hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 2739 of 2784 FirstFirst ... 1739223926392689272927362737273827392740274127422749 ... LastLast
Results 54,761 to 54,780 of 55670

Thread: USA Politics Thread

  1. #54761

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    4,165
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dzajic View Post
    Just calling it "climate change" was a conservative victory. For 30 years before that it was "Anthropocentric global warming". And that is still the more correct term, yes local climate may get cooler in some places, but overall the planet is warming. But GOP and (I think) Bush II administration managed to relabel it to "climate change".

    Carbon tax and trade is a horrible pure capitalist attempt at solution that doesn't solve anything and just creates more profit opportunities for financial capital and service providers. A very neoliberal approach.
    Hurr Durr it snowed, but they say theres global warming.

    Unfortunately, it was the easiest, dumbest excuse to be willfully ignorant and be the special kind of asshole who selfishly fucks everything up for everyone else, because somethingsomething some dirt farmer in thirdworldshithole uses plastic to haul his water from the dirty river to his mud hovel so why should I change.

    These people should be held criminally negligent, but fortunately, worsening Atlantic and Caribbean hurricanes are going to scour most of them off the planet in karmic retribution soon, and the bigger, blacker tornados will get get the ones further inland. It's just unfortunate there's going to be a lot of collateral damage everywhere else.
    They won’t be scoured off the coasts. They’ll become—gasp—refugees! And they’ll move north, and west.
    Build. The. Wall.
    You know what - judging from the composition of the construction teams here in Germany, I'd say the wall will mostly be build by (illegal?) immigrants then ...

  2. #54762
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    11,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dzajic View Post
    Just calling it "climate change" was a conservative victory. For 30 years before that it was "Anthropocentric global warming". And that is still the more correct term, yes local climate may get cooler in some places, but overall the planet is warming. But GOP and (I think) Bush II administration managed to relabel it to "climate change".

    Carbon tax and trade is a horrible pure capitalist attempt at solution that doesn't solve anything and just creates more profit opportunities for financial capital and service providers. A very neoliberal approach.
    Hurr Durr it snowed, but they say theres global warming.

    Unfortunately, it was the easiest, dumbest excuse to be willfully ignorant and be the special kind of asshole who selfishly fucks everything up for everyone else, because somethingsomething some dirt farmer in thirdworldshithole uses plastic to haul his water from the dirty river to his mud hovel so why should I change.

    These people should be held criminally negligent, but fortunately, worsening Atlantic and Caribbean hurricanes are going to scour most of them off the planet in karmic retribution soon, and the bigger, blacker tornados will get get the ones further inland. It's just unfortunate there's going to be a lot of collateral damage everywhere else.
    They won’t be scoured off the coasts. They’ll become—gasp—refugees! And they’ll move north, and west.
    Build. The. Wall.
    You know what - judging from the composition of the construction teams here in Germany, I'd say the wall will mostly be build by (illegal?) immigrants then ...
    They already build a lot of the houses (and do a lot of the gardening, and do a lot of the cooking and cleaning, and food preparation, and farm labor, and general labor...)
    meh

  3. #54763
    Super Chillerator Global Moderator teds :D's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 9, 2011
    Posts
    8,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dzajic View Post
    Just calling it "climate change" was a conservative victory. For 30 years before that it was "Anthropocentric global warming". And that is still the more correct term, yes local climate may get cooler in some places, but overall the planet is warming. But GOP and (I think) Bush II administration managed to relabel it to "climate change".
    I remember it the other way around.

    It first was labeled "Global Warming", (hence the "AGW" moniker). And because, as erichknaar stated, those a 'lil low on the intellectual resource meter can't into weather != climate, and the scientific oriented populace got annoyed with having to explain it over and over again - the dominant term used became "Climate Change".
    they've always been seperate issues. basically put;

    climate change: the climate is always changing, but it's changing quicker recently
    global warming: while the climate changes, earth overall stays a sort of average temp, this is getting warmer.

  4. #54764
    Donor Pattern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    6,715

  5. #54765
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    7,663
    TBH I'm fine with amending the 14th amendment so birthright citizenship is only given to those whose parents are legal residents or citizens themselves. It's like that pretty much everywhere in Europe, even stricter in some cases.

    An acknowledgement of hypocrisy on this issue from Republicans is far too much to ask though since for them it's not a question of amending an archaic status quo and bringing the US in line with the rest of the world; for them its about racism against brown people.

  6. #54766
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    1,701
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    TBH I'm fine with amending the 14th amendment so birthright citizenship is only given to those whose parents are legal residents or citizens themselves. It's like that pretty much everywhere in Europe, even stricter in some cases.

    An acknowledgement of hypocrisy on this issue from Republicans is far too much to ask though since for them it's not a question of amending an archaic status quo and bringing the US in line with the rest of the world; for them its about racism against brown people.
    It would be problematic in the US because of the 10+ million illegals here. Birthright citizenship gives the next generation an out from being a permanent and invisible underclass. There would need to be more DACA-like laws or a path to citizenship if you were to do this

    But yeah stricter immigration laws are pretty much the standard in Europe and by itself they're not something to get really worked up about despite what the pink-haired bunch says. The problem is when the Stephen Miller + Bannon crowd are suggesting them, and then you have to wonder what the motive is, and where it will end.
    Last edited by mewninn; November 2 2018 at 09:54:36 PM.

  7. #54767
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    12,395
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    TBH I'm fine with amending the 14th amendment so birthright citizenship is only given to those whose parents are legal residents or citizens themselves. It's like that pretty much everywhere in Europe, even stricter in some cases.

    An acknowledgement of hypocrisy on this issue from Republicans is far too much to ask though since for them it's not a question of amending an archaic status quo and bringing the US in line with the rest of the world; for them its about racism against brown people.
    It would be problematic in the US because of the 10+ million illegals here. Birthright citizenship gives the next generation an out from being a permanent and invisible underclass. There would need to be more DACA-like laws or a path to citizenship if you were to do this

    But yeah stricter immigration laws are pretty much the standard in Europe and by itself they're not something to get really worked up about despite what the pink-haired bunch says. The problem is when the Stephen Miller + Bannon crowd are suggesting them, and then you have to wonder what the motive is, and where it will end.
    surely you can see that the point of getting rid of birthright citizenship is the creation of permanent a easily disposable underclass ?

    i mean sure, the kids end up becoming defacto stateless, but that just means they're even more locked into the system in the process!
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  8. #54768
    Lachesis VII's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 20, 2011
    Location
    Egghelende
    Posts
    2,525
    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...itings-to-fbi/

    Local state rep penned a Vanila ISIS insurgency manual, gets referred to FBI for investigation.

    Seriously, shit gets weird on the other side of the mountains. It’s called Spokanistan for a reason.

  9. #54769
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    11,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...itings-to-fbi/

    Local state rep penned a Vanila ISIS insurgency manual, gets referred to FBI for investigation.

    Seriously, shit gets weird on the other side of the mountains. It’s called Spokanistan for a reason.
    My flight back from Vegas on Sunday was "going on to Spokane".


    Holy fuck.
    meh

  10. #54770
    Donor Spaztick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    No Longer up High Sierra's Ass
    Posts
    9,659
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...itings-to-fbi/

    Local state rep penned a Vanila ISIS insurgency manual, gets referred to FBI for investigation.

    Seriously, shit gets weird on the other side of the mountains. It’s called Spokanistan for a reason.
    Seattle is the heavy liberal capital of WA and the rest of the state is a lot of confederate flag waving rednecks. I had family there (and you can guess which part).

    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    TBH I'm fine with amending the 14th amendment so birthright citizenship is only given to those whose parents are legal residents or citizens themselves. It's like that pretty much everywhere in Europe, even stricter in some cases.

    An acknowledgement of hypocrisy on this issue from Republicans is far too much to ask though since for them it's not a question of amending an archaic status quo and bringing the US in line with the rest of the world; for them its about racism against brown people.
    It would be problematic in the US because of the 10+ million illegals here. Birthright citizenship gives the next generation an out from being a permanent and invisible underclass. There would need to be more DACA-like laws or a path to citizenship if you were to do this

    But yeah stricter immigration laws are pretty much the standard in Europe and by itself they're not something to get really worked up about despite what the pink-haired bunch says. The problem is when the Stephen Miller + Bannon crowd are suggesting them, and then you have to wonder what the motive is, and where it will end.
    surely you can see that the point of getting rid of birthright citizenship is the creation of permanent a easily disposable underclass ?

    i mean sure, the kids end up becoming defacto stateless, but that just means they're even more locked into the system in the process!
    I think that implies responsibility on the states parts for de jure citizenship of the parents and children. I agree security is an important responsibility: nobody visiting the US should be worried about retaliation from the government for being in the country, but citizenship is a privilege granted. Also giving birthright citizenship is a great way to incentivize people to move here legally or illegally and pop out anchor babies so they can be guaranteed de facto citizenship, or even have a baby in Mexico and come across the border to acquire a US birth certificate (which happens a lot in Texas).
    Last edited by Spaztick; November 3 2018 at 12:02:05 AM.

