|
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. |
On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:
Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect.
IN OTHER NEWS
We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is.
The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives.
|
On January 21 2018 05:59 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect. IN OTHER NEWS We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954788467069870081 The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives.
Shitgibbons? I agree with your post but I particularly like this new word.
Of course, Republicans will probably insist that you said shitgoblins instead of shitgibbons, or whatever.
|
On January 21 2018 05:59 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect. IN OTHER NEWS We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954788467069870081 The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives.
I've already stated my opinion on his tweets and think he'd be more successful without most of them. That being said, a tweet isn't going to start a nuclear war and thinking so is ridiculous.
|
On January 21 2018 06:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 05:59 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect. IN OTHER NEWS We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954788467069870081 The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives. Shitgibbons? I agree with your post but I particularly like this new word. Of course, Republicans will probably insist that you said shitgoblins instead of shitgibbons, or whatever.
Well A gibbon I'm pretty sure is the prison that Caribbean pirates where locked in a lot where they were in a cage outside elevated up a bit and out in the sun. It doesn't really make sense to call them shit prisons when the inherent design of it actually prevents shit from piling up in the prison and the prison was for pirates anyway.
Plus people know what goblins are and that would make more sense to anyone.
|
On January 21 2018 06:08 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 05:59 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect. IN OTHER NEWS We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954788467069870081 The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives. I've already stated my opinion on his tweets and think he'd be more successful without most of them. That being said, a tweet isn't going to start a nuclear war and thinking so is ridiculous.
No, tweets unarguably don't start nuclear wars.
Really, really shitty relations do. But thank god you got the best dealmaker, peoplesperson and humble servant you could get as president, so really no fears of that ever happening.
|
On January 21 2018 06:15 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 06:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 21 2018 05:59 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect. IN OTHER NEWS We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954788467069870081 The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives. Shitgibbons? I agree with your post but I particularly like this new word. Of course, Republicans will probably insist that you said shitgoblins instead of shitgibbons, or whatever. Well A gibbon I'm pretty sure is the prison that Caribbean pirates where locked in a lot where they were in a cage outside elevated up a bit and out in the sun. It doesn't really make sense to call them shit prisons when the inherent design of it actually prevents shit from piling up in the prison and the prison was for pirates anyway. Plus people know what goblins are and that would make more sense to anyone.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shitgibbon
It's an actual thing. Means "person similar to trump" or "despicable asshole". Something along those lines.
|
On January 21 2018 06:15 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 06:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 21 2018 05:59 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect. IN OTHER NEWS We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954788467069870081 The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives. Shitgibbons? I agree with your post but I particularly like this new word. Of course, Republicans will probably insist that you said shitgoblins instead of shitgibbons, or whatever. Well A gibbon I'm pretty sure is the prison that Caribbean pirates where locked in a lot where they were in a cage outside elevated up a bit and out in the sun. It doesn't really make sense to call them shit prisons when the inherent design of it actually prevents shit from piling up in the prison and the prison was for pirates anyway. Plus people know what goblins are and that would make more sense to anyone.
Gibbons are also apes, fwiw.
On January 21 2018 06:08 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 05:59 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect. IN OTHER NEWS We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954788467069870081 The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives. I've already stated my opinion on his tweets and think he'd be more successful without most of them. That being said, a tweet isn't going to start a nuclear war and thinking so is ridiculous.
I'm pretty sure that it's possible to come up with such a threatening or classified-leaking tweet that some world leaders decide to take drastic preemptive measures. That may not be someone pressing a nuke button, per se, but I have no doubt that Trump could say something dumb enough on social media that costs Americans lives and starts wars.
|
Before anybody decides that is sheer hyperbole, a Trump tweet had already endangered UK surveillance on domestic terrorists, so that isn't exactly a hypothetical.
|
On January 21 2018 06:15 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 06:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 21 2018 05:59 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect. IN OTHER NEWS We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954788467069870081 The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives. Shitgibbons? I agree with your post but I particularly like this new word. Of course, Republicans will probably insist that you said shitgoblins instead of shitgibbons, or whatever. Well A gibbon I'm pretty sure is the prison that Caribbean pirates where locked in a lot where they were in a cage outside elevated up a bit and out in the sun. It doesn't really make sense to call them shit prisons when the inherent design of it actually prevents shit from piling up in the prison and the prison was for pirates anyway. Plus people know what goblins are and that would make more sense to anyone.
