Messages

1

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: December 15, 2019, 10:48:28 AM »

My man Jonathan Pie lays down the truth.

https://youtu.be/G0nIhL4v6bY

People need to understand that this vote was a protest vote. For three plus years the entire media and parliamentary opinion has been focused on Brexit. So it's only natural that a subset of people who would never, ever, vote for the party of the rich/old would change their vote if only so Brexit could finally be done with and the declining social system could be addressed.

Will said social system be addressed in a way that pleases said voters by that party? I wouldn't quite bet my life against it but I would bet a whole lot of money. Fact is the Conservatives have ruled for close to a decade here and living standards for the lower class have continually declined. I'm not sure why I should believe they'd start caring now. The entire history of the Tory party has been taking care care of London and anywhere a couple hours drive away.

2

General Comments / Re: British elections!

« on: December 13, 2019, 09:40:25 PM »

One viewpoint on a decade of Tory rule.

https://youtu.be/MjUWX6S8iYU

3

General Comments / Re: British elections!

« on: December 12, 2019, 06:28:41 PM »

So the polls are closed and the exit polls released. If they hold accurate it looks like the Conservatives will have a massive majority, with Labour at it's worst showing in decades.

Worst showing since 1935.

Is what it is. I'm against public referendums in general but the public have chosen their representatives. I'll respect that.

I'll also have an uncomfortable amount of schadenfreude when the poor and uneducated who fell for this begin to reap what they sowed. The same people I've had to listen to talk about how we'll be free. L-o-shoot-me-now-l.

Tory deal keeps us on EU regs outside of keeping brown and Slav people out the country and in return we get to still follow the rest of the EU regs without being one of the three most important countries making those decisions.

Let me be clear, I'm going to suffer as well. I'm not rich enough not to. I may even suffer in ways beyond losing my pension, seeing as how the Tories have spent the past 10 years weakening the social safety net and we're about to enter a self imposed economic contraction.

Oh well, least I'll have the comfort of an "I told you so."

4

General Comments / Re: British elections!

« on: December 12, 2019, 06:13:34 PM »

It’s hard to be left wing in Europe without being anti Semitic. Hell, in Germany burning down a synagogue because you don’t like Jews is “not a hate crime” if you’re Muslim. Hope that judge gets heiled.

I mean, it's not really hard for me.

I still maintain you can speak out against Israel's actions without being labeled anti Semitic.

Did those people get punished for arson? I'm not the biggest fan of hate crime legislation so I'll admit I'm not all that bothered if they got done for that. I'd be very surprised if they burned down a building and got away with it.

5

General Comments / Re: British elections!

« on: December 12, 2019, 06:02:56 PM »

ElectoralVote.com has a good summary of what's up (for those on the west side of the pond).

The general consensus seems to be that this is one of those elections that the United States seems to have so often these days, where voters will be choosing the less problematic of two bad options. On one side are the Conservatives and Boris Johnson. His flaws are pretty well known, but just in case anyone has forgotten: He's a nativist and populist who abuses his power and has been guilty of what the Guardian describes as "breathtaking hypocrisy." He's also hardly a model of ideal behavior in private; he alienates the people he works with, is allegedly somewhat lazy, and has been credibly accused of having a child from an extramarital affair, and then pretending that child does not exist. Should he be sustained, he's going to try to ram through a Brexit deal that makes very few people happy, as it keeps the UK tied to the other EU countries in many ways, except without a lot of the benefits of actual EU membership, such as having a say in crafting EU policies.

Alternatively, folks could check their ballots for Labour. That would put Jeremy Corbyn in 10 Downing Street. Corbyn, however, has quite a few flaws of his own. To start, the fact that he and his party are not surging despite 10 years of shaky Conservative leadership and plenty of "throw the bums out" sentiment speaks to Corbyn's rather low popularity. In fact, he has the lowest approval ratings of any major British politician of the last decade, and has shown no ability whatsoever to expand his (or Labour's) appeal beyond hard-core supporters. He has also done a lousy job of responding to anti-Semitism in his own party, with the result that Jewish voters have taken an "anyone but Corbyn" attitude heading into Thursday's balloting. If Corbyn is elected, he has promised to cancel Brexit without holding a new referendum. Given that about 50% of the populace has remained steadfast in their support of Brexit, that will be an unpopular move, to say the least.

There are no other parties in the U.K. that, right now, have a plausible path to a majority in Parliament. Jo Swinson, leader of the Liberal Democrats, has far less baggage than Johnson or Corbyn, but the premiership is not in her immediate future (and is probably not in her distant future, either). The best projection available suggests that Johnson is not only going to remain in power, but that he'll pick up 25-30 seats in Parliament, which will allow him to pass his Brexit deal. Of course, polling British parliamentary elections is always a tricky business, and you should never take anything to the bank until the ballots are counted. Still, if Johnson does win convincingly, then that will likely be the end of the line for Corbyn as Labour leader. Undoubtedly, the Party is wishing it had its old leader, Ed Miliband, back. Not only was he more moderate and more popular, he is also Jewish.

Good luck, Quang, deciding between the rock and the hard place.

Don't think this is quite fair. What Corbyn promised was that the Labour party would present its own deal in a referendum with the other choice being no Brexit. That's a far shout from canceling it with no referendum.

I suspect they mixed up his position and Jo Swinson's.  (Lib Dems.) They did indeed flat out say they would revoke Brexit without a referendum if elected.

6

General Comments / British elections!

« on: December 10, 2019, 06:47:31 PM »

So we're having elections this side of the pond. Boris Johnson is gonna win despite being a dick.

I would totally vote Lib Dem however despite the historical record of my district being Labour I'm not comfortable leaving it in the hands of people who would vote for economic suicide. Which, you know, they did. Direct democracy sucks ass. Labour it is.

Unless they actually managed to get young voters to really buy in, it'll he a Tory government. God help us all.

7

General Comments / Re: Concentration camps

« on: November 14, 2019, 03:48:52 PM »

In regard to Western bias, I'll also point this out.

Uighur culture will be functionally extinct in the next decade or two. They've all been put into reeducation camps, and their children will be raised without knowledge of their culture or religious beliefs. And they'll raise their kids the same. And once the grandparents are dead, the Uighurs, as a people, will be extinct. They'll be different looking Chinese people.

I would suggest you all compare and contrast your feelings towards that with your feelings to the Jewish community facing the same thing. After all, take out culture and religion and most Jewish people are white. They could go through the same thing and at least they wouldn't look different in the end.

I ask you - is there a moral or a practical reason that we're not all up in arms over the Uighurs, but would lose our *censored* if some country decided to do the same to their significant Jewish minority.

8

General Comments / Re: Concentration camps

« on: November 14, 2019, 03:24:27 PM »

What's happening with the Uighurs is absolutely real. While not as bad as the NK camps, there has been a concerted effort to remove their cultural heritage and adherence to Islam. People are being rolled into "reeducation camps" wholesale.

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if some higher up in China ate the right wing idea that "Muslims=terrorists and radicals," and rolled up a plan to pacify the 5th largest minority in the country ahead of time.

The people put into those camps, it won't be as effective. But their children, raised in that environment? They'll be good Chinese Communists raised with the Right Ideas.

It's a similar idea to how North American governments thought they could raise Native American kids in white people style and therefore integrate them into the "right" culture and ideals. Except with modern logistics, it'll be far more successful. And with China's muscle on the international stage, ain't no one gonna truly get in their way.

I understand the reality of geopolitik, but it does no one any favors to pretend like what we can see isn't there. Let's be honest with ourselves. There are people suffering over there and in order to truly help them, it would have a cost that we, as a nation, are not willing to pay.

9

General Comments / Re: The Race is On

« on: November 09, 2019, 07:02:58 PM »

But hey, they weren't there in Normandy so...

10

General Comments / Re: The Race is On

« on: November 09, 2019, 07:01:09 PM »

For thr Kurd thing, I suppose it could be called a lot of things but I was mostly wondering about the limits. How long we were supposed to support them, if we were supposed to be their permanent military and defend them from every enemy they have in perpetuity. I don’t recall voicing support for it or objecting to it.

My persona is that I won’t condemn every single thing about Trump because he won the election or gives some people a sad. I do think that committing troops to action is something the Congress should do rather than a single person. Given your irrational hatred of Trump, I’d think you would like putting restraints on his power and I did laugh at those that think he’s a lunatic trying to support his unlimited power and their sudden  willingness to conduct unnecessary wars.

I guess I can understand why you'd hate me for that.

