Interesting video. And very logical.

Thanks for posting,

Pretty remarkable statement. And guess who benefits the most.

Merkel: Europe 'can no longer rely on allies' after Trump and Brexit - BBC News

Not really remarkable - honest but not remarkable, England is flaky as shit at the moment ... the conservatives aren't playing ball at all for a reasonable exit from the EU and Trump is bending in the breeze according to the last person he talks to.

The opinion of the US in Europe/UK isn't particularly high presently and I don't think either would count the US as a reliable ally.

If this was a Crusader Kings dynasty, Trump taking office is comparable to when your ruler dies and next in line is the hunchback bastard son with zero prestige and all negative traits.

Leaving this here without comment. A senior administration official to reporters on Air Force One: pic.twitter.com/SDlUvQBMmQ

— Philip Crowther (@PhilipinDC) May 28, 2017

The books that are going to come out of the White House will be incredible.

wow, someone's been drinking the Kool-aid

I suspect this is one of the numerous bullshit artists Trump has on at hand at all times.

I think it's tough to go by these numbers because the definition of the words change so much. A conservative of 10 years ago is almost the opposite of conservative today. Today's conservatives are anti-free trade, have done a 180 on a lot of family values, and have changed their tune when it comes to foreign policy (anti-NATO, pro-Russian).

But the numbers haven't changed much. Party ID has a lot of movement, but ideology is pretty stable going back decades. Quite a bit more people consider themselves conservative rather than liberal, and generally conservative is more popular than moderate.

That's been the story of the country since WW2. The idea that liberals significantly outnumber conservatives at a national level has no supporting evidence.

I agree with Rainmaker on this. It has to do with what people think of the labels. More people ID as Democrat than Republicans, which is the opposite of conservative/liberal. That alone shows the flaw.

:lol:

From AP:


I'm so old I remember when unsecured communications was disqualifying.

Anybody want some covfefe? Or does one covfefe lead to another?

I'm not a Trump supporter and do think this crossed the line. I hope she gets hammered for this.

So, Here's Kathy Griffin Holding A Very Fake, Very Bloody Donald Trump Head (UPDATE) | HuffPost

Is there seriously no one in the administration who can address the Tweet, take it down, etc.?

Yep, even as someone who thinks Trump is pretty much the worst and most dangerous person alive I think that picture is way out of line.

I haven't been able to covfefe for the life of me.

Ironically, I agreed to become a contributor at https://eatprayvote.org just yesterday. Last night I had trouble sleeping, woke up and saw that foolishness, and ended up having my first article published there overnight. *shurg*

https://eatprayvote.org/2017/05/31/w...e-white-house/

Desperate plea for attention. Sad.

Edit: In reference to Griffin. Not Ben. ;)

To be the #covfefe, you gotta beat the #covfefe - WOOOOO! pic.twitter.com/8KtxSvNL2b

— Ric Flair® (@RicFlairNatrBoy) May 31, 2017

I assume covfefe was a draft that he inadvertently sent, and Trump being Trump, didn't even notice.

That said, what sort of maniac feels the need to prep a draft of an already idiotic tweet?

I am assuming he was in bed and fell asleep with his finger near enough to the screen to send it. That has happened to me on social media at night.

Low energy tweeter.

"Listen to this. Marcy comes over and she tells me that her ex-boyfriend was over late last night and '#covfefe I'm really tired today.'"

I feel like the "pulling out" of the Paris Climate accord is just waiting for the right joke to mask the horror.

Of course Trump always intended to do that, but he had to run home to his safe space like a little baby to announce it rather than discuss it with the other world leaders last week and make his stand there.

Exactly. He didn't have the balls to do so when he was outnumbered 6 to 1.

It's easy for people that won't be around for the impact of climate change to call it a hoax and pad their pockets while pushing the problem off to the next generation. That's the American way.

This ends the Javanka as a moderating force right? They were supposedly the ones pushing to remain in, no?

Maybe the other gits simply weren't worth the energy to argue with.

We are, after all, talking about some folks too f'n stupid to even attempt to protect their own country (yes Merkel, I'm looking at you). I don't know that I'd have even bothered to make the trip frankly.

This is coming from the same guy who, just a few days ago, tried to call out other nations for not holding up their end of an international agreement. No wonder he ran home to his safe space to announce it.

But were we really ever in the Paris Agreement? I don't remember anything ever being approved by the senate.

Obama entered into it as an executive agreement. Which was a bit controversial at the time, but there was a precedent for distinguishing treaties from "international agreements and international arrangements," and this was the latter.

Edit: Sorry, I let my anger get the best of me.

I just wish I could get answers to the following:

How does eliminating abortion help the country?
How does failing to adapt to new and cleaner energy technology help the country?
How does joining Syria against the Paris agreement help the country?
How does corporate welfare help the country?
How does a bad health care plan help the country?
How does privatizing the internet help anyone?
How does anyone still think Trump is worthy of the presidency?

Why are prisons run for profit?
Why are hospitals for that matter?
Why is education getting cut?

How many crazy pills have I taken?

Nearly every one of those could be answered by saying "it helps corporate bottom lines" abortion being the exception.

At some point people have to realize that the Republican party as it currently stands isn't for people with household incomes under $250k right?

We pull in north of that (albeit in SF) and still think the overwhelming majority of this country is too stupid, fat and scared to question the actions of anyone on their political team.

There aren't lines being drawn based on income. The lines are being drawn because of race, religion, and capitalism.

Even North Korea signed the deal.

Well they do a good job at turning their lights off at night

1) How does eliminating abortion help the country?
It doesn't, afaic. That ain't my cause.

2) How does failing to adapt to new and cleaner energy technology help the country?
Adapting is fine if that's the consumer's choice

3) How does joining Syria against the Paris agreement help the country?
It frees the nation from the largely meaningless agreement (remember, it's non-binding) over the hysterical bullshit of man-made climate change.

4) How does corporate welfare help the country?
I'm not a fan(aside from industry vital to the common defense) generally speaking. I'm not much help here I'm afraid.

5)How does a bad health care plan help the country?
Government should be getting its inept fingers [i] out of the market, not deeper into it. The lackluster changes to Obamacare fell far far FAR short of being what was needed.

6) How does privatizing the internet help anyone?
This one is tricky. Generally speaking business should be left free of government interference. And there is no such thing as a "right" to the internet.

7)How does anyone still think Trump is worthy of the presidency?
Because even if he's right 1 time out of 50 that's still a significant improvement over the Godforsaken p.o.s. that tried his best to destroy the nation for the last 8 years. I'd prefer ISIS over a (D) in office, they have more credibility & are right more often, so Trump looks like the greatest jewel in recent memory by comparison

8) Why are prisons run for profit?
If it saves taxpayers money, why not?

9) Why are hospitals for that matter?
Why wouldn't they be? Sure as hell not interested in having them run by the government.

10) Why is education getting cut?
Because it's the most overspent & underproducing entity in a lot of places. The education cabal ranks below autoworkers unions with me for credibility.

11) How many crazy pills have I taken?
2/3rds.

The problem with eliminating net neutrality is that ISPs have a monopoly in most parts of the country. If I had a choice in 10 different ISPs, I'm fine with dumping net neutrality.

And if ISPs want no government regulations in their service, they should give back the billions they took in taxpayer funds to build out fiber and broadband throughout the country. That seems like a fair deal. Kind of hypocritical to beg for handouts over the last few decades and then cry that the government is involved in your business.


I actually kind of agree on this point. There is this myth we don't fund education when in fact we do much more than most countries. At some point just throwing money at something doesn't magically improve it. Then again I feel the education issues in this country stem much more from bad parenting than how much money is in the classroom.

The weird thing with net neutrality being abolished is I think it would hurt right-wing sites more than left-wing sites. The left is much better at crying and pretending to be offended by things. They are much better at using that faux-outrage to shut things down and get people fired. I think they'd be much better at getting sites banned from a particular ISP than the right would be.

That's not really the issue with net neutrality. It's that large corporations will be able to pay Providers to offer their content at high speed while startups and other smaller companies will not and thus will be snuffed out.

Look no further than NetFlix, who is was an ardent and vocal supporter of Net Neutrality the last go around.
Netflix CEO says net neutrality is ‘not our primary battle’ - The Verge

From the CEO:


Just another obstacle in the way of the "american dream" that enemies of net neutrality claim they hold so dear.

Oh I know it's terrible for that reason too. I just think people overlook the fact that ISPs can start blocking sites they deem to be hateful. Just like Twitter, Facebook, etc ban accounts based on complaints.

The problem here is taxpayer money went into to building key parts of the infrastructure used by ISPs for the internet and those same ISPs claim to those parts of our infrastructure is keeping competition out of their areas.

The government helped ISPs create the regional monopolies we see today so the least they could do is protect the people at the mercy of those companies.

And I'd argue that within 10 years either the internet is considered a right to American citizens or we're going to be miles other countries from a technological standpoint.



There isn't concrete data either way is the problem.

Lets just hope wireless technology comes along like it's supposed to. If 5G does what some people think it can, most of us can throw Comcast/Time Warner away and never look back.

So, the question is loaded, but I'll be damned if that chicken doesn't need a shower.

Would definitely be better to have an ISIS leader in office, who would go on to implement Sharia law and behead all non-Muslims in the country rather than a dirty, stinking democrat. Good to see Jon is above simple partisan politics.

At least ISIS is honest about their intentions to destroy society and/or nations.
Democrats simply lie about it (or are delusional, which isn't exactly an upgrade).

Oh goody, more free shit.

I'm holding out for the unicorn.

I wouldn't argue free, but the government should put an end to regional monopolies and allow actual competition.

ISPs shouldn't get free market protections when there isn't a free market to begin with.

Well, Hell... Republicans are just ISIS in training.

Is ISIS the new 'Hitler'?

Heh...

Logan Dobson on Twitter: "I'd like to think someone just woke up from a 15-year coma and the first thing they saw was this tweet https://t.co/8kMtV6z7fG"

Jake Sherman on Twitter: "NEW YORK (AP) - CNN has cut ties with Kathy Griffin after video depicting her holding President Donald Trump's severed head."

Trump pulls out of the Paris Climate Accords because its not a deal good enough for the US. Meanwhile in Antarctica just today:

Giant iceberg poised to snap off from Antarctica: scientists

I was never enthusiastic about the US having to give billions of dollars to 3rd world countries who would probably embezzle half the dough anyways. I'd rather have that money spent here and have the embezzled money spent in the local economy.

God will take care of it.

I feel like we've reached peak anti-intellectualism. The people who don't believe scientists, who studied their field for years, are the same people who hand over their money to mega church preachers, who have as much Divinity training as I do.

It's a shame that we're at a point in time where nearly anyone can find out anything they want about absolutely anything with a few clicks of a mouse, and yet the perfect counter has already been thought up - just flood the internet with catchy, usually completely false, headline popping shit that preys on people's fear while also serving someone's agenda and it will drown out the facts.

Don't sweat it, I'm sure the guy that blocked a bill a few months ago to continue to allow mining companies to dump waste into streams knows what he's doing.

I heard part of Trump's speech live on the radio as I was driving around. I actually thought he did a great job of spelling out why he was pulling the US out of the accords.

But in the back of my mind, I was thinking, how many of these facts are wrong or out of context.

Looking forward to the analysis and rebuttals that are sure to come over the next couple days.

Also looking forward to Comey testifying next week.

Me too, but, I have this tiny bit of a nagging feeling in the back of my mind it's going to go like the Rachel Madow tax returns episode went. I hope it doesn't. I hope Comey's testimony carpet bombs this administration into the stone age, but, the pessimist in me is expecting a dud.

James Comey's fake Russian document handling baffles former officials - Business Insider

This story is going to guarantee the entire thing turns into partisan bickering over whether he is to be believed or not with no progress. The far right will say that nothing he says can be trusted, the far left will take every word as incontrovertible evidence that impeachment hearings should begin immediately, and we'll be in the same place we are now.

But we're now past whether or not belief really matters. Meuller will either deliver indictments or he won't, and that will be all that matters. Now that this is a criminal investigation, anything short of criminal activity will be cast as exoneration.

Rick Santorum, "Sad to be criticized by the left for something as obvious as solar (clouds & darkness) and wind (calm winds) are not reliable or consistent."

And I thought Trump was a fucking idiot.

Well, we do have a total solar eclipse every 375 years give or take, so there is that. That makes Rick a cautious fucking idiot....

Dola, the comments on his twitter feed responding to that are priceless, I'll be laughing for the next 30 minutes...

I'm personally interested in how he's going to 'renegotiate' an accord which was wholly voluntary and the choice of the US ... if its self selected then obviously negotiations are basically talking to yourself? ...

Still its great to see the US aligning with Syria against such a serious threat ;)

Donald Trump: “At what point does America get demeaned? At what point do they start laughing at us as a country?”

Even leaders of other countries are way ahead of you there Donald...
Nordic Leaders Troll Donald Trump With Their Version Of The Orb Pic

Newspapers on the decison?
https://www.thelocal.de/20170602/ear...act-withdrawal

Yeah, they aren't laughing at us, they're laughing at you.

You know, I sometimes imagine this is all one big game of EU4, and this particular move just ends up as one of those moves, where like 3 turns later, you're thinking about the fucking mess you just got yourself into, and wondering why you didn't save before you did it.

Almost all of them ... What else would you expect ? The guy thinks climate change is an invention by china to hinder the US.

https://news.vice.com/story/trump-wr...e-change-paris

(sorry, couldn't find a "big media" outlet quickly. But the facts/issues i am familiar with are spot on here ...)

I'm not defending Santorum or his statement, but current solar tech is much more dependent on cloud cover than than your post implies.

It's also a net negative environmental impact, but if we can change pv cell composition one day we can change that.

It does affect the efficiency but doesn't stop production at all - if it did I expect you wouldn't see so many solar farms in the UK.

4m homes in the UK will be powered purely by solar by 2020 .. Solar power in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

I still think May will win, but polls in England are swinging hard to Corbyn. That Tory manifesto was an incredible self-inflicted wound.

I would love to see England vote away from the Conservatives but unfortunately I doubt it will happen, the situation there is much the same as here - the less right wing parties will split the vote between them and the Tories will get in I expect.

(which is a huge shame for the country as a whole - especially as the other parties have a huge amount of commonality in the main)

Do you really think he was going this deep? I know Solar efficiency is about the heat on the panels as much as actual clear, sunny skies, so light without excessive heat is preferred. But for him to basically dismiss it as a viable alternative is foolish and short sighted IMO.

Was watching Charlie Rose early this morning and he had a former Intelligence director on there. He was talking about the middle east and the biggest threat right now that isn't really being talked about, and that's what happens as Syria gets tighter and tighter.

He mentioned that the US took out some Syrian fighters recently because they got too close to a training area for US fighters and allies. That Russia recently attacked US allies that got too close to their staging areas. This is going to continue to escalate and there's really no plan for what the next phase is.

It really has the seeds for something much bigger when its US and allies v. Russia/Syria assuming that the big battle Raqqa ends without any sort of plan, what's the next step, because this is how real wars start.

Has the real war ever really ended? It would be interesting to be able to read a history book written 200 years from now to describe the last 100+ years of history in that region. A century of shitty wars, rebellions, terrorist attacks, massacres, etc. all stemming largely from the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the actions taken by the Western powers following/during that fall.

This morning's tweets wont help his travel ban case before SCOTUS.

POTUS saying courts are too "political". OK.

Has the region ever not been at war? I would say there has been conflict for the entire history of man.

There's another mass shooting in ORL. Meanwhile, the President Of The United States is hate-Tweeting about the mayor of London, England. Great optics!

If there's ever been a case for the white house to take away his Twitter privileges it's been over the last 24 hours.

This Qatar thing is crazy. The Saudis, and others, have closed borders with Qatar. The same Qatar that hosts a massive U.S. military base.

This is turning biblical real quick

For supporters at least, it ain't half bad.

For the rest, honestly, I'm not sure Trump gives two shits what they think. (2/3rds of one maybe, but not two full ones). Which, conveniently, also fits pretty well with his supporters feelings.

Yeah, great optics. We'll keep letting our own die while building up a boogie man of another color. America first, after all.

Honestly stolen from the comments section at Deadspin.

Huh? There was a long period during Ottoman rule where the Middle East was relatively at peace. The warfare involving the Ottoman Empire from the mid-1500s to the 1800s involved the parts of the Empire in Europe or bordering Russia.

Looking like this was a workplace incident where the shooter was fired in April. Looks like he committed suicide after the shooting. So if the shooter was a white male, likely Trump doesn't care too much politically.

Multiple fatalities reported in workplace shooting in Orlando, Florida - AOL News

The crazy thing about this is that you can tell the administration views it as an easy political point just because it has the word 'Paris' in it. They have to know full well with this "Pittsburgh not Paris" stuff that people in Pittsburgh do in fact care about global warming, but to the base "backing out of the Paris accord" conjures up the image of antagonizing some effeminate globalist Frenchman to show how tough and strong America is.

Except this was the decline of the empire. And there was great unrest within the empire. Rebels took over large parts of the empire and kept the taxes from the weak government.
There were revolts throughout this time period.

And the Ottomans invaded central Europe in the late 1600s. Thus, Europe and then Russia saw an opportunity and attacked.

I dont think it was as peaceful as you think.

How many of those Ottoman rebellions were based in the Middle East? The vast majority were in Southeastern Europe (mostly Serbia) or Anatolia.

And if we are discussion internal revolts or uprisings, how is this any different from any other area? I mean it's roughly akin to asking if France has ever not been at war.

Definitely. Plenty of conflict in Europe. Hell, the IRA/UK stuff fills out a lot of years post WW2 all by itself. Balkan Wars of the 90s, Russia invading Georgia, the list goes on and on. As a species we humans have always been fighting and always will be. Limiting the damage/loss of life is key. We are actually doing much better in that regard. Compared to say, Europe from 1914-1918.

This seems to fit.

The guy who has a temper tantrum on Twitter every other day doesn't give two shits what they think? Come on.

Yeah, timing-wise, it's quite likely this morning's "TRAVEL BAN" (in all caps!) outburst was triggered by criticism from Morning Joe. "Desire to be liked/respected by the overwhelming majority of people" is a personality trait that typically isn't all that strong in politicians, but Trump really does seem to live for the approval of the masses, and he lashes out when he perceives that he's being criticized. Some of his *supporters* don't give a crap about the opposition's opinions of them, but Trump himself sure seems to care.