He wasn't calling them "shit prisons", he was calling them "shit prisms".
|
On January 21 2018 06:15 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 06:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 21 2018 05:59 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 21 2018 05:10 Introvert wrote:Schumer is of course an unreliable narrator, but "put the wall on the table" is so weasly everyone should be suspect. IN OTHER NEWS We all know the president trolls, but some still take his tweets super seriously. If we needed any more evidence that he really does just troll here it is. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954788467069870081 The leader of a nation with access to nuclear weapons trolling in what we have been told to take as official White-house correspondence is so f***ing ridiculously insane and unacceptable. It's apologist BS that has no right to fly and were it not for the Republicans being shameless, morally and ethically bankrupt s***gibbons running off a cult-of-personality base to keep them in office, it wouldn't. When someone with that much power speaks their mind, you'd be an idiot not to listen. Don't defend this as mere trolling, idiots on 4-chan don't sign and veto policy that changes millions of lives. Shitgibbons? I agree with your post but I particularly like this new word. Of course, Republicans will probably insist that you said shitgoblins instead of shitgibbons, or whatever. Well A gibbon I'm pretty sure is the prison that Caribbean pirates where locked in a lot where they were in a cage outside elevated up a bit and out in the sun. It doesn't really make sense to call them shit prisons when the inherent design of it actually prevents shit from piling up in the prison and the prison was for pirates anyway. Plus people know what goblins are and that would make more sense to anyone.
Thats a Gibbet, not a gibbon.
|
On January 20 2018 14:33 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 14:29 NewSunshine wrote:On January 20 2018 14:27 Introvert wrote:
I find it fascinating that in 2013 it was the minority party's fault but this time we all play dumb and pretend the filibuster doesn't exist. Especially funny since Schumer objected to the motion for unanimous consent to move to a vote.
Shows how intellectually bankrupt Democrats are on shutdown politics. Republicans blamed their own party last time. Are you really about to pretend that with Republicans in control of the House, the Senate, and the White House, the Democrats are to blame in any meaningful way? Your boys did this. Own it and hold them accountable. Yep! One party suggested a clean bill, the other ensured it required 60 votes then didn't grant them. I'm making actual arguments while everyone here is being intellectually dishonest to an amazing extent and making vague arguments about "controlling all branches." In previous years we would have heard about how the minority party has to make sacrifices and accept that they don't run it all. Now, that argument has disappeared. It has to be dishonesty, no one in this thread is stupid enough to try and argue it's any different, so they don't. So have fun, the primaries will be so much more boring.
This is way back now, but want to highlight how true this is. I'm honestly sort of flabbergasted at the doublethink tbh.
Interestingly, it's not just here. The official line from Schumer appears to be "they control all three branches" while conveniently ignoring they're still unable to avoid a shutdown without Dem votes.
If someone wanted to argue DACA is worth it and shutdown politics is justified now but wasn't in 2013, I could at least disagree while understanding the argument. Instead, the suspension of reason/active ignorance feels eerily Trumpian. It's even more worrisome to me when the supposed intellectual party are willing to fall for this nonsense tbh.
|
On January 21 2018 07:14 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 14:33 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 14:29 NewSunshine wrote:On January 20 2018 14:27 Introvert wrote:
I find it fascinating that in 2013 it was the minority party's fault but this time we all play dumb and pretend the filibuster doesn't exist. Especially funny since Schumer objected to the motion for unanimous consent to move to a vote.
Shows how intellectually bankrupt Democrats are on shutdown politics. Republicans blamed their own party last time. Are you really about to pretend that with Republicans in control of the House, the Senate, and the White House, the Democrats are to blame in any meaningful way? Your boys did this. Own it and hold them accountable. Yep! One party suggested a clean bill, the other ensured it required 60 votes then didn't grant them. I'm making actual arguments while everyone here is being intellectually dishonest to an amazing extent and making vague arguments about "controlling all branches." In previous years we would have heard about how the minority party has to make sacrifices and accept that they don't run it all. Now, that argument has disappeared. It has to be dishonesty, no one in this thread is stupid enough to try and argue it's any different, so they don't. So have fun, the primaries will be so much more boring. This is way back now, but want to highlight how true this is. I'm honestly sort of flabbergasted at the doublethink tbh. Interestingly, it's not just here. The official line from Schumer appears to be "they control all three branches" while conveniently ignoring they're still unable to avoid a shutdown without Dem votes. If someone wanted to argue DACA is worth it and shutdown politics is justified now but wasn't in 2013, I could at least disagree while understanding the argument. Instead, the suspension of reason/active ignorance feels eerily Trumpian. It's even more worrisome to me when the supposed intellectual party are willing to fall for this nonsense tbh.
There was a bi-partisan deal. Trump said fuck it.
The end.
|
On January 21 2018 07:19 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 07:14 mozoku wrote:On January 20 2018 14:33 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 14:29 NewSunshine wrote:On January 20 2018 14:27 Introvert wrote:
I find it fascinating that in 2013 it was the minority party's fault but this time we all play dumb and pretend the filibuster doesn't exist. Especially funny since Schumer objected to the motion for unanimous consent to move to a vote.
Shows how intellectually bankrupt Democrats are on shutdown politics. Republicans blamed their own party last time. Are you really about to pretend that with Republicans in control of the House, the Senate, and the White House, the Democrats are to blame in any meaningful way? Your boys did this. Own it and hold them accountable. Yep! One party suggested a clean bill, the other ensured it required 60 votes then didn't grant them. I'm making actual arguments while everyone here is being intellectually dishonest to an amazing extent and making vague arguments about "controlling all branches." In previous years we would have heard about how the minority party has to make sacrifices and accept that they don't run it all. Now, that argument has disappeared. It has to be dishonesty, no one in this thread is stupid enough to try and argue it's any different, so they don't. So have fun, the primaries will be so much more boring. This is way back now, but want to highlight how true this is. I'm honestly sort of flabbergasted at the doublethink tbh. Interestingly, it's not just here. The official line from Schumer appears to be "they control all three branches" while conveniently ignoring they're still unable to avoid a shutdown without Dem votes. If someone wanted to argue DACA is worth it and shutdown politics is justified now but wasn't in 2013, I could at least disagree while understanding the argument. Instead, the suspension of reason/active ignorance feels eerily Trumpian. It's even more worrisome to me when the supposed intellectual party are willing to fall for this nonsense tbh. There was a bi-partisan deal. Trump said fuck it. The end.
*Trump said fuck it, McConnell and Ryan don't even have the balls to make him officially say fuck it or see if whether there's enough support for the bipartisan bill to make it veto-proof.
Part of what makes it relevant they have the majority in all three chambers is that they control all the bills that go to the floors of both the House and Senate, and have enough power to override a veto with less than half of the opposition party. Or would, if Ryan and McConnell had even an iota of power over their chambers beyond procedure.
The Democrats in 2013 couldn't even send a "clean" CR to the House floor to attract Rs as far as I know until Boehner signed on as anti-shutdown + Obamacare repeal, since Boehner was majority leader.
|
On January 21 2018 07:19 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2018 07:14 mozoku wrote:On January 20 2018 14:33 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 14:29 NewSunshine wrote:On January 20 2018 14:27 Introvert wrote:
I find it fascinating that in 2013 it was the minority party's fault but this time we all play dumb and pretend the filibuster doesn't exist. Especially funny since Schumer objected to the motion for unanimous consent to move to a vote.
Shows how intellectually bankrupt Democrats are on shutdown politics. Republicans blamed their own party last time. Are you really about to pretend that with Republicans in control of the House, the Senate, and the White House, the Democrats are to blame in any meaningful way? Your boys did this. Own it and hold them accountable. Yep! One party suggested a clean bill, the other ensured it required 60 votes then didn't grant them. I'm making actual arguments while everyone here is being intellectually dishonest to an amazing extent and making vague arguments about "controlling all branches." In previous years we would have heard about how the minority party has to make sacrifices and accept that they don't run it all. Now, that argument has disappeared. It has to be dishonesty, no one in this thread is stupid enough to try and argue it's any different, so they don't. So have fun, the primaries will be so much more boring. This is way back now, but want to highlight how true this is. I'm honestly sort of flabbergasted at the doublethink tbh. Interestingly, it's not just here. The official line from Schumer appears to be "they control all three branches" while conveniently ignoring they're still unable to avoid a shutdown without Dem votes. If someone wanted to argue DACA is worth it and shutdown politics is justified now but wasn't in 2013, I could at least disagree while understanding the argument. Instead, the suspension of reason/active ignorance feels eerily Trumpian. It's even more worrisome to me when the supposed intellectual party are willing to fall for this nonsense tbh. There was a bi-partisan deal. Trump said fuck it. The end.
To be fair he was probably on a sugar comedown around that point and someone on Twitter might have said something mean about him so you can't expect him to be at 100%
|
On January 21 2018 07:14 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 14:33 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 14:29 NewSunshine wrote:On January 20 2018 14:27 Introvert wrote:
I find it fascinating that in 2013 it was the minority party's fault but this time we all play dumb and pretend the filibuster doesn't exist. Especially funny since Schumer objected to the motion for unanimous consent to move to a vote.
Shows how intellectually bankrupt Democrats are on shutdown politics. Republicans blamed their own party last time. Are you really about to pretend that with Republicans in control of the House, the Senate, and the White House, the Democrats are to blame in any meaningful way? Your boys did this. Own it and hold them accountable. Yep! One party suggested a clean bill, the other ensured it required 60 votes then didn't grant them. I'm making actual arguments while everyone here is being intellectually dishonest to an amazing extent and making vague arguments about "controlling all branches." In previous years we would have heard about how the minority party has to make sacrifices and accept that they don't run it all. Now, that argument has disappeared. It has to be dishonesty, no one in this thread is stupid enough to try and argue it's any different, so they don't. So have fun, the primaries will be so much more boring. This is way back now, but want to highlight how true this is. I'm honestly sort of flabbergasted at the doublethink tbh. Interestingly, it's not just here. The official line from Schumer appears to be "they control all three branches" while conveniently ignoring they're still unable to avoid a shutdown without Dem votes. If someone wanted to argue DACA is worth it and shutdown politics is justified now but wasn't in 2013, I could at least disagree while understanding the argument. Instead, the suspension of reason/active ignorance feels eerily Trumpian. It's even more worrisome to me when the supposed intellectual party are willing to fall for this nonsense tbh.
I mean, if we take each party at their word, both parties supported a "clean short-term CR." They just disagreed on how long the short-term should be. Republicans wanted 4 weeks, Democrats wanted it shorter. If your reasoning is "Republicans offered a 4 week CR, Democrats refused, therefore Democrats are to blame," why does the logic "Democrats offered a 2 week CR, Republicans refused, therefore Republicans are to blame" not equally apply? Only the Republicans' offer got a vote, but that's because as mentioned, they control both houses so they decide what gets voted on. I think you're putting a lot of stock in the theater of the vote that was held, without looking at the actual bargaining positions of the parties involved. If you always judge by "who officially voted against the last proposal to keep the government open," you're always gonna wind up siding with the majority, because if they didn't like a proposal they'd just not put it to a vote in the first place.
|
|
|
If you control the leadership in both houses of congress, you control the floor in both houses. If you can't put a bill on the floor that will pass, you failed the leadership role. People can blame the Democrats all they want, but the DACA demand has been building for months now. Republicans knew it was coming. Adding CHIP on at the end to sweeten the deal, after ignoring it for over 100 days while people feared or were losing coverage only pissed senate Democrats off.
GOP runs the floor. They could have passed DACA or CHIP any time in the last 3 months. They tried to call the Democrats bluff, but it wasn't a bluff.
|
The really sad part is, you can tell that many trumpets actually resonate with that bullshit.
|
Just a friendly reminder the original DACA does not provide a path to citizenship or give you financial aid or welfare benefits. The DREAM act reintroduced by Flake offers an individual permanent residence status by serving in the military or going to an institute of higher learning (and a variety of other inclusions), after which they could begin the process of normal citizenship application.
But I guess "amnesty" is a big scary word when it's applied to people who were brought over by their parents and not Sheriffs who torture people.
|
Friend of mine's life is hanging in flux because of this whole thing. His whole life was a tightrope walk and DACA let him finally breath for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