Again, I'm just calling attention to the fact that none of us post here like we'd talk to people in real life, face to face. I'm willing to admit it. I'm a bleeding heart liberal who believes in Scandinavian style socialism but I can't go around slanging that crap in real life with the same sort of fervor or lack of responsibility because I know those people as real people and I can't treat them the same way I treat screen names.

Given that, the KB was about more then executive power. Congress pissed away their war authority all the way back in Vietnam. Plenty of R's took advantage of it.

It was about how Trump went about it. How he tried to defend it in hindsight. The supreme hypocrisy to me was how we supposedly went over there to make it a better place for our type of thinking, and then Trump hamstrings the *only* Muslim ethnicity in the *entire* Middle East that actually believes in things like women's rights and Western values and we just straight up *censored*ed them.

You can believe it or not but if Obama had bent the Kurds over the genocide barrel the same way Trump just did I'd be every bit as pissed.

11

General Comments / Re: The Race is On

« on: November 09, 2019, 04:25:48 PM »

Actually, I did not claim NPR changed the transcript. You just made that up. Why are you making things up like that? The posts are adjacent, it’s super easy to see you’re just, well, being dishonest about what I said.

The last couple of posts from you I’ve seen are completely uncalled for personal attacks on others or just outright, obvious, falsehoods.

To be fair you've earned how people on this board respond to you. I don't blame him.

The personal attack was not directed at me. I did respond saying it was uncalled, and it is. I also disagree with your assertion that it’s ok to lie.

In the Dobbs sucks off Trump sucks off Dobbs sucks off Trump spectrum, you're pretty much in the middle. But everyone here, Seriati included, knows exactly the persona you put out there (because of course you're just some dude and the Internet inevitably makes almost everyone look worse then they really are) and absolutely no one is surprised by anything you post, even when it's pretty transparent you're just trying to "own the libs." You were exactly the same when you posted as Rafi on the old board.

Wut? 

Eh, I might be wrong about the Rafi thing, likely even, it was just a guess based upon posting styles.

The part about online personas, what I meant was I really hate yours. What you say, how you post. And yet, if were to meet in a bar or an in law barbeque I'm quite sure you'd be a decent guy and all I'd say to myself would be, "Never, ever bring up religion or politics with this guy."

The Trump Dobbs thing was just me wondering where you fit in that spectrum. You are aware they've just been bouncing compliments off each other the past few days in the best "Dear Leader" type of style.

Even after the Kurdish Betrayal you were desperately looking for any excuse or why it wasn't that, and only after most of the Repugs spoke out against it you half heartedly said "Well if Congress feels that way, let them fix it," instead of choosing to criticise the Dear Leader.

12

General Comments / Re: The Race is On

« on: November 08, 2019, 08:08:10 PM »

Actually, I did not claim NPR changed the transcript. You just made that up. Why are you making things up like that? The posts are adjacent, it’s super easy to see you’re just, well, being dishonest about what I said.

The last couple of posts from you I’ve seen are completely uncalled for personal attacks on others or just outright, obvious, falsehoods.

To be fair you've earned how people on this board respond to you. I don't blame him.

In the Dobbs sucks off Trump sucks off Dobbs sucks off Trump spectrum, you're pretty much in the middle. But everyone here, Seriati included, knows exactly the persona you put out there (because of course you're just some dude and the Internet inevitably makes almost everyone look worse then they really are) and absolutely no one is surprised by anything you post, even when it's pretty transparent you're just trying to "own the libs." You were exactly the same when you posted as Rafi on the old board.

13

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: October 19, 2019, 03:35:25 PM »

Spoiler alert - the Tories tried to make Theresa May their scapegoat for the Brexit fallout, she didn't last long enough, so they've shifted that honour to Johnson.

Ya'll complain the media sets Trump up to fail in the States, but BJ's own party used his own ego and power hungryness to set him up. His own party.

14

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: October 19, 2019, 03:31:16 PM »

And another failed vote for Johnson. I don't think he's gotten anything passed Parliament. How on earth is he still Prime Minister?

Fair play to him, he got 1 put of his first 9 votes passed.

This is the equivalent of the House being the end all of government and the first nine votes Pelosi gets she only wins one despite there being enough people in to vote her leader.

What a circus.

15

General Comments / Re: The impossible economy

« on: October 15, 2019, 01:04:33 PM »

With 3.5% unemployment, people have options. If they are living paycheck to paycheck, they can find higher paying jobs, pick up a second job, etc. They are not locked into the one job for the rest of their life. I’m not sure why you think they are. Have you only had one job your entire life?

Leaving aside the rest of my disagreements with you, not just your arguments but apparently you as a person, this "point" of yours is pretty disgusting.

Let them eat cake, eh, Crunch?

16

General Comments / Re: Trump decision to pull U.S. troops back from Syrian-Turkish border

« on: October 08, 2019, 04:04:08 PM »

From what I've read, we're talking about 50-100 soldiers. I could definitely be not seeing the big picture, but that doesn't seem like any kind of momentum-changing volume of people to help defend or not.

It could be one.

The number doesn't matter. The fact that there is a Muslim nationality in the Middle East willing to set aside stuff like burkas, to that extent, that's what matters.

We're all supposed to up and support Israel for having decent human values. Yet we're going to abandon these people? Again?

Because I kind of feel the need to remind people of how the Kurds were assured of protection after Iraq War 1 and got betrayed.

Conservatives so often talk about how they'd accept Muslims if they'd only accept human rights, and now they're abandoning the very ones who do so.

Edit - What, you think women make a large part of the US or UK armed forces? The fact they're even allowed to is the point here.

17

General Comments / Re: Trump decision to pull U.S. troops back from Syrian-Turkish border

« on: October 08, 2019, 03:14:29 PM »

I get the joke, Wayward, but fact is the Kurds had women fighting on the front line against ISIS. All they want is their own country protected against Iraq and Turkey.

It would be immensely shameful if we were to abandon them yet again, like Bush the First did.

I know we've got some decent conservatives on the board, can any of them please give me the other side's perspective on this?

18

General Comments / Re: Heart-Bern?

« on: October 08, 2019, 01:29:50 AM »

And don't get me wrong, Biden is the literal Clinton 2.0. Lifelong politician embroiled up to the neck in "necessary" political decisions that look like *censored* today.

It's not what the electorate is looking for. It's not what I'm looking for. I've been a lifelong Dem but I swear if the DNC pulls another 2016 I'll be voting 3rd party the rest of my life.

19

General Comments / Re: Heart-Bern?

« on: October 08, 2019, 01:20:56 AM »

Jesus.

You know why we don't trust Warren? She used to be a Republican. That's reason enough.

Nevermind her ridiculous Native American claims and the never ending *censored*e that will be called upon her in a general election campaign.

You can pretty up your celebration all you want, Scifi, but the fact is Sanders has been on the forefront for progressive ideals for decades. And at the very same time, Warren was voting R.

I wasn't celebrating. I'll gladly support Sanders if he's the nominee. I don't feel any enmity toward Sanders supporters, but I'm getting a different vibe from you right now.

quote author=scifibum link=topic=800.msg32159#msg32159

"Many of us who support Warren have been wanting Bernie to drop out and endorse her."

Your words, my friend.

If you say you weren't celebrating, I'll take you at your word. No reason not to. My apologies. I obviously took the words the wrong way.

I will admit a certain curiosity as to why you'd tie your train to a woman who is looking like Clinton 2.0. A lifelong politician who was a Republican for a long time. Her faking the Native American heritage thing is a boondoggle that will not go away, at all, in the general. At least if Sanders went through the biggest thing against him would be Scandinavian style socialism. Big turn off for some, but at least it'd turn on some younger voters, the ones abandoned by the Boomer's choices.

Literally as a pretty big liberal and socialist the only reason I see to vote Warren over Sanders is she has a vagina. And that's not a good enough reason for me.

20

General Comments / Re: The impossible economy

« on: October 08, 2019, 12:53:57 AM »

I'm absolutely not against a good economy, but I do need to ask.

How are these numbers adjusting for people who fall off the unemployment benefit and aren't counted anymore? That's always been an issue for me.

21

General Comments / Re: Trump decision to pull U.S. troops back from Syrian-Turkish border

« on: October 08, 2019, 12:10:09 AM »

People play up supporting Israel as the only democracy in the ME, but the Kurds are the only Muslim group out there currently who have anything resembling Western values.

Edit - By out there, I mean in the Middle East. And I'll admit Lebanon is pretty borderline.

To abandon them, *again*, is pretty damned shameful.

22

General Comments / Re: On Post-Cold War NATO

« on: October 04, 2019, 07:00:40 PM »

The corporate welfare given to the military companies - the very same military industrial complex Eisenhower warned against - I feel needs to be examined, but never is.

This country will complain about welfare payments or the cost of the immigrants, or whatever. Whatever scapegoat is there.

Can we all acknowledge that when Trump was withholding 400 mil or whatever in military aid to the Ukraine, he was actually talking about welfare.

In that scenario, the US government would pay privately owned companies to provide weapons to third party countries.

It's hypocrisy, is what it is.

23

General Comments / Re: Heart-Bern?

« on: October 04, 2019, 06:49:25 PM »

Biden and Trump are also excessively old. Warren is...what...in her sixties?

If he's healthy he's healthy. God knows half the country ignores Trump's dementia like symptoms as is.

IIRC, Warren is 70.

But, hey, she's a real cougar!  Or, at least, a Houston Cougar.

Why you linking Jacob Wohl stories to me? Guy's an idiot.

24

General Comments / Re: De-listing Chinese companies

« on: October 04, 2019, 06:34:33 PM »

True, as a member of government Biden does have a lot of sway over international issues. Good point, Crunch.

25

General Comments / Re: Heart-Bern?

« on: October 04, 2019, 06:26:58 PM »

Biden and Trump are also excessively old. Warren is...what...in her sixties?

If he's healthy he's healthy. God knows half the country ignores Trump's dementia like symptoms as is.

26

General Comments / Re: Heart-Bern?

« on: October 04, 2019, 06:25:05 PM »

Jesus.

You know why we don't trust Warren? She used to be a Republican. That's reason enough.

Nevermind her ridiculous Native American claims and the never ending *censored*e that will be called upon her in a general election campaign.

You can pretty up your celebration all you want, Scifi, but the fact is Sanders has been on the forefront for progressive ideals for decades. And at the very same time, Warren was voting R.

27

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: September 10, 2019, 12:30:08 PM »

Buy you have to know the numbers are against you. Literally the only thing giving the R's in America a voice is old people and that young people don't vote.

Gotta ask. Do you think young people should vote more?

I'd like to issue a small correction to this: the only thing giving the establishment a voice is older people, and that young people are repeatedly told their voices don't matter in every way that counts. They are told that progressive candidates 'don't have a chance' and not to waste their vote on them, which is another way of saying 'don't vote'.

In some ways you're right, in some ways you're wrong. It really is a chicken and egg problem.

It's not fair that older people have  greater hold on the media.

The way the media treats the young is atrocious. They should probably figure that out.

28

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: September 10, 2019, 12:26:11 PM »

To follow up. The right's gleeful proclamations about the sanctity of the Brexit vote should probably get ready to respond about how the only the reason they have a vote in the States is due to the Electoral Collage and the deliberate lies drawing up Congressional districts. I.e gerrymandering.

It's an interesting point, not sure I agree with any of it though.  I think Brexit is a good idea, and I understand the reasons people would vote for it, but I would never support a renunciation of the right of free determination.  If they want to vote again and Remainers win, that's fine too (even if I think they'll be worse off long term).

That really has next to nothing to do with the electoral college.  The electoral college is more akin to how some people think its unfair that a big pro-Exit vote in England, override a big pro-EU vote in Scotland and Wales.  If you imagine the UK as a US equivalent then the "electoral college" may have actually prevented the Brexit vote from winning, depending on how it's actually constructed.  Which is kind of exactly it's point, to ensure that the most populous region can't use it's raw numbers to ignore the less populace, but distinct areas, and to ensure that national policy has to consider the whole nation.

Gerrymandering is not a Republican only problem.  The left is just a wicked on this front (looking at you MD, for example).  In fact, there's a huge amount of intentionally pro-Democrat manipulation that's legally required (which was a major coup), even if how it operates wasn't set up.

Please. I dare any of you R's. Try to bring an argument based on weight of numbers.

Don't think it was that hard.  The electoral college has a specific purpose that's factually a good thing for a nation.

We all love represenative democracy. It's honestly the best idea we've had.  It annoys me when people slip out of that respect to complain about the will of the people.

Not sure where you are going here, "representative democracy" and the "will of the people" can easily be at direct odds.  I think the Brexit vote was kind of an oddity (the equivalent in the US for example, would require effectively a Constitutional Amendment, 2/3's approval in each house of Congress and approval of 75% of the States, not flipping the switch on a bare majority of the country), in that it undermines the actual representative democracy in the UK, but then so did joining the EU in the first place.

