![]() |
|
Quote:
Your first point was that GOPers are more fiscally responsible than Dems. The trend since Carter has been yearly deficits drop during Dem presidencies and rise during GOP presidencies. And starve the beast is about crisis, that's why not a single elected GOPer is complaining about a boom-time trillion dollar deficit. The plan is to use the deficit to force cuts, so the bigger the better. And, yes, it's primarily about entitlements because that's where the spending is. Defense is off the table, so cutting entitlements is the only way to make big cuts to the budget. You put the two together and it's why the GOP refused Obama's grand bargain. They didn't really want reduced deficits with modest entitlement cuts. The goal is gutting entitlements. They've been after that since LBJ or FDR. The problem is those cuts are extremely unpopular, so the theory is that only a fiscal crisis will move the public in such a way as to allow big entitlement cuts. |
Quote:
Really? Read again. Quote:
I think I was pretty clear when I used "parrot" that it was all just talk. If not, sorry. |
Quote:
Except that the Trump Administration's immigration strategy hasn't just been "build the wall" but cut ALL legal immigration. It hasn't been about 'limiting their access to services.' The Adminstration has sharply reduced the ability of immigrants to seek asylum from domestic and gang/militia violence. There was the travel ban, which didn't actually target any of the countries whose nationals had been involved in terror attacks against the US, but DID target several countries in the Middle East which didn't have business dealings with Trump. The refugee program has been sharply curtailed. The number of green cards issued in the last two years is down, cumulatively, about 15% from pre-Trump years. President Trump sought to cut legal immigration in half in return for legal protections for Dreamers. Quote:
Except that tax cuts don't grow the economy. They, largely, end up lining the pockets of shareholders through stock buybacks and such. If you're well-off, you get to double dip off the Trump tax cuts because not only were your taxes cut, but corporations you've invested in also received tax cuts, and shared that out with their shareholders. But those tax cuts did not lead to new jobs being created as an explicit result of the cuts - many of the announcements had been made previously, and got dusted off in the aftermath of the passage of the cuts to make it look like they were related when they weren't - and in some cases, companies which benefited heavily from the tax cuts have gone on to cut labor. Yeah, it's great for the stock market. The stock market doesn't affect take-home of, say, people on hourly wages. It doesn't affect their job security, whether they can afford health insurance, etc. The performance of the economy is reliant on consumer spending, and that's going to be affected far more heavily by things like tariff wars with trading partners and whether the bottom 90% of American earners can afford to purchase luxuries than whether we blow a trillion dollar annual hole in the deficit to make corporate tax cuts permanent. Quote:
There was already welfare reform in the '90s under Clinton and a Republican Congress! There is both a short-term and a lifetime limit on one's ability to access TANF. It's not a generational "get on welfare, have babies, and they're on welfare all their lives" thing. But that's how the GOP portrays it. Shit, in Wisconsin, Republicans bought whole hog into the food stamp scare by trying to mandate what recipients can spend their food aid on and trying to tie it to 'the nutritional needs of pregnant women and very young children.' Which, spoiler alert, are pretty explicit and different from what non-pregnant women, dudes, and older children need. But because of the GOP perception that people on food stamps are blowing all that money on cigarettes, booze, and expensive seafood, they try to either cut the program (see: food stamp cut attempts in recent farm bills) or revamp it to make it look like They're Doing Something. I mean, it's adorable that you want to pretend their motives aren't what they are, but I stand by every word I said. You can rewrite them all you want, but that's just grammar you engage in as a Republican to make yourself feel better. Quote:
I love how the word "responsible" is missing there. Yeah, that's absolutely Republicanism. No argument. Quote:
Except that they aren't. You know what's screwing us? The evisceration of the middle class by offshoring jobs to countries where corporations can pay pennies on the dollar, and then wondering why American workers can't compete. That's not about China or India or Mexico. That's about CEOs selling their companies' future business prospects down the river over the last 20-30 years so that THEY can reap a big bonus NOW and cash out. Quote:
The GOP redefine the terms. Fiscal responsibility to the GOP means "cut taxes so that we can claim that government is too big and now we can slash all the spending we don't like but don't you dare claim $600 billion a year is too much to spend on the military." As others have pointed out, it's the "starve the beast" strategy. Cut taxes, then claim the resultant fiscal emergency as necessity to target the safety net. If the GOP gave even a single solitary fuck about "fiscal responsibility," we wouldn't have spent so much of the Obama Administration with Republicans claiming that, well, it's no big deal if we default on our debts. |
Quote:
I get that Trump wants to eliminate illegal immigration and wants to reduce legal immigration, specifically those he would consider undesirables (e.g. those that are here legally as PR and using social programs). Your statement above said one of the 3 tenets is "immigrants are bad". It obviously isn't wholesale and unfair to use such a generalization. He/Miller obviously doesn't mind many legal immigrants. Quote:
Economy is going well, stock market is going well, unemployment is down etc. Is that all a direct result of the tax cut, probably not. Is it a result of Trumpism (with some leftover momentum from Obama), and the good/bad environment he has championed, yes. Will it last the next 2-6 years, unknown. Do some people get left out, yup. Quote:
I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I do feel better with my revision, thanks. Quote:
Yup, tenet #4 for you to add to the list. Quote:
Sorry, I should have been more explicit. China is chief culprit in my mind. If you don't think China is screwing with us with IP/tech (and other) then let's agree to disagree here. There's economic warfare going, we need to find a way to "win" it. It would be great if the Chinese economy crashed like the Japanese lost 2 decades. Re: offshoring/outsourcing has more nuances in the context of globalization and the advent of the internet. You are not going to stop all/most globalization and offshoring. Should we offshore nike shoes, clothes - yes, low value and unlikely we can be competitive making them here. Should we offshore/outsource development of more strategic, thought capital like latest tech from Oracle/MicroSoft etc. - I would say no or at least slow it down considerably to maintain our competitive advantage as long as possible. Should we offshore steel which has been in the news - I don't know, haven't really studied the situation. Has offshoring hurt a lot of people? Absolutely, no question. Can we stop all/most offshoring, nope. NAFTA which resulted in a lot of this offshoring was passed by Clinton so its not all GOP. Quote:
I think you must have also misread my POV on GOP & Dem "fiscal responsibility". Don't disagree with you but let's not lay all the blame on the GOP as Dems also contributed to the deficit we have today. See my response #12538 & #12540 to JPhillips couple posts above. |
Quote:
That deficits weren't a problem early in Obama's presidency because they were needed to get out of a giant financial collapse but they should have been sandwiched between massive tax cuts that needlessly exploded deficits during periods of economic prosperity. |
Quote:
Less pithily, I think that graph helps show that yes we've almost always been divided, and it really is the media or social media climate exacerbating things, and not buying into it is the best option. Shurg, maybe liberal democracy only works when you have the existential threat of a significant other to remind people how they share 90%+ of values. In which case go Alien contact! Quote:
Agree with Panerd that your second statement is laughable. Donald Trump was a classic 3rd party candidate who realized he should run under the 2 party system because it gave so much more publicity. Though I do understand why someone with your username dislikes 3rd party candidates :p Quote:
I've always liked to claim I'm a Centrist, but if pressed I'm a socially liberal Libertarian Hawk (who still gets really fed up with the smugness & ends up trolling the worst of the PC crowd... Because the worst of the opposite is so evidently wrong I don't find it worth engaging.) Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Though I fear having a cult of personality is the easiest way to change things, and unfortunately Trump stumbled (fell face backwards?) into that before we realized it. (And considering the fortunes of the Democratic party during his presidency, I think it's fair to say there was also a cult of personality around Obama as well... I certainly don't think you can pin a cult of personality on GWB, and even the Republican love of Reagan was ex-post facto). Quote:
The problems with American healthcare are varied and numerable, and the idea that Medicare or whatever government subsidized program for all will solve the problems is laughable. You've identified the main problem imo - that people who need a real procedure have little to no ability to compare prices (and little to no idea how much things cost) - but you think introducing a 3rd party in the US Government that will either obfuscate, mitigate, or delay the real cost will lead to individual people choosing fewer or cheaper procedures? I don't get that part. If you're saying "Medicare for all" as a proxy for basic health services, yeah I'm on board, but as someone who has dealt with Patrick/RomneyCare & now ObamaCare that's not how it works. Because it's a massive, geographically spread out thing that is almost assuredly staffed by incompetent and uninterested government workers. I agree the free market doesn't always work, but thank god my father was in the air force, because we're in USAA through him, and they're universally known to have amazing customer service, which I've experienced. For car insurance, home insurance, soon dental insurance, and hopefully eventually health insurance... Meanwhile I deal with the Massachusetts DMV, the NC DMV, MassHealth, and other government agencies where the individual actors are pretty good sometimes, but the institution as a whole could not care less about me, because where else am I going to go? |
Quote:
Should have or Should not have? |
I'm not sure I understand what is going on here. Ford's 4 witnesses not corroborating her story (but at least one publicly says she believes Ford)? I get it was a long time ago but wouldn't it have been better if Ford checked with the 4 witnesses first to see if she should even have offered them up?
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/22/polit...ion/index.html Quote:
|
The US-China trade war is yet to be settled and this is a Trump policy that I support (e.g. I do see China as our biggest economic threat). I supported TPP also and was concerned that when Trump scrapped it there wouldn't be a replacement ... well, glad to know the concern was unfounded and it appears the replacement is a trade war, a more "direct" approach.
Who knows who will "win" and what, if anything, China will ultimately concede. But it was reassuring to read the below from Cramer (had to look up what rapacious meant) ... obviously still fraught with challenges but at least Trump is doing something about it. ... and yes, it goes without saying, some Americans will suffer because of this trade war even if it results in a significant overall net benefit. https://realmoney.thestreet.com/arti...814.1520130023 Quote:
|
Quote:
Nice timing to our discussion, here are the details. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/imm...ts-who-n910791 Quote:
When I went through the Student-H1B-PR-Citizen route, I had to declare that I had enough funds to be in the US (not sure what the rules were for the other types of visas) ... definitely at the Student-H1B stage, not sure about later ... so this doesn't really surprise me. I guess two questions from me ... 1) For those adversely impacted by this, did they also have to declare some sort of self-sufficiency and then fell into hard times (or just lied about it) 2) What is the real # of people and $ impact of this? If its relatively chump change, does the savings benefit outweigh the person/societal costs? |
Quote:
The items produced there for the US may shift to other countries but it won't be the US, it'll be other cheap countries which don't presently have tariffs associated with them .... |
How can Amazon mimic manufacturers? Amazon doesn't actually make anything.
If you are a company that relies on importing sprockets, how are you going to immediately find another sprocket supplier if nowhere else makes them? Is a sprocket factory going to pop up in the middle of Mozambique in the middle of the night? If it were that easy and favorable to be making them somewhere else, wouldn't someone already be doing it? And even IF a supply chain can materialize in two or three quarters, can all companies wait that long? |
China is pouring billions into Africa right now. Infrastructure, manpower, and I have to think, that they believe they can use Africa as a massive manpower repository for when their own workers start to leave and join the middle class. It may not pay off. I've read that the value per dollar spent is horrible, because of the grift and lack of centralized infrastructure. However, if they stick with it for another 20 years, it may pay off in the long run.
|
Quote:
Cramer seems optimistic about the US positioning due to the strength of the US stock market & economy. I'm sure he knows it'll be a lose-lose but he thinks (and I hope) that China will lose more. Best that I can hope for is the China stock market crashing (it already has some) and doing some crazy things there, creating unrest etc. Quote:
Yeah, I think that is one of the results of the master plan. So we may see initial higher prices but it'll normalize after the initial pain and long-term, the deficit with China will be lower and I assume higher with some of these cheaper countries. |
Quote:
I was thinking his wording about Amazon was off also. The gist is probably that if a widget was $5 and now it is $10 because of the tariffs that there will be another company/country out there that will make the widget for $5 in 3- quarters or so and Amazon can then sell it for $5 again. I agree with you with the skepticism but I can hope he is right. |
Quote:
I did know China is investing a lot into Africa but thought it was more for its natural resources vs. making things. In 20 years, if we are buying more widgets from other countries I think it helps us and hurts China. The question in my mind is can China sell its widgets to non-US countries (e.g. the EU) or would the non-US countries now buy their widgets from the non-China countries (that we are buying from) who are now making them. I don't really know but its an interesting dynamic and it shakes it up some. The trajectory it was on was not good so maybe it'll change it some. **** I read on a reddit /china board that the Chinese citizens do not really know what is going on with the economy, the debt, ghost cities, the trying to get to soft landing etc. because of lack of media transparency. With continued pressure, word will get out and cause more unrest or run on the markets? Who knows. However, it seems this is some sort of grand plan vs shooting from the typical-Trump shooting from the hip. The TPP was more like let's get the Asian countries together and collaboratively compete against China whereas the current policies seem more US will act and other countries will follow. **** Trump notwithstanding, I really like what is happening now. But its only because it seems the US is in a stronger position in the trade war. If our market and economy crashes but China's doesn't, then obviously its a different story. A nice Machiavellian play so far. . |
Is it me or does it seem as if Trump has tweeted less and those that he has tweeted are less caustic?
Or is it that we are just so overloaded already that he just hasn't raised the bar to get as much reaction as previously? I'm thinking there is more discipline nowadays but who knows how long it'll last. He seems to be very focused on China, Immigration and economy/stock market lately which are winning issues for his base. Latest survey I see: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/23/gop-...-wsj-poll.html Quote:
. |
I don't think these calendars are going to help Kavanaugh the way he thinks. If he says there were parties outside of those listed, they are worthless, and who would believe that a seventeen year-old kept perfect records of his actions, especially a seventeen year-old known for heavy drinking?
Everything beyond, I didn't do it, has, IMO been counterproductive for Kavanaugh. |
Honestly, he could probably, reasonably say, "I don't remember doing it. If I did, I am honestly, and sincerely sorry for the pain and suffering that you have endured and I would never wish that sort of outcome on anyone, let alone knowingly inflict it on another human being. I have tried to live my with integrity, kindness and empathy and I have raised my kids the same way. If by some account, these are my actions, I am truly sorry, and know that I would have done everything in my power to make it right somehow. My life has been about leading by example and every step of the way my decisions have been based on that goal. Know now, that I am not this person, I have never been this person, and I would stand here and criticize anyone who said that this kind of behavior was ok. I promise that I will always serve the people of the United States of America with integrity, wisdom and empathy and will be the kind of example that future generations will be proud of. Thank you very much." And he would endure some harsh criticism, but I think it would give the R's enough standing to continue to confirm him. It will however, open the door for those who left under even weaker accusations, like Franken, to run again, and never let the R's forget that it was in this moment that they chose a seat on the Surpreme Court over the values they hold so dear.
|
Ronan Farrow just released a story with a new accusation against Kavanaugh from his Yale days. At this point I doubt we get to the Thursday hearing.
|
New Yorker story on Kavanaugh. Avernati says he's representing a third woman now.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...social_twitter Edit: have to say after reading it, this story has more doubt and holes in it than the first woman. Color me skeptical. |
It gets much more interesting if there is a pattern.
|
It's like homeopathic politics. |
Quote:
There is corroboration in that story from at least two other sources that the thing happened, though. It'd probably be treated as hearsay in court because they aren't direct eyewitnesses, but you've got two other people saying "I heard at the time that that had happened, yeah," and one of them the New Yorker is saying "independently recalled" details of the incident. To me, that sounds like "they came up with the same details without being prompted." So, I mean...it's been 35 years, she was drunk, and there aren't going to be hard forensic details to back up either Dr. Ford's or Ms. Martinez's claims. But in both cases, external corroboration exists. Dr. Ford's claims have notes from a therapist from YEARS ago where these allegations were first aired, and Ms. Martinez has people - including Kavanaugh's roommate at Yale - either saying "Yeah, I remember hearing that that thing happened to a girl" and corroborating certain specific details, or else saying "Yeah that would have been a total Brett thing to do at that time." Like, did the second account happen to Deborah Martinez, or is she borrowing a story she heard 35 years ago because 'woo 15 minutes of fame'? It's a fair question to ask when she herself is going "well I don't remember all the details" and one of the corroborators is like "I heard that happened, but I can't swear it happened to HER." But the existence of a second accusation - and a third, if Avenatti is legit and not just trying to insert himself into the spotlight again - start to create a pattern, and the bigger that pattern gets, the harder it is to say "well he was a turd then but he's been a standup dude since." |
A potential constitutional crisis first thing Monday morning wasn't I was expecting. Rosenstein is saying he won't resign, they will have to fire him.
|
It's kind of disturbing to think that the President would fall for fake news from the failing New York Times as justification for firing Rosenstein.
|
Quote:
Yeah, you expect that to happen with Fox News. |
Quote:
https://act.moveon.org/event/mueller...events/search/ Mueller Firing Rapid Response - The Plan | MoveOn.org Reminders. |
Quote:
I wonder if it will muddy/mute the response a bit that a Rosenstein firing triggers it too, especially if it ends up being unclear if he was fired or resigned. |
Quote:
I hope we don't get to this point. However, from a social perspective, I will be interested to see how this goes. Whether it turns out to be close to the 400,000 strong they claim or if it is lackluster. |
Quote:
I assume the 400k number is based on the number of people who have "RSVP'd" to a specific location on the site. EDIT: Which, I assume means far fewer will show up, but hopefully that's offset by people who hear about it in a location in some other way or once a much louder call to action occurs if something worthy does happen. |
Quote:
Yeah, I assumed it to be those who signed up on the website for notifications. Regardless, I think it will be interesting to see the response if it happens. I agree that the publicity can grow the numbers besides those who have signed up. |
If Mueller is fired I expect 400k will be low. People in big cities will just start streaming out to be a part of things. 100k or more in NYC alone wouldn't surprise me.
|
What are the odds Trump just takes this to next level, emulates his hero Putin, and Rosenstein just disapears? And trump considers it a resignation and fills the vacancy? 1% chance? I say it's somewhere above zero.
|
0%
|
Quote:
100% that Putin has told Trump about the existence of Novichok. |
The thing we've learned, though, is that Trump is a coward. Someone else would have to order and execute anything Trump is too scared to do himself.
|
Quote:
That's why I don't think Rosenstein will be fired Thursday if he is meeting with Trump. Trump would probably have someone else do it rather than firing Rosenstein himself. |
Quote:
I wonder if the meeting with Kelly might be that Kelly can't fire a Senate appointed cabinet member, but can badger them into resigning meaning Trump or Sessions has to say "You're fired" if Rosenstein won't quit. |
Rosenstein could pull a Costanza and just keep showing up for work and Trump would never have the courage to make him leave.
|
Quote:
If Trump is brave enough to do it - then it'll happen Thursday, its no coincidence that happens to be the day Kavanaughs accused does the open hearing .... the media can't manage to cover two huge outcries at once so doing it then will distract from one of them. |
Quote:
This was the whole point of TPP which Trump did not want. |
Quote:
He substituted TPP for his brand of economic warfare. I posted these in prior posts. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
I disagree that we're in the stronger position. Trump can't let this go into 2020 or the general election is going to be worse for republicans than the midterms appear to be. Because of that, China could easily just ride the Trump administration out of office and find themselves in a much better bargaining position with a newly elected President that would be looking to end this trade war as soon as possible. They're in far better position to take a year and half of losses and move on. If/When Walmart starts to raise prices everyone else is going to be comfortable following. The average US citizen isn't going to give a shit about protecting IP and the tech sector if it puts a dent in their grocery bill. This is a stupid trade war with no winners. Our strategy seems to be to simply make sure we're not the biggest loser. |
Quote:
He'll just keep telling people he's working on the Ruskie file. |
Quote:
I will admit it could be confirmation bias but I've read numerous similar type of analysis to the below (including SEA news version). Others added China's weak stock market as evidence as the "smart" money is betting on the US. With that said, who knows. Many things could happen and you may very well be right. It may be a game of chicken to see who blinks first/who can last longest based on their differing internal pressures. https://www.newsweek.com/trump-winni...e-deal-1104980 Quote:
Just a note, not really sure I want Chinese money coming over here e.g. buying property like in Canada. But that's a different conversation. . |
You are quite the fool if you do not think Chinese money is coming over here. It is so expensive to buy in Beijing, many of these folks buy in the states. Last time I was in California, some folks told me that some places are making rules/laws that say you can't buy a house unless you live in it XXX days of the year, to prevent Chinese buyers from coming to the states and driving up all the prices.
|
Quote:
Oh I get it... /me is slow |
Quote:
Let me restate. I know Chinese money has already come into NA markets buying up houses and increasing prices. Canada (e.g. Vancouver) is probably worse off than the US. I would hope we can do something to prevent/slow down the purchasing of homes where the Chinese buyer won't live in it. In Canada, there is an "un-occupancy" tax, maybe something similar here. |
Quote:
I think you missed his Russia joke. |
Quote:
Have to admit I did. (in fairness, I think the lack of a double 's' threw me) |
His yearbook entry is... interesting. Speaks poorly of him and the school for allowing such garbage.
|
If these guys think that these 'unfair accusations' are going to ruin this mans life and think that it's quite possibly the worst thing ever, they've conveniently forgotten Emmet Till.
|
I forgot about Emmet Till. I mean seriously I have no idea who he is.
|
I'm actually surprised the financial stuff didn't get more attention. No one found it weird he ran up to $200k in debt for "baseball tickets" and magically paid it all off last year right before his nomination? Pay for Federal Judges isn't bad.
|
Quote:
I can chalk that stuff up to being an idiot 17 year old. Teenagers lie about that crap. But him lying as an adult about what it meant and then lying about kissing her after a date is bizarre. Just come out and say "I was 17 and made comments I'm not proud of as an adult". Sure people would still call him on it but I think most of the public understands that what they say at 17 isn't who they are as an adult. I still don't get why they don't just nominate someone else. There are dozens of guys like him with similar resumes. |
Quote:
Black kid lynched in the 1950s for allegedly having hit on and cussed at a white woman. One of the catalysts for the Civil Rights movement in the next decade. |
OIC. Don't I feel like a rube. (But seriously I feel I probably should know that name)
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Would Republicans even have time to vet and nominate another justice? If Democrats take control of the Senate you know they won't let anyone through to right of Merrick Garland.
|
Quote:
I think that's the bit the judge let the jury hear at the murder trial. Carolyn Bryant, the married woman at the center of the whole thing, had her testimony ruled inadmissible at the time; she testified that Till had grabbed her wrist and "uttered obscenities." I mean, obscene in the context of the 1950s from a black boy to a white woman is probably different from contemporary obscenity, so it probably wasn't "swearing at" so much as "lewd language." |
Quote:
There's all the time in the world to nominate another justice. "Vetting" another justice implies they bothered to vet Kavanaugh at all. At the end of the day, somebody's going to get rammed through because a) they can, b) they don't dare risk the Democrats paying them back for Garland (even if that means confirming someone in a lame duck Senate with Democrats waiting to take control in January), and c) conservative control of the Court for a generation is worth whatever time the party spends in the wilderness as a result, because the Court can unwind any policy gains the Democrats make in that time. |
Quote:
TRUST THE PROCESS. What a country, whether you're a R or D. |
Quote:
So, I see it that way also, but I wonder if that sort of impression is just too subject to the politically divisive whims of modern politics. If you're committed to Team Red or Team SaveBabies or Team Kavanaugh for whatever reason, do you genuinely look at the words in that yearbook and see relatively harmless stuff, "I kissed her too" and the like? And conversely, is the fact that it's plan as day to you and me just an indictment that we are suffering the same consequence of our own bias? We see it as base and vulgar because that fits the response we prefer? |
I would prefer to see a conservative nominated (whether or not Kavanaugh), and it's beyond obvious what the intent was. It's the conquest culture, and it's nothing new.
Now, whether inappropriate innuendo in a yearbook should disqualify a candidate, or people are using that to justify believing his accusers, is a whole different discussion. That could be anything from, he slept with or attempted to sleep with (whether by some sort of sexual assault or not) all of these girls, or he was just bragging to appear cooler than he actually was, and he didn't do anything except try to make it look like he did. I do agree that he's hurting himself by still preaching that he has always been a choir boy, but you know what? I don't hold that against him, because in today's culture, admitting anything means defeat. He might as well just say he raped each of his accusers and step down. Admitting anything in politics is weakness, and there are too many anti-whatever-you-are forces out there for someone to survive it. |
Really? I think if at some point in his life he had said he drank too much as a student and regretted some of the things he did he'd be in much better shape today. Now doing that post-nomination might not have worked, as he would rightly be questioned about his sincerity, but even then I think he'd be in a stronger position than he currently is.
|
Quote:
The most charitable reading of the yearbook entry still includes multiple references to binge drinking. That makes his study/practice/church story very hard to believe. The drinking, in itself, isn't disqualifying, but his continuing willingness to lie about it is a problem. |
Quote:
Except that she made most of it up. Till was beaten, lynched, his killers got off, and admitted killing him later, and oh yeah, he was 14. And people still shoot up his grave site on a regular basis. Soooo. I think he is the example of false accusations ruining someone's life. In 2017, author Timothy Tyson released details of a 2008 interview with Carolyn Bryant, during which she disclosed that she had fabricated the most sensational part of her testimony.[2][5][125] Tyson said during the interview, Bryant retracted her testimony that Till had grabbed her around her waist and uttered obscenities, saying "that part's not true".[126][127] |
Quote:
All the predictions seem to indicate that the Republicans would keep the Senate. (or at least just lose one seat so 50-50 means Pence is the tie breaker) And remember the new Senate doesn't sit until January. (Of course generally you wouldn't ram through a SCOTUS justice in a lame duck sessions, but...) But that has to be in the minds of the GOP right now (if not the President, then the leaders of the Senate). |
|
Quote:
I think McConnell the Ithorian is completely willing to do whatever is necessary. There is no stone he isn't willing to turn over. |
Quote:
There's a tweet for everything Donald does. MALAA Make America Laughed At Again. |
Did he stomp off the playground after the mean kids laughed at him?
|
Quote:
This is the part I don't get. People would use it against him but I think most of the public would understand that being a bit crude with male friends at 17 is par for the course. Just say "I said some things I regret as a teenager but I'm not that person today". I think most of us would regret stuff we said back in the day. But lying about it just mean you're a liar and that is disqualifying. |
Quote:
Yup, agree with this. |
Quote:
Nah, he's going with, "I was trying to get people to laugh all along!" |
Quote:
Actually no. The laughter was at the beginning of his speech and I thought he finished it pretty well. Content notwithstanding, he had good poise and looked almost presidential. |
Quote:
Just goes to show how helpful teleprompters and pre-written speeches are. |
Quote:
Yeah we TOTALLY have leverage over China:-) Brazil soybean exports wins in US-China trade war |
Quote:
We all just need to suck it up for a little while longer and then everyone will be a millionaire. |
I support protectionist policies in some instances. I'm just not sure he really has any idea what he is doing in regard to his current strategy of tariffs.
|
Quote:
Quote:
At the end of the day, materials are materials & they'll find an equilibrium on the global market. The real money that'll only take up more market share going forward is IP, and it's not the worst thing to have this fight now. Say whatever you want about why it wasn't the right time in the past or we should ignore it, but everyone including the Chinese Government knows IP theft has been rampant in China since the 90's at least. There's a reason the markets and the Forbes/WSJ's etc are favoring the US right now, which is not what was anticipated when this tit for tat started. |
Quote:
'Cept here's the thing. Once you establish that he's willing to lie for advantage - or to avert disadvantage - you completely undermine his credibility on any topic, but perhaps this one in particular. If you're willing to lie about vulgarity in your high school yearbook because of how it might make you look, you're going to be even more willing to lie about committing sexual assault - sober or otherwise - because that will make you look worse. And that's really where we're at here. What we have is a high school dude who was willing to trade on the name of a classmate so he could be one of the "bros," and 30-some years later, is trying to handwave that away and tell people it doesn't mean what it meant, he was a pure virgin and didn't even KNOW what that stuff meant, blah blah. And a teenager who's willing to engage in that level of public cruelty against a female classmate is not somebody I have any difficulty believing would be the kind of drunken lout who would wave his penis in a woman's face for laughs, or try to undress a woman against her will while laughing about it with his "bro." The sort of cruelty that causes one to deny the humanity of another to enhance one's own social standing isn't the sort of thing you outgrow. That he's willing to lie about yearbook cruelty to try to deflect the allegations of assault and exposure says more about his character than the people vouching for him ever could, I think. |
lol Trump @ UN.
|
Quote:
I get all of that, and even agree. But I also see that he loses either way. Admit to anything, and it becomes the same slippery slope to accepting the sexual assault allegations against him - using the same rationale you've laid out here. |
Quote:
The only way 'out' really would be his withdrawal on an excuse about a circus and putting his family through it etc. ... as it stands this is going to get a lot worse, I've already seen quotes from classmates saying he wasn't the choirboy he is indicating. If he hasn't gone overboard and said he was a virgin etc. then he might have avoided some of this - but liars can't resist lying ... Independent Article - Brett Kavanaugh |
Why isn't a case like Brock Turner and all the hoopla over that getting any more play here? The results, the resulting outrage over the initial sentencing, the entire defense. It seems like there is so much overlap in the situations, only separated by a few decades.