  11. #54771
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    7,663
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    TBH I'm fine with amending the 14th amendment so birthright citizenship is only given to those whose parents are legal residents or citizens themselves. It's like that pretty much everywhere in Europe, even stricter in some cases.

    An acknowledgement of hypocrisy on this issue from Republicans is far too much to ask though since for them it's not a question of amending an archaic status quo and bringing the US in line with the rest of the world; for them its about racism against brown people.
    It would be problematic in the US because of the 10+ million illegals here. Birthright citizenship gives the next generation an out from being a permanent and invisible underclass. There would need to be more DACA-like laws or a path to citizenship if you were to do this

    But yeah stricter immigration laws are pretty much the standard in Europe and by itself they're not something to get really worked up about despite what the pink-haired bunch says. The problem is when the Stephen Miller + Bannon crowd are suggesting them, and then you have to wonder what the motive is, and where it will end.
    surely you can see that the point of getting rid of birthright citizenship is the creation of permanent a easily disposable underclass ?

    i mean sure, the kids end up becoming defacto stateless, but that just means they're even more locked into the system in the process!
    No, the vast majority of counties have jus sanguinis laws so they are eligible for citizenship of country their parents were born in. They would not be stateless.

    Ideally though there would be an amnesty for those who already live here with permanent residence/pathway to citizenship, and an easy to get guest worker visa so that economic migrants get documented. Plus a massive crackdown on people who hire undocumented workers.

    But this is just wishful thinking since there's no discussion of meaningful reforms anymore. It's either "shoot brown people at the border" now or "everyone is entitled to US citizenship" with no room in between apparently.
    Last edited by Approaching Walrus; November 3 2018 at 12:20:32 AM.

  12. #54772
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    14,579
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Fahrentho...21830837563392

    It's interesting and will probably be entertaining, but the congressional GOP are already fine with Trump being a russian agent, so I don't see them giving a shit about this
    Quote Originally Posted by Keieueue View Post
    I love Malcanis!

  13. #54773
    Movember 2012 I Legionnaire's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,736
    Imagine one airliner crashing every day and killing 115 passengers. This would be a national emergency that would eclipse partisanship. The death of 115 Americans by overdose every day should also eclipse partisanship.

    Yes, and every day 96 people are killed by gun violence, this should eclipse partisanship.


    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/newt...and-save-lives

  14. #54774
    Kai's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 2, 2012
    Posts
    6,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...itings-to-fbi/

    Local state rep penned a Vanila ISIS insurgency manual, gets referred to FBI for investigation.

    Seriously, shit gets weird on the other side of the mountains. Its called Spokanistan for a reason.
    I'm not saying he's sane. But seriously, that article manages to imply that just war theory is a weird Christian ideology to justify holy war.

    It's a mainstream western theory to justify war and underpins the right of national self defence. It has its basis in Christian ideology.

  15. #54775
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    1,701
    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...itings-to-fbi/

    Local state rep penned a Vanila ISIS insurgency manual, gets referred to FBI for investigation.

    Seriously, shit gets weird on the other side of the mountains. It’s called Spokanistan for a reason.
    I'm not saying he's sane. But seriously, that article manages to imply that just war theory is a weird Christian ideology to justify holy war.

    It's a mainstream western theory to justify war and underpins the right of national self defence. It has its basis in Christian ideology.
    No its nothing like just war theory. The reason why Thomas Aquinas still gets quoted today is because he has a fairly grounded analysis on the ethics of war for a 14th century theologian

    This is just a lot of crazy evangelism on display. Here's a taste:

    c. Make an offer of Peace before declaring war.
    i. Not a negotiation or compromise of righteousness.
    ii. Must surrender on terms of justice and righteousness:
    1. Stop all abortions;
    2. No same-sex marriage;
    3. No idolatry or occultism;
    4. No communism; and
    5. Must obey Biblical law.
    iii. If they yield – must pay share of work or taxes.
    iv. If they do not yield – kill all males.
    https://www.spokesman.com/documents/...cal-basis-war/
    Last edited by mewninn; November 3 2018 at 11:21:37 PM.

  16. #54776
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    11,336
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    This is just a lot of crazy evangelism on display. Here's a taste:

    c. Make an offer of Peace before declaring war.
    i. Not a negotiation or compromise of righteousness.
    ii. Must surrender on terms of justice and righteousness:
    1. Stop all abortions;
    2. No same-sex marriage;
    3. No idolatry or occultism;
    4. No communism; and
    5. Must obey Biblical law.
    iii. If they yield must pay share of work or taxes.
    iv. If they do not yield kill all males.
    https://www.spokesman.com/documents/...cal-basis-war/
    Batshit/10
    meh

  17. #54777
    Lachesis VII's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 20, 2011
    Location
    Egghelende
    Posts
    2,525
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...itings-to-fbi/

    Local state rep penned a Vanila ISIS insurgency manual, gets referred to FBI for investigation.

    Seriously, shit gets weird on the other side of the mountains. It’s called Spokanistan for a reason.
    I'm not saying he's sane. But seriously, that article manages to imply that just war theory is a weird Christian ideology to justify holy war.

    It's a mainstream western theory to justify war and underpins the right of national self defence. It has its basis in Christian ideology.
    No its nothing like just war theory. The reason why Thomas Aquinas still gets quoted today is because he has a fairly grounded analysis on the ethics of war for a 14th century theologian

    This is just a lot of crazy evangelism on display. Here's a taste:

    c. Make an offer of Peace before declaring war.
    i. Not a negotiation or compromise of righteousness.
    ii. Must surrender on terms of justice and righteousness:
    1. Stop all abortions;
    2. No same-sex marriage;
    3. No idolatry or occultism;
    4. No communism; and
    5. Must obey Biblical law.
    iii. If they yield – must pay share of work or taxes.
    iv. If they do not yield – kill all males.
    https://www.spokesman.com/documents/...cal-basis-war/
    I love this whole “must obey biblical law, but no communism” angle these people have worked themselves into. Have they ever read the New Testament, and what it has to say about property and wealth and government?

  18. #54778
    Lachesis VII's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 20, 2011
    Location
    Egghelende
    Posts
    2,525
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    This is just a lot of crazy evangelism on display. Here's a taste:

    c. Make an offer of Peace before declaring war.
    i. Not a negotiation or compromise of righteousness.
    ii. Must surrender on terms of justice and righteousness:
    1. Stop all abortions;
    2. No same-sex marriage;
    3. No idolatry or occultism;
    4. No communism; and
    5. Must obey Biblical law.
    iii. If they yield – must pay share of work or taxes.
    iv. If they do not yield – kill all males.
    https://www.spokesman.com/documents/...cal-basis-war/
    Batshit/10
    Can you divide by batshit?

  19. #54779
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    14,579
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...itings-to-fbi/

    Local state rep penned a Vanila ISIS insurgency manual, gets referred to FBI for investigation.

    Seriously, shit gets weird on the other side of the mountains. It’s called Spokanistan for a reason.
    I'm not saying he's sane. But seriously, that article manages to imply that just war theory is a weird Christian ideology to justify holy war.

    It's a mainstream western theory to justify war and underpins the right of national self defence. It has its basis in Christian ideology.
    No its nothing like just war theory. The reason why Thomas Aquinas still gets quoted today is because he has a fairly grounded analysis on the ethics of war for a 14th century theologian

    This is just a lot of crazy evangelism on display. Here's a taste:

    c. Make an offer of Peace before declaring war.
    i. Not a negotiation or compromise of righteousness.
    ii. Must surrender on terms of justice and righteousness:
    1. Stop all abortions;
    2. No same-sex marriage;
    3. No idolatry or occultism;
    4. No communism; and
    5. Must obey Biblical law.
    iii. If they yield – must pay share of work or taxes.
    iv. If they do not yield – kill all males.
    https://www.spokesman.com/documents/...cal-basis-war/
    I love this whole “must obey biblical law, but no communism” angle these people have worked themselves into. Have they ever read the New Testament, and what it has to say about property and wealth and government?
    Supply Side Biblical Law, dummy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Keieueue View Post
    I love Malcanis!

  20. #54780
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    11,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachesis VII View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    This is just a lot of crazy evangelism on display. Here's a taste:

    c. Make an offer of Peace before declaring war.
    i. Not a negotiation or compromise of righteousness.
    ii. Must surrender on terms of justice and righteousness:
    1. Stop all abortions;
    2. No same-sex marriage;
    3. No idolatry or occultism;
    4. No communism; and
    5. Must obey Biblical law.
    iii. If they yield – must pay share of work or taxes.
    iv. If they do not yield – kill all males.
    https://www.spokesman.com/documents/...cal-basis-war/
    Batshit/10
    Can you divide by batshit?
    These people are multiplying it, so sure, why not?
    meh

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •