Not exactly keen on Buttigieg, but I'd really like to have a president under 70.
I like Yang in the sense that I can read the entirety of his Wikipedia entry's list of positions without wanting to slap my forehead or punch him.
...thankfully, none of their grandiose plans are going to make it to fruition, so they'll probably be about as inert as [Sleezebag], only making different noises.
I would just like to note that Biden called a woman a "lying, dog-faced pony soldier (https://slate.com/culture/2020/02/joe-biden-dog-faced-pony-soldier-john-wayne-tyrone-power.html)." That is awesome and I would like to vote for him to continue our "addled old man who utters gibberish" political tradition. Mmm, covfefe.
Not exactly keen on Buttigieg, but I'd really like to have a president under 70.
Doesn't seem like much to ask for, does it?
Age when elected
Kennedy- 43
Carter- 52
Clinton- 46
Obama- 47
I think Democrats do better with the change message when the messenger is younger.
This (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-11-20/robots-replacing-human-workers-isn-t-supported-by-data) economist claims you should be slapping your forehead.Well, it's not that I particularly believe in any of his UBI stuff; a little quick math suggests we couldn't come close to affording it. But we can't come close to affording any of the other leprechaun nonsense the others are proposing, and UBI would have the benefit of not creating any particularly gigantic new bureaucracies, and he's talking about phasing out some existing bureaucracies to balance. If this gets neutered into "just give the poor people money instead of this food stamp BS," as it potentially could, I'd be okay with that.
https://www.standard.net/news/government/weber-county-move-to-election-day-voting-at-union-station/article_2d8fe875-6717-58d8-9a32-508b67c2315b.html
TLDR: My county changed the polling locations to just one for the entire county for today. There were no announcements or info out there that it was happening.
If you're going to have ONE location, it's about as good as you could pick, being a central hub for most public transport, but it isolates a LOT of the poorer neighborhoods from easy access.
Hard to imagine what else it could be in a redder-than-red state...
:mad:
How Joe Biden Can Reach Progressiveshttps://arcdigital.media/how-joe-biden-can-reach-progressives-85cbfdd2f9f4?source=friends_link&sk=57ee7b44d6cee4181c7d7afa6adc22e6&gi=84d4ba910831
If Democrats nominate Biden, he will need progressives’ support to beat Donald [Sleezebag]. Here’s how he can get it.
by Noah Berlatsky
Mar 6
I’m a lefty socialist progressive, and like most lefty socialist progressives, I don’t much like Joe Biden. He was a segregationist in the 1970s, when he fought against busing and school integration. In 1988, he ran for president and plagiarized comments by a British Labour leader. In 1991, as head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he helped put Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court when the nominee’s colleague Anita Hill accused him of sexual assault. He’s been bad on mass incarceration. He helped push through a law making it impossible to file for bankruptcy on student loans, supercharging the student debt crisis. He won’t stop putting his hands on women in public. I could go on.
Given his record, there is no way I and most other progressives will be enthusiastic about voting for Biden in November if he consolidates his lead and wins the primary. But there are things he could do that would make me feel simply resigned and melancholy rather than actively tormented by the thought of having to pull the lever for him.
Biden admittedly is doing well in the primary without much support from Sanders or Warren voters. But the general election will be tough and more progressive support might help him with fundraising. Sanders impressively raised $34.5 million from small donors in the last three months of 2019. Reaching out to the left could also help Biden with younger voters. Sanders crushed Biden 65% to 11% among voters under 30 in Texas, and 72% to 5% percent in California early tallies.
So what could Biden do to appeal to the left? First of all, he could start talking and acting like he cares about their concerns. If he would stop gratuitously insulting poor and marginalized millennials, that would be a start. It would also be great if he would listen to, and respond respectively to, the concerns of activists and advocates. He’s been promising to put out a disability plan for months, but it’s still AWOL, to the great frustration of the disability community.
To get progressive votes, Biden could start by asking for them. His team has not made much effort to do that.
Even better than asking progressives for their votes is thanking them for their work. The best way to do that is to adopt some of their policies and priorities. Obviously, Biden isn’t going to adopt the Sanders/Warren platform wholesale. But it would mean a lot to me, and I think to other people on the left, if he took one or two of their proposals and made them his own.
I would love, for example, to see Biden adopt Elizabeth Warren’s 2 percent wealth tax on fortunes over 50 million. Soaking the very rich is an extremely popular proposal, and not just with leftists. It has a 50 percent approval rating among Republicans, and would allow Biden to draw a stark contrast with real estate heir Donald [Sleezebag]. The tax would generate some $4 trillion in income that could be used to fund Sanders’ free college proposal, or perhaps Warren’s exciting proposal for universal child care.
Hillary Clinton said that one of her regrets from 2016 was not embracing a shoot-the-moon, ambitious, inspiring progressive proposal as a campaign centerpiece (she was thinking in particular of universal basic income). There’s no reason for Biden to make the same mistake when Sanders, Warren, and others have proposed so many excellent progressive ideas during the primary.
Another obvious olive branch to progressives would be the vice presidency. VP picks often aim to appeal to certain demographic or geographic constituencies. But after Sanders’ strong showing two cycles in a row, it’s past time to give a progressive a shot at the office, and at a stronger presidential bid down the road. And much as a northerner might consider adding a someone from the south for electoral benefit, Biden can shore up an electoral weakness with a VP who appeals to the left.
Sanders and Warren themselves are both perhaps too old to serve as VP for the 77-year-old Biden. But former HUD secretary and current Warren surrogate Julian Castro would be an excellent choice. So would California Congressman and Sanders surrogate Ro Khanna. Even if the vice presidency goes elsewhere, it could help if Biden indicated some willingness to put Warren, Sanders, or other progressives — like, for example, Sanders supporter and surrogate, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — in his cabinet.
Finally, it would help Biden a great deal with progressives if he occasionally spoke as if he understood the urgency of our current moment. Faced with a Republican party that has cosigned the president’s efforts to solicit foreign election interference, and has actively tried to deny their own constituents healthcare, Biden has responded with chipper appeals to bipartisanship and vague gestures at conciliation. He claims the Republican party will return to decency if only [Sleezebag] is voted out of office. He’s made noises about choosing a Republican running mate. He’s repeatedly said he wants to return politics to “normal.”
Some of these appeals are panders, not promises. There’s little chance a Republican would agree to run on a Democratic ticket, as Biden surely knows. But still, Biden seems most comfortable speaking the language of conciliation, and this is not a conciliatory time. Republicans are engaging in ambitious voter suppression efforts. [Sleezebag] is filling the courts with judges who refuse to hold the executive even minimally accountable. Meanwhile the world barrels towards a climate crisis, and right-wing authoritarian governments gain strength around the globe.
[Sleezebag] has done serious, frightening damage to our democracy. We need a president who will take aggressive steps not just to fix the damage, but to make sure those responsible are not able to do even worse the next time they get into office.
Progressives are not excited about Joe Biden because he seems to want only to beat [Sleezebag]. But we want, at the very least, to make future Trumps impossible. If Biden could bring himself to say that, he’d go some way towards reconciling progressives to his presidency.
-But, on the other hand, this is JOE BIDEN we're talking about - tripping over his tongue/misspeaking is sorta his signature going decades back.
BTW - am I correct in assuming that if the Pig had ever been hired in the first place at your house, he'd now be fired yet again for fiddling while the 19 crows virus burns?
-I think that right there is impeachable all by itself, and completely refutes Elok's assertion that his incompetence renders him harmless, to boot.
Liberal Circular Firing Squads - LCFS?
Y'know, a few days ago, the silly SOB re-tweated a shooped pic of him holding a violin, and naturally some of the Liberals Screaming On Twitter -hereinafter LSOT- promptly started calling him Nero. He walked right into that one.
I assume someone took over this position since 2018?
I heard today that [Sleezebag]'s event here has been postponed. Then I remembered that yesterday the Democratic mayor banned all meetings over 250 people. My guess is he didn't consult [Sleezebag].
To expand on your last phrase, I will say that the Party closing ranks and organizing against him so completely hints that a Sanders presidency would be a lot like a Romney one would have been - born dead, because you can't do ANYthing without the support of your own side...
ANYone in TV news mentioning that the Pig lies when his lips move? Who?
They are derelict in their duty to carry those mid-day pressers live, frankly. They are news, but should be covered that afternoon, when fact-checking has taken place and the lies/unfacts can be covered - this would not be mere political journalism, so many lives being at stake. They aid his negligent mass-homicide when they enable him w/ live coverage. That guy at NBC IS a terrible journalist - they all are, only for the opposite reason than the Pig claims.
...So I sez to Mom yesterday, I sez "When the other old church ladies say 'socialism' you say 'The New Deal'".Several days ago, Mom watched some WPA depression-era pseudo-documentary about a black family in Georgia working hard and saving to buy better equipment and get ahead, w/ friendly neighbors who turned out to help in a big way when a fire broke out on the logging site. We talked a fair bit about the New Deal values it pushed, not least at all the good neighbors/people doing the right thing in a crisis/positive collective action...
-It didn't really end the Depression -that was WWII turning up- but it kept a lot of people going until it was over. THAT'S one of those rare things Big Government is good for; getting people over the hump in a crisis.
So, we were bitching about politics tonight when I came in from feeding the cats, especially a lot of dirtbaggery and hate-slash-lying on the right and the harm it causes, and I was quoting what she said last time after we voted in the primary for Bernie about it just being Christian for people to look out for each other --- and Mamma spread her arms wide and said "SOCIALISM! We need a little socialism." She was serious.
?
Thus, I will not be shocked if he wins again. This is somehow WORKING for him.
I hope a lot of his followers try to self medicate with that.They likely have already been huffing Lysol for years...
So...as many of you are aware, I work in the military/industrial complex in an extremely red state.
There are a LOT of people who seem to think [Sleezebag] is handling this marvelously. As in thank god [Sleezebag] was in charge as he's saving millions of lives. I'm really struggling to understand this point of view. I mean I disagree with these people quite often, but at least normally I can see where they are coming from. Yes, even up til now. But I'm really struggling to see how any of this can be construed as not just an adequate response, but an actual fantastic response.