Just because Turner got caught, didn't have to prove himself in front of the world before he made something with his life shouldn't really matter in the end. |
Can someone explain to me why these tariffs against China are a good idea? Maybe they're not but why does Trump think they are?
|
Quote:
The idea is to protect American jobs and the American manufacturing industry. Make it more expensive to do business with China so that doing business in America becomes a better value. The interesting thing to me is how the competing views on this have gone back and forth between the Republican and Democratic parties. The right was traditionally more about free trade and the left was more about economic protectionism. But now it's gotten more complicated. Bernie Sanders, for example, was always strongly pro-tariff and opposed to free trade, but he's kind of evolved the tone of his argument over the years where now it's whether you have a free trade plan or not, the terms should be tailored to reign in corporations and help workers. So he opposes Trump's tariffs but he would also oppose free trade with China. He would want to target American companies directly with penalties for moving jobs overseas, instead of Trump's approach of targeting China with tariffs to try to influence American companies behavior that way. But Trump and Sanders would actually thus be closer on this issue those who support free trade agreements (and those people come from both parties). So there are a lot of Democrats, particularly in the rust belt states that have been killed by job losses, who are on the same side as Trump on this but are in the awkward position of deciding whether they want to admit that out loud. |
Well Holy Shit. Not only did Avenetti have someone, but she swore out an affidavit (which means she'd be subject to criminal perjury if it was false)!
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/26/mich...-swetnick.html Quote:
|
Swetnick apparently holds a bunch of US government clearances (with DOT, Mint, and IRS) which would be immediately revoked if she lied in an affidavit.
Jessica Valenti on Twitter: "Julie Swetnick has a pretty serious background and I have a hard time believing she’d lie in a sworn affidavit. Everything that has come out about Kavanaugh’s youth points toward drunken predatory behavior - how much more do we need to know?… https://t.co/pKAUd4GNAl" |
I guess it's an interesting story, as all the "stuff" about Kavanaugh's teen years was starting to seep out, he and his advisers basically had to decide what path to take. He could own up, say he did things that were irresponsible, say his recollection of any specific encounter was different than hers, and so forth. Or he could just deny everything.
Picking that latter path has committed him to an increasingly absurd series of statements built to buttress other statements... lies upon lies, it seems to many. Now he was a choir boy, a virgin, a teetotaler, a virtual shut-in. Who knows how far this goes? Of course, among the community that matters most immediately, the Senate (R) Caucus, there's a vague commitment to just hold their nose, select among any of the available excuses, and vote to confirm him -- and to receive the fawning and adulation of the loyal right. I know people look back on the Thomas/Hill drama with their own versions of regret. Some/much of it colored by remaining partisan loyalties. I can't help but wonder whether history will allow us all some clarity of judgment on the actors in this round? I suspect some will be judged...harshly. |
Maybe I wasn't cool enough in high school. Were these 'train' rapes common for anyone?
|
It never ceases to amaze me how willingly even competent people are to throw away their dignity in pursuit of Trump's affection. |
Quote:
He was obviously very advance. I was still at panty raids in college. |
Quote:
In addition to not using social programs, another criteria for "desirable" legal immigrants are good FICO scores. Just another way for Trump's immigration policy to eliminate undesirables. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/im...-us-2018-09-26 Quote:
|
Evidently the spouses of people here on H1B visas that work is another undesirable class. The admin is moving to do away with H4 visas, which allow spouses of people with H1Bs to work in the US. We are going to lose one of our best developers if this happens.
|
Quote:
|
Not sure the criteria for H4 other than spouse of H1B but I remember, even with all the gaming of job postings in ComputerWorld, the H1B was pretty high (e.g. college degree, appropriate work background). These are the ones we want to give higher priority to IMO and if would be good if the spouse came along.
I wonder what the stats are on the "legal" immigrants adversely impacted by these proposed changes. Is it dis-proportionally impacting Indians or SEA or LATAM or Europeans etc. |
Quote:
Yeah it's kind of weird. Democrats for what it's worth have mostly been about free trade for the past few decades. It was one of the areas that both parties agreed on. And rightfully so as most of the studies have shown that it's beneficial to all parties. Tariffs are a real far-left trade stance and I'm kind of surprised they've come back. I do think after Trump is gone Republicans will go back to how they were on the issue. It creates a weird form of welfare where the government is choosing winners and losers in business mostly to gain votes from specific parts of the country. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:14 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.