table just yet, unfortunately. That being said, it's pretty clear that anyone can make a good deal against Trump, especially if you're in the Democratic minority.
On September 14 2017 11:30 Nyxisto wrote: Is Schumer possessed by demons? What's the secret of his legislative powers? That Trump is starting to ditch Republicans is hilarious. I hope his numbers go up now and the Democrat mole theory proves right after all.
The question isn't Schumer ... him and Trump go way back. The question is what took Trump this long?
On September 14 2017 11:30 Nyxisto wrote: Is Schumer possessed by demons? What's the secret of his legislative powers? That Trump is starting to ditch Republicans is hilarious. I hope his numbers go up now and the Democrat mole theory proves right after all.
EPT