So why did they offer it?  And what do you actually do if more than half of your voters wants freedom from an unelected government with overwhelming powers (England at least should have been familiar with that situation as it's played out many times among their colonies).

The people get to decide their will. In the voting box. Deciding the person who is more experienced/cool/knowledgeable on the matters that care for them.

Or in the case of CA not in the ballot box and uncontrolled through ballot harvesting that there's no way to control for reasonable protections (which in NC is what's causing a revote today, and in CA flipped 8 seats that have been Republican for a long time).

There is nowhere in our cultural history where people have respected the random guy's vote because the random guy is an idiot. And ya'll can bleat about the need for the average person to vote, and respect their opinion, but something tells e you wouldn't be on board with a law requiring anyone 18+ to vote lol.

There's actually a place where they do - polling and marketing.  Pretty much every single argument you see where someone claims they have the support of the people is made on the basis of the "random (or even not random at all)" guys vote. 

I tend not to support laws that force those who have self selected not to vote to vote.  Not sure how anyone can think an electoral process is made better by compelling participation of those who choose not to be informed.  In fact that's my biggest problem with ballot harvesting, it's "including" people who are virtually guaranteed to be casting ill informed and easily manipulated votes.

But that said, it's not the worst process possible.

We have a Representative democracy for a reason
 You don't like what they're doing, choose someone else.

Otherwise you're asking two wolves and a sheep what's for dinner.

You don't believe the opinion of the guy down the street can decide what's best. Neither do I. We voted in people who do their best. Why should be thrown that system aside to suck on the people reading the Mail?.

29

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: September 10, 2019, 12:21:18 PM »

To follow up. The right's gleeful proclamations about the sanctity of the Brexit vote should probably get ready to respond about how the only the reason they have a vote in the States is due to the Electoral Collage and the deliberate lies drawing up Congressional districts. I.e gerrymandering.

It's an interesting point, not sure I agree with any of it though.  I think Brexit is a good idea, and I understand the reasons people would vote for it, but I would never support a renunciation of the right of free determination.  If they want to vote again and Remainers win, that's fine too (even if I think they'll be worse off long term).

That really has next to nothing to do with the electoral college.  The electoral college is more akin to how some people think its unfair that a big pro-Exit vote in England, override a big pro-EU vote in Scotland and Wales.  If you imagine the UK as a US equivalent then the "electoral college" may have actually prevented the Brexit vote from winning, depending on how it's actually constructed.  Which is kind of exactly it's point, to ensure that the most populous region can't use it's raw numbers to ignore the less populace, but distinct areas, and to ensure that national policy has to consider the whole nation.

Gerrymandering is not a Republican only problem.  The left is just a wicked on this front (looking at you MD, for example).  In fact, there's a huge amount of intentionally pro-Democrat manipulation that's legally required (which was a major coup), even if how it operates wasn't set up.

Please. I dare any of you R's. Try to bring an argument based on weight of numbers.

Don't think it was that hard.  The electoral college has a specific purpose that's factually a good thing for a nation.

We all love represenative democracy. It's honestly the best idea we've had.  It annoys me when people slip out of that respect to complain about the will of the people.

Not sure where you are going here, "representative democracy" and the "will of the people" can easily be at direct odds.  I think the Brexit vote was kind of an oddity (the equivalent in the US for example, would require effectively a Constitutional Amendment, 2/3's approval in each house of Congress and approval of 75% of the States, not flipping the switch on a bare majority of the country), in that it undermines the actual representative democracy in the UK, but then so did joining the EU in the first place.

So why did they offer it?  And what do you actually do if more than half of your voters wants freedom from an unelected government with overwhelming powers (England at least should have been familiar with that situation as it's played out many times among their colonies).

The people get to decide their will. In the voting box. Deciding the person who is more experienced/cool/knowledgeable on the matters that care for them.

Or in the case of CA not in the ballot box and uncontrolled through ballot harvesting that there's no way to control for reasonable protections (which in NC is what's causing a revote today, and in CA flipped 8 seats that have been Republican for a long time).

There is nowhere in our cultural history where people have respected the random guy's vote because the random guy is an idiot. And ya'll can bleat about the need for the average person to vote, and respect their opinion, but something tells e you wouldn't be on board with a law requiring anyone 18+ to vote lol.