Thus, I will not be shocked if he wins again. This is somehow WORKING for him.
I keep thinking about what will happen, IF we have some states use a Mail in Ballot, due to C-19 and [Sleezebag] loses those states and gets voted out of office. What will [Sleezebag] do to claim "Fake Votes" and try to invalidate the election. I really doubt that he will leave office without a fight that will further divide the country with everything else that has happened.
I wonder whether he is planning on shutting down the postal service before the election.
Very much federal; IIRC the Constitution expressly gives the feds authority over the post, but I could be wrong.
Incidentally, Justin Amash says he's going to try to be the Libertarian candidate this year. After perusing his wiki entry, I'm inclined to vote for him even though I'm 99.5% confident he won't win. Just to signal-boost.
There's also the part where not all the horrible authoritarians are on [Sleezebag]'s side (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/what-covid-revealed-about-internet/610549/). Not that Biden has come out in favor of Chinese-style censorship, but he doesn't have a history of good judgment where aggressive interventions are concerned, and there seems to be a worrisomely large amount of support on the Left for protecting the little people from unapproved opinions.I sense you possess a bias against authoritarianism.
/me groans
I have over the last few years made a public speech in front of more than 50 people on the practicality of communist features in American society, the benefits of those features against the current American system, and held private discussions on the matter multiple times. You can laugh or groan about my positions, but I have influenced people with my rhetoric. I intend to influence more people./me groans
;lol
Well, I'm not going to tell you not to write, but you may have to work at polishing your writing a great deal to get us to overlook all the corpses. And torture chambers. And show trials. And famines. And prison camps.A leader does not need the mass support of the subjects because the majority of the people in the society need only fear the ruling group and not necessarily love the group. Good rulers need only the avoidance of hate from their subjects.
First rule of persuasive writing/speaking: know your audience. When the majority of your posts come across as keyword-triggered propaganda pamphlets, don't expect much from people engaged in actual conversations.Furthermore, the lame book-communism has mutated from Marx -who had a couple of good points, for all of the colossal naivete on human nature making it unworkable- to Lenin, who ended up hopelessly and forever mired in Bossman thuggery difficult to distinguish from fascism.
I assume that means we should not engage, BU?Gee - no, I don't want to step on a good argument, just, advocation of religious repression and torture in my house…
I could not care less about the application of torture on heinous prisoners as long the process produces useful reintegration. My studies for my History degree indicates torture remains useful for the elicitation of compliance and horrible for the extraction of accurate information.
I could not care less about the application of torture on heinous prisoners as long the process produces useful reintegration. My studies for my History degree indicates torture remains useful for the elicitation of compliance and horrible for the extraction of accurate information.
These are the words of someone who is extremely sure the instruments of the state will not be turned against them. Historically speaking, that's not been a great bet, especially in dictatorships.
Whom was it, Trosky(sp) that was a compatriot of Lenin's whom Stalin had had murdered due to him being next in line after Lenin (originally). A prime example of using the instruments of the state to kill someone they did not like... "Will no one rid me of this d@mn Priest?"I could not care less about the application of torture on heinous prisoners as long the process produces useful reintegration. My studies for my History degree indicates torture remains useful for the elicitation of compliance and horrible for the extraction of accurate information.
These are the words of someone who is extremely sure the instruments of the state will not be turned against them. Historically speaking, that's not been a great bet, especially in dictatorships.
With undercover footage and firsthand accounts from survivors of China's detention camps, FRONTLINE investigates the Communist regime’s mass imprisonment of Muslims, and its use of sophisticated surveillance technology against the Uyghur community.https://www.pbs.org/video/china-undercover-zqcoh2/ (https://www.pbs.org/video/china-undercover-zqcoh2/)
First rule of persuasive writing/speaking: know your audience. When the majority of your posts come across as keyword-triggered propaganda pamphlets, don't expect much from people engaged in actual conversations.Furthermore, the lame book-communism has mutated from Marx -who had a couple of good points, for all of the colossal naivete on human nature making it unworkable- to Lenin, who ended up hopelessly and forever mired in Bossman thuggery difficult to distinguish from fascism.
-Even worse, it's boring to read. And unlike Elok, I can and have told you to cool it with this crap. When you participate in the on-topic areas, as you have of late, the management smiles; when you escalate with your repulsive advocation of religious repression and torture, the Management considers banning you from OT permanently.
Well yeah; it's not the communism that upsets me - it's the going Stalin.I believe you place criticism on me from a position of good faith, and I accept your criticisms.
And while I've grown beyond making it my problem when someone's wrong on the internet -mostly- I feel responsible for what gets said here, where I am responsible -and paying for it. There's lines, and I hardly have every possible line worked out in advance, but the decency line has been crossed here, and I won't continue to have that.
-I'm not necessarily averse to member feedback on the point...
Stable dictatorships require legitimacy, co-option of the opposition, and repression of people. The leaders of many dictatorship from the Sumerian Kingdoms to the Roman Republics through the 20th century suffered from succession issues and legitimacy crises. Regardless of your position on issues of social incorporation, dictatorships often managed this issue through the cultivation of a chosen successor and elimination of other potential rivals. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea will likely perform a similar process under Kim Jung-un because the leadership assumed a form of monarchy.I could not care less about the application of torture on heinous prisoners as long the process produces useful reintegration. My studies for my History degree indicates torture remains useful for the elicitation of compliance and horrible for the extraction of accurate information.
These are the words of someone who is extremely sure the instruments of the state will not be turned against them. Historically speaking, that's not been a great bet, especially in dictatorships.
Funny you say that. I just finished reading an article on the North-Korean infamous Kim Jong-un over his absence these last couple of weeks. It delved a bit into possible successors if something was to happen to him. Seems the list narrowed down quite a bit since the previous leader Kim Jong-il deceased back in 2011.
In case I didn't post a link to it previously, here it is...From my understanding of Chinese history, some of the Chinese Muslims in Xinjiang created terror problems for the government in the 1990s and early 2000s.
Frontline: China UndercoverQuoteWith undercover footage and firsthand accounts from survivors of China's detention camps, FRONTLINE investigates the Communist regime’s mass imprisonment of Muslims, and its use of sophisticated surveillance technology against the Uyghur community.https://www.pbs.org/video/china-undercover-zqcoh2/ (https://www.pbs.org/video/china-undercover-zqcoh2/)
Stable dictatorships require legitimacy, co-option of the opposition, and repression of people. The leaders of many dictatorship from the Sumerian Kingdoms to the Roman Republics through the 20th century suffered from succession issues and legitimacy crises.
I can respect your opinion of democracy and dictatorships.Stable dictatorships require legitimacy, co-option of the opposition, and repression of people. The leaders of many dictatorship from the Sumerian Kingdoms to the Roman Republics through the 20th century suffered from succession issues and legitimacy crises.
Kinda why we (humans, not the US) invented democracy. Waaaaay more stability and less repression if you just let people decide who the next leader should be. Yeah, democracy is rife with issues--corruption by special interests, demagoguery, etc.--but I'll take those over the brutal torture and killing of any opposition any day.
We should embrace the resurgence of authoritarianism because competent leaders in authoritarian governments have achieved spectacular results for society.
If you'll notice, my argument in favor of democracy was that it allowed for peaceful transitions of power. There are other benefits, but that might be the largest one.
But there is another very big one...We should embrace the resurgence of authoritarianism because competent leaders in authoritarian governments have achieved spectacular results for society.
...again, spoken like someone who is veeeery certain they'll be on the side of the "competent leaders."
I'm kind of puzzled by your criticizing democracy for restricting the franchise when you favor authoritarian regimes where the franchise is effectively restricted to a handful of guys in a room, some of whom may be plotting to liquidate the others. Democracies can become more fair and open; authoritarian societies can too, by ceasing to be authoritarian.1, What difference does an authoritarian society or democratic society make if both restrict transitions of power through voting? Democracies indirectly manipulate people's votes under the influence of government systems like the Electoral College, gerrymandering, or advertising while the authoritarian societies rig elections for specific candidates and enable a small pool of possible candidates.
I don't mean that as a snide remark. I mean that as an important criticism of authoritarianism. When people favor dictatorship/autocracy/whatever, they're mostly favoring the ability to get things done. Like episode 2 Anakin flirting with Padme/tyranny.The same process occurs inside the United States of America where a small number of groups control the passage of legislation and enter into Congress with minimal representation of the people's actual interests. The political scientists call it the Iron Triangle.
But the thing is, when you empower the state to control people's lives absolutely, your good intentions and competency don't mean squat if you lose power and someone less good and less competent gains it. Then you've just given terrible people the power to do terrible things and say every bit of it was "legal." And if you decide the solution is to just do whatever it takes to maintain power, then, well... you end up being the terrible person doing terrible things, because you're no longer trying to use your power to help people.
I'm guessing that you didn't even watch the program (and if you did, not with an open mind to the possibility that it could even be close to factually correct, requiring you to rethink some of your positions..).I will admit I did not watch the videos until now. I have now watched both videos. I admit the similarities between my position and man in the first video. I had to think how to phrase a response.
So, in less than a 1/2 hour, you watched one program that is 54 minutes, 22 seconds of run time and something else as well, then composed your reply and then edited it for "Clarity and decency". Dang, I wish I could compress time as effectively as you do, I could play much more Factorial than I currently have been doing of late AND do everything else I would like to do with all of that additional time...Do you mean the PBS Front line series on the Chinese Muslims in Xinjiang? If you do mean the PBS series, I sincerely apologize for the inconsistency. I thought you referred to the star wars videos.
Just a note that it is possible to play YouTube videos at accelerated speeds; I often do, when it's a video of somebody long-winded lecturing.I agree with your analysis on the stupidity of Chairman Mao's promotion of backyard furnaces and killing sparrows in the Great Leap Forward of 1956-1958. I also agree on the foolishness of the Soviet Union's advocacy of the Lysenkoism in the USSR and refusal for the adoption of cybernetics until later than the United States of America. Hitler lost World War II partially from a lack of coordination between Japan and Germany on military efforts. If Japan and Germany coordinated military production and military movement, then Japan and Germany might have won the war.
Anyway, Bearu is correct that communist and otherwise authoritarian governments are better at getting dramatic things done quickly, because there are fewer checks and balances in the way of one or two guys saying, "hey, let's do this." The only problem being that, in the absence of those checks and balances--in combination with a culture where administrators are terrified of admitting failure or criticizing leadership--a lot of those dramatic things wind up being dramatically stupid. Such as "let's kill all the sparrows" or "we'll have a new industrial revolution by having peasants operate backyard smelters" or "this one guy says Darwin is wrong and that sounds anti-capitalist so let's overthrow all accepted agricultural practice" or "people with glasses are necessarily corrupt and Western so let's kill them." If need be, democratic and capitalist societies are capable of rapid performance; the US barely had an army when we entered WWII, and by the end we were basically drowning Hitler in tanks. Also, race to the moon.
I view [Sleezebag] as basically a prank caller in the oval office, little different than leaving it vacant.
I think our present crisis should be evidence enough that nobody home at the White House is dangerous and unacceptable. There's plenty of blame to go around in the bureaucratic morass of the FDA and CDC, but a president who hadn't ignored the dire warnings in his daily briefings for months could have provided critical leadership at the beginning. Instead, we have ~70,000 dead and 2,000 more dying each day and no clear plan of how to get through this, because [Sleezebag]'s thorough incompetence squandered the extra time we bought by quarantining. However unenthusiastic I am about Biden, I am very confident he (and the people he appointed) would have done better, where better means a lot fewer dead people.I think this defines a dangerous person because the gross incompetence of Donald [Sleezebag] directly resulted in the death of people. In most other positions, someone might have charged Donald [Sleezebag] for gross negligence resulting in death.
To return somewhat to the thread topic...I suspect the final result would not be much better with Biden in charge, for the simple reason that Trumpists will outlast [Sleezebag], and any attempt at discipline imposed by a Blue president will be met with enormous and irrational hostility, and broad refusal to comply. They certainly wouldn't have gone along with anything Hillary said to do, after three years butting heads with her. I'm also unsure how much good a different president could have done given how prolific this little bugger is, and how hard a time we're having learning about it. The main benefit of delay, that I can see, is that we're starting to get a better handle on how to treat it--but we only got there by massive trial and error on a huge group of patients, so ...I view [Sleezebag] as basically a prank caller in the oval office, little different than leaving it vacant.
I think our present crisis should be evidence enough that nobody home at the White House is dangerous and unacceptable. There's plenty of blame to go around in the bureaucratic morass of the FDA and CDC, but a president who hadn't ignored the dire warnings in his daily briefings for months could have provided critical leadership at the beginning. Instead, we have ~70,000 dead and 2,000 more dying each day and no clear plan of how to get through this, because [Sleezebag]'s thorough incompetence squandered the extra time we bought by quarantining. However unenthusiastic I am about Biden, I am very confident he (and the people he appointed) would have done better, where better means a lot fewer dead people.
And Donald [Sleezebag]? “I haven’t had any interaction with him yet,” Fauci says. “But in fairness, there hasn’t been a situation.”
There surely will be, though. At some point, a new virus will emerge to test [Sleezebag]’s mettle. What happens then? He has no background in science or health, and has surrounded himself with little such expertise. The President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology, a group of leading scientists who consult on policy matters, is dormant. The Office of Science and Technology Policy, which has advised presidents on everything from epidemics to nuclear disasters since 1976, is diminished. The head of that office typically acts as the president’s chief scientific consigliere, but to date no one has been appointed.
Other parts of [Sleezebag]’s administration that will prove crucial during an epidemic have operated like an Etch A Sketch. During the nine months I spent working on this story, Tom Price resigned as secretary of health and human services after using taxpayer money to fund charter flights (although his replacement, Alex Azar, is arguably better prepared, having dealt with anthrax, flu, and sars during the Bush years). Brenda Fitzgerald stepped down as CDC director after it became known that she had bought stock in tobacco companies; her replacement, Robert Redfield, has a long track record studying HIV, but relatively little public-health experience.
Rear Admiral Tim Ziemer, a veteran malaria fighter, was appointed to the National Security Council, in part to oversee the development of the White House’s forthcoming biosecurity strategy. When I met Ziemer at the White House in February, he hadn’t spoken with the president, but said pandemic preparedness was a priority for the administration. He left in May.
Organizing a federal response to an emerging pandemic is harder than one might think. The largely successful U.S. response to Ebola in 2014 benefited from the special appointment of an “Ebola czar”—Klain—to help coordinate the many agencies that face unclear responsibilities. In 2016, when Obama asked for $1.9 billion to fight Zika, Congress devolved into partisan squabbling. Republicans wanted to keep the funds away from clinics that worked with Planned Parenthood, and Democrats opposed the restriction. It took more than seven months to appropriate $1.1 billion; by then, the CDC and NIH had been forced to divert funds meant to deal with flu, HIV, and the next Ebola.
How will [Sleezebag] manage such a situation? Back in 2014, he called Obama a “psycho” for not banning flights from Ebola-afflicted countries, even though no direct flights existed, and even though health experts noted that travel restrictions hadn’t helped control sars or H1N1. Counterintuitively, flight bans increase the odds that outbreaks will spread by driving fearful patients underground, forcing them to seek alternative and even illegal transport routes. They also discourage health workers from helping to contain foreign outbreaks, for fear that they’ll be denied reentry into their home country. [Sleezebag] clearly felt that such Americans should be denied reentry. “KEEP THEM OUT OF HERE!” he tweeted, before questioning the evidence that Ebola is not as contagious as is commonly believed.
[Sleezebag] called Obama “dumb” for deploying the military to countries suffering from the Ebola outbreak, and he now commands that same military. His dislike of outsiders and disdain for diplomacy could lead him to spurn the cooperative, outward-facing strategies that work best to contain emergent pandemics.
Perhaps the two most important things a leader can personally provide in the midst of an epidemic are reliable information and a unifying spirit. In the absence of strong countermeasures, severe outbreaks tear communities apart, forcing people to fear their neighbors; the longest-lasting damage can be psychosocial. [Sleezebag]’s tendency to tweet rashly, delegitimize legitimate sources of information, and readily buy into conspiracy theories could be disastrous.
They certainly wouldn't have gone along with anything Hillary said to do, after three years butting heads with her.
QuoteThey certainly wouldn't have gone along with anything Hillary said to do, after three years butting heads with her.
Is it a bad thing when idiots kill themselves off? Isn't that at the heart of Darwinian thinking?
Since you're arguing that idiocy is heritable
is it a bad thing when people with, say, cystic fibrosis die off?I certainly have no desire to draw out there suffering for my ethical solitude. I do not WISH death upon anyone, but in terminal situations, there should be an option for a painless death. Not a forced suffering to salve some societal moral conscious.
QuoteSince you're arguing that idiocy is heritable
Am I?
Also, leaving aside morality, the disease does seem to strike densely populated urban areas, eg New York, ie Blue Zone. Red areas are less affected by the disease, but more likely to fret about economic downturn since many of them were marginal already. I live in Bay County, FL; we've been shaky since the hurricane in 10/18, but there have been all of three coronavirus deaths. Just for context.When I was stationed at Eglin AFB, my buddies and I had visited Panama City. Other than that, I would travel via SR 20 between Eglin and where I grew up in Apopka, FL. Was just under 400 miles, which was the mandated distance for one day travel via motor vehicle, that the military allowed when on leave. I could take a week (or less) leave to Apopka without any problem. One time, I stayed on 98 and could say that I had traveled along the Florida Gulf Coast in my past...
I would take 441 to Ocala, 27 to Alt 27 to Chiefland, US 98 to Newport and the Wildlife area, FL 267 to FL 20 to Niceville and down into Eglin...
Eh, Amash is out anyway. Well, I can save the bother of registering, so that's something. I'm just going to avoid saying who I like from now on, it's clearly cursed.
Dang Washington Post requires subscription to even browse and article.
James Mattis Denounces President [Sleezebag], Describes Him as a Threat to the Constitutionhttps://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/james-mattis-denounces-[Sleezebag]-protests-militarization/612640/?utm_content=edit-promo&utm_medium=social&utm_term=2020-06-03T21%25253A59%25253A05&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=the-atlantic
In an extraordinary condemnation, the former defense secretary backs protesters and says the president is trying to turn Americans against one another.
I made sure that my Voter Info was updated (before the deadlines) and have made Vote by Mail request for the up coming Primary (Aug 18) and General Elections. I can make the Request for 2021 once we get closer to then as I don't know if I'll need them for then.
I actually have my Aug 18 Primary (only Local/State stuff as I'm Libertarian) now. :danc: NOW, I can make thousands and thousands of copies and totally defraud the Vote..... Mruhahaha!!!! ;q;
I made sure that my Voter Info was updated (before the deadlines) and have made Vote by Mail request for the up coming Primary (Aug 18) and General Elections. I can make the Request for 2021 once we get closer to then as I don't know if I'll need them for then.
I made sure that my Voter Info was updated (before the deadlines) and have made Vote by Mail request for the up coming Primary (Aug 18) and General Elections. I can make the Request for 2021 once we get closer to then as I don't know if I'll need them for then.
I've requested an absentee ballot, which you can do with no excuse in Maryland. I'll probably hand deliver it to my local BoE as soon as I'm able. I don't want to add strain to either the mail system or my polling location.
I've requested an absentee ballot, which you can do with no excuse in Maryland. I'll probably hand deliver it to my local BoE as soon as I'm able. I don't want to add strain to either the mail system or my polling location.
You know, I wonder if he didn't (doesn't) somehow do some form of off the books insider trading on stuff due to his intelligence reports
@ewarren · 23h
This sleazy Supreme Court double-dealing is the last gasp of a corrupt Republican leadership, numb to its own hypocrisy. The last gasp of a billionaire-fueled party that's undemocratically over-represented and desperately clinging to power in order to impose its extremist agenda.
So, in short, if mr. [Sleezebag] were wise, he'd bail out... ;lol
Looks like the maskless brigade of GOP dummkopfs has decided to try on herd immunity for size and fit.
McConnell has suspended the Senate for 2 weeks as 3 GOP Senators have confirmed positive tests.
He could only afford to lose three, and Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins had already defected. Losing 3 sure votes removed his window to cram this SCOTUS pick onto the court for the next two weeks... he still thinks he has time BEFORE the election, and is perfectly happy to consider doing it AFTER the election, no matter the outcome.
We voted yesterday afternoon. Only about a 15 minute wait, masks and distancing. All of us careful to not vote for a single republican for anything, a policy I swore back during the first Cheney occupation.
Getting in with a prediction after it's become conventional wisdom - but I've been thinking since August, and just didn't post: EPIC beat-down on the Pig. ;nod -Possibly record-breaking, like, McGovern's ghost says "thanks".
P.S. Biden still sucks - just a lot less.
And the thing is, once the polls close, is when the real fireworks are going to start. I predict that [Sleezebag] will declare Victory before even half of the ballots are counted; that he will lose anyway, but do as much as he can to attempt to invalidate the results; refuse to leave office until they have to drag him out, kicking and screaming like a spoiled brat, being lead out by the ear... and afterwards, create such a stink that will even further tear the country apart!
Thus taking our Democracy to the brink and possibly shattering it...
Well, definitely not something that you will ultimately be happy with, Bearu, because whatever comes out of it all, will not be friendly towards such things... maybe even worse.... better to have stability than trying to upset the cart, because in the process, it might roll over on you and crush you... i.e. be very, very careful what you wish for, because you just might get it...I know the stability of the status quo has not served many people well in the United States of America over the last couple decades. An openly fascist or authoritarian government in the United States of America will create more unrest and crises for most Americans. I know crises will create suffering for many Americans; suffering people provides fertile grounds for recruitment of discontented people into radical left and right groups. These radical people's ideologies will subvert the legitimacy of the core values of the United States of America from the 1776 constitution.
You want bad times to happen to hasten the revolution? Get lost./me agrees
In about 24 hours, we ... start to enter the next stage of the drama. I voted for Jorgensen a few days back. Stay safe, all.I did the same...
...suffering people provides fertile grounds for recruitment of discontented people into radical left and right groups.
These radical people's ideologies will subvert the legitimacy of the core values of the United States of America from the 1776 constitution.
There are a whole bunch of candidates, really, but it's accepted that only the big two have the slightest prayer of winning. Jorgensen is the Libertarian candidate, and frankly I think she's a bit bonkers but I voted for her anyway to signal-boost the Libertarian Party. And to send the message that neither big-party candidate is satisfactory, which is the main reason anybody votes for a third party--as a protest. I think Jo Jorgensen was the only candidate who was on the ballot in all fifty states, so technically there's no obstacle to her winning. But she won't, of course. Third-party support is expected to be lower this year because the election's so polarized and everybody feels it's important to "make every vote count" against whichever bugbear they're more afraid of.One of the things that the Libertarians believe is having a "None of the Above" thing on the ballot for the elected offices. As there are people whom voters would rather leave their ballot blank than to vote for the other party, even if the person that was running in their party as Hitler himself. This sort of disenfranchises someone, even though they did cast a ballot. The ability to say, 'I don't like any of you slubs that are running and I will make my voice heard in this respect, no matter what' is mainly what it is for. And truth to tell, if that turns out to be the majority position, then we start over and get someone else up to the position until there is a sufficient majority for them to win.
Hehe, Those whom don't learn from History are doomed to repeat it.......suffering people provides fertile grounds for recruitment of discontented people into radical left and right groups.
Suffering people also suffer.QuoteThese radical people's ideologies will subvert the legitimacy of the core values of the United States of America from the 1776 constitution.
The what?
I'm still angry enough that I just took a tranq. I ain't in Virginia, and there's mouth-fun for me tonight.
The wife and I are feeling better today. We didn't realize how much jaw/neck/back tension we've been carrying this year, but we both new it was excessive.
Aside- Anticipating this day, I have Alexa programmed to answer the question "Alexa, how long?' with-
"I'm happy to report the end of the Trumpocalypse is on Wednesday, January 20th, 2021, only (74) days away. It's going to be a great time (OR you must be so excited)! ( sounds of a cheering crowd)"
The wife and I are feeling better today. We didn't realize how much jaw/neck/back tension we've been carrying this year, but we both new it was excessive.only if he leaves peacefully...
Aside- Anticipating this day, I have Alexa programmed to answer the question "Alexa, how long?' with-
"I'm happy to report the end of the Trumpocalypse is on Wednesday, January 20th, 2021, only (74) days away. It's going to be a great time (OR you must be so excited)! ( sounds of a cheering crowd)"
#YOUREFIRED
Presidential vetoing and political privileges in mind, what kind of mischief can he still do in these final months? Launch the missiles? Get the (vice-)president-elect arrested on some "[Sleezebag]"ed charges? Order the 6th Fleet into Libanon?[/font][/size]
Incite his followers to try to take things into their own hands. Something worse than the attempted kidnapping of MI governor? Worse?
Presidential vetoing and political privileges in mind, what kind of mischief can he still do in these final months? Launch the missiles? Get the (vice-)president-elect arrested on some "[Sleezebag]"ed charges? Order the 6th Fleet into Libanon?
Possible.
Before I answer what else he could do on his own, are you sure you want to know?
Presidential vetoing and political privileges in mind, what kind of mischief can he still do in these final months? Launch the missiles? Get the (vice-)president-elect arrested on some "[Sleezebag]"ed charges? Order the 6th Fleet into Libanon?
Possible.
Before I answer what else he could do on his own, are you sure you want to know?
Speaking of fired, Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin - there was a quorum for Supreme Court confirmation w/o the Sergeant at Arms physically compelling any Senators' presence.
-Also, a Lifetime Achievement job termination for Speaker Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic leadership in both houses. -Most of them have been fired daily by me for over 20 years now, but the last thing the world needs to combat a reactionary party bent on gaming the system to destruction is a LESS conservative conservative party w/ no fight in it.
(Plenty of fight, mind you, in the primaries when an actual liberal shows up. FIRED.)
Presidential vetoing and political privileges in mind, what kind of mischief can he still do in these final months? Launch the missiles? Get the (vice-)president-elect arrested on some "[Sleezebag]"ed charges? Order the 6th Fleet into Libanon?
Possible.
Before I answer what else he could do on his own, are you sure you want to know?
I prefer to look to into the (possible) future with my eyes wide open.
I can't link from here, but do yourself a favor and google 'humor politico aroeira'
Sec of Def was fired today
Isn't treason still a capital crime in the USA?
Wasn't there a few people, during the Vietnam War, tried for Treason? (or during Korea or the Gulf Wars)
Of course if he were to flee the country, I wonder what his prospects are for being tried for the crime against humanity of permanently separating hundreds of small children from their parents and putting them in cages.
Was that an outrage in Europe?
I figured it was my duty as an American to use the time formerly spent on global current event awareness for actively opposing Cheeto Mussolini.
I still come across some information, but it's mostly headlines. I couldn't tell you if Britain is in or out of the EU now.
...Then he'll fold, and exit stage left while snarling and whining, preferably with somebody else inconspicuously carrying his suitcase of money and stolen White House valuables. Because he's not, and has never been, a fascist. Fascists have principles. He's half snake-oil salesman and half internet troll, the mixture leavened with a complete lack of virtue.
In defending Democracy, Do or Do Not, there is no try. This is the Way. @Protect2020
@steve_vladeck^This.
· 8h
The problem with this fraud nonsense—and Republicans’ refusal to denounce it—is not that it’s going to *succeed* this time; it’s that it’s going to normalize all kinds of anti-democratic behavior that will make it more likely to work in the future, especially in a close election.
You make it sound as once those struggling people are vaccined, they will turn away from Trumpism, since then they're able to pick up their former life(styles) again.
@AmandiOnAir ·10h
The Republican Party must not just be defeated, it must be destroyed.
An American political party that accepts and encourages autocracy and undermines democracy, while pledging fealty to an an autocratic leader as its organizing principle, cannot be rehabilitated nor saved.
Quote from: Fernand R. Amandi on Twitter@AmandiOnAir ·10h
The Republican Party must not just be defeated, it must be destroyed.
An American political party that accepts and encourages autocracy and undermines democracy, while pledging fealty to an an autocratic leader as its organizing principle, cannot be rehabilitated nor saved.
I am too angry to speak for myself. I've been too angry for decades, and recent events, this evening's Supreme Court ruling notwithstanding, have proven me right. They. are. fascists.
...[Sleezebag] Cuts vacation short, but no reason offered by WH staff as to why...
Quote from: Fernand R. Amandi on Twitter@AmandiOnAir ·10h
The Republican Party must not just be defeated, it must be destroyed.
An American political party that accepts and encourages autocracy and undermines democracy, while pledging fealty to an an autocratic leader as its organizing principle, cannot be rehabilitated nor saved.
I am too angry to speak for myself. I've been too angry for decades, and recent events, this evening's Supreme Court ruling notwithstanding, have proven me right. They. are. fascists.
Funny you should mention that. Since this latest lawsuit was launched, I've come to think of our two party system as the Democrats and the Autocrats. They're obviously not republicans or federalists any more. We were just watching tv. It was one of those crime documentaries. I said "That's a beautiful little town, I wonder where it is? Oh, South Carolina, the rat-bastards!"
I feel particularly insulted that Texas, SC, MO, AR, LA, MS and UT have decided that they know more about the election laws in my home states of PA and WI than the State Supreme Courts. I'm inclined to hold a grudge. Granted, when I stage a boycott of this kind it usually only lasts 15-20 years on average. I may visit or do business in those states again in my lifetime. I've already been to all of them except Arkansas... speaking of which, fornicate WalMart! Maybe I'll write them a letter. I figure they go a long way towards propping up the state government with their taxes.
[/END RANT]