There's actually a place where they do - polling and marketing.  Pretty much every single argument you see where someone claims they have the support of the people is made on the basis of the "random (or even not random at all)" guys vote. 

I tend not to support laws that force those who have self selected not to vote to vote.  Not sure how anyone can think an electoral process is made better by compelling participation of those who choose not to be informed.  In fact that's my biggest problem with ballot harvesting, it's "including" people who are virtually guaranteed to be casting ill informed and easily manipulated votes.

But that said, it's not the worst process possible.

I honestly don't get it sometimes. You people are all about "Yeah man get out the vote!".

Buy you have to know the numbers are against you. Literally the only thing giving the R's in America a voice is old people and that young people don't vote.

Gotta ask. Do you think young people should vote more?

30

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: September 10, 2019, 12:16:52 PM »

So, the EU made it a point to set up a law to unravel places where money laundering/tax avoidance were a problem. And wouldn't you know it,  when that got out, and the deadline for it, there were *so many* people and media outlets crying for a Brexit option.

Real Christmas miracle.

31

General Comments / Re: NRA as domestic terrorists

« on: September 10, 2019, 12:01:13 PM »

Saudi Arabia *obviously* wasn't really involved in 9/11. I mean, they funded it. Sure. The religious beliefs of the Arabian government, and their actions, can be linked to 9/11. obviously it was due to a minor official.

32

General Comments / Re: Nice business you have there

« on: September 10, 2019, 11:53:09 AM »

How about the various gun enthusiasts encouraging a boycott of Walmart in protest of its decision to ban open carry and limit sales of guns and ammo? Is that a mobbed up street action? What distinguishes a politically motivated boycott from a mobbed up street action?

I think I know the answer: the GOP has settled on "we are being persecuted" as one of the core messaging principles.

Obviously fascists.

33

General Comments / Re: Would anybody care to defend this Trump move?

« on: September 10, 2019, 11:31:11 AM »

Fen, my only point on that is that I am in fact aware of and routinely call out people on the right, particularly those motivated by religion for the horrible things they say and try.  I have no interest in, and would move to impeach, any judge that imposed rightwing morality controls on people. 

I also have a large number of friends on the left and in the middle, and not all of them act this way, just a disturbing number, and it's highly mainstream.

Your claim of left wing friends and family is interesting. If you wouldn't mind, could you share how you might speak differently to them versus your pretty strident arguments and defenses here?

34

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: September 10, 2019, 11:23:38 AM »

To follow up. The right's gleeful proclamations about the sanctity of the Brexit vote should probably get ready to respond about how the only the reason they have a vote in the States is due to the Electoral Collage and the deliberate lies drawing up Congressional districts. I.e gerrymandering.

Please. I dare any of you R's. Try to bring an argument based on weight of numbers.

We all love represenative democracy. It's honestly the best idea we've had.  It annoys me when people slip out of that respect to complain about the will of the people.

The people get to decide their will. In the voting box. Deciding the person who is more experienced/cool/knowledgeable on the matters that care for them.

There is nowhere in our cultural history where people have respected the random guy's vote because the random guy is an idiot. And ya'll can bleat about the need for the average person to vote, and respect their opinion, but something tells e you wouldn't be on board with a law requiring anyone 18+ to vote lol.

35

General Comments / Re: Would anybody care to defend this Trump move?

« on: September 09, 2019, 04:36:42 PM »

Even funner If Trump was cough on video (multiple) saying "Don't worry, I'll pardon you," and then latter given that person a pardon
His followers would still defend it.

Obama did it.
Somehow.

36

General Comments / Re: Employer required attendance at political rally?

« on: September 09, 2019, 04:35:18 PM »

Crunch could be given a directive to eat the President's feces and the only complaint would be that Obama's had corn  visible in it.

DJ: Please see your email. -OrneryMod

37

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: September 09, 2019, 04:26:49 PM »

The line I heard regarding Jo Johnson is "he's quitting to spend less time with his family."

Now it's being alleged that Boris lied to the Queen to get Parliament prorogued.

The referendum was definitely non-binding though the Tories chose to act as if it were.

Of course it was.  The very idea of the referendum was insane. It'd be like the US letting people decide a really big decision for all the states based upon which idiot read the Daily Mail. Stateside propositions are bad enough, but christ. Nationwide ones? There is a very good reason that both the US and UK govern through a representative democracy and it ain't about Joe Redneck getting to vote about burkas or whatever.

38

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: September 08, 2019, 10:25:58 AM »

Schadenfreude. That's the one.

39

General Comments / Re: BoJo Boffo or Bozo?

« on: September 08, 2019, 10:24:40 AM »

There's a German word for taking pleasure in other's pain, and I can't remember it at the moment, but gotdamn I'm enjoying Johnson getting this thrown in his face.

40

General Comments / Re: Employer required attendance at political rally?

« on: September 08, 2019, 10:20:37 AM »

Ok, let’s look at the story and see what wasn’t mentioned:

Smith also claimed that the event "was treated as a training (work day)," the only notable departure from traditional training sessions being that Tuesday's program included "a guest speaker who happened to be the President."

"We do these several times a year with various speakers," he said in a written statement. "The morning session (7-10 a.m.) included safety training and other work-related activities."

So this was normal training, nothing unusual. The requirement to attend and “penalties” for not are the same as they do for any other training day. Having guest speakers is just part of the program. This time, the guest speaker was Trump. Could be Biden next time.

Trump Derangement Syndrome is real.

BS. There's nothing to be gained in a training aspect from The-Oligarch-Who-Could giving a speech about how he's a victim and all of the wonderful thing's he's done.

This company has tried to make it like it's for training, but get real. It's a political rally and they're doing their best to put behinds in seats because they know if the place is empty Trump will throw a temper tantrum and try to damage the company.

41

General Comments / Re: A Message from the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump:

« on: September 05, 2019, 08:34:30 PM »

he keeps it alive by making it too ridiculous to ignore.

All part of the game. I've been much happier seeing it for what it is and not playing.

His followers will eventually see him for what he is and represents or they won't... or maybe I'll see him differently someday, or won't... probably not. Its a philosophical character issue for me and I don't see who he is as a person changing.

Lol. We have a fine example of the most intelligent and educated Trumptards posting right here on this board. They've made it clear they'll never admit he can do wrong, you think the average person is going to?

DJQuag: Please see your email. -OrneryMod

42

General Comments / Re: Race for the least desirable job

« on: July 24, 2019, 09:59:41 PM »

Other than some chaotic "take back" attempt, I think drawing a line in the sand and letting the EU react may not be the worst thing in the world.  Now, I think Brexit is/was a terrible decision, but a hard date is probably best.  I think the game of chicken is suddenly a lot more credible in their willingness to "crash out". 

We'll see just how generous / willing to play the grownups, the EU is on this mess.  If nothing else this part will be over and the process of cleaning up will begin.

I find it interesting that you label a "take it back" vote as chaotic.

The Leave campaign was chock full of flat out lies and deceptions. Even Leaver Jesus Farage said the day after the vote that the campaign's promise of the 350 million a day to the NHS instead of the EU wasn't real.

So. Three years later. After a whole bunch of things revolving around Brexit and the consequences thereof, with the electorate now having a better understanding  of what is actually at stake, why not have another vote?

-spoiler alert. Right wingers oppose another vote because they know the electorate, now being maybe semi literate on the issue, will reject it.

43

General Comments / Re: What are Democrats running on in 2020?

« on: July 24, 2019, 08:01:42 PM »

Not sure I follow that TheDrake.  It's more like 4-5 year lag, they have been covered and standard for more than 2 years here.

And what about the rationing?  Do you mind that 100% of type 1 get them on the US insurance and only 20% in the NHS?  This is something that every Type 1 patient should have access to use.

Just want to say your figure of 100 percent of American diabetics getting this technology is flawed from the outset.

Even if I give you that all and any insurance will pay for it, not all Americans are insured.

That's the issue here. Although I'll admit you have stated for chronic lifelong diseases you're willing to spend federal money.

44

General Comments / Re: Race for the least desirable job

« on: July 24, 2019, 07:54:58 PM »

Maybe he'll cede northern Ireland to the republic. Border problem solved.

Didn't you hear? He's gonna look the EU in the face and tell them Brexit means Brexit. And then they'll cave and Britannia will rule the waves again.

Source: Boris Johnson

45

General Comments / Re: Trump's asylum rule

« on: July 24, 2019, 07:49:30 PM »

Your inability to respond to an argument is truly inspiring.

In some ways it's a gift. I kind of admire it.

46

General Comments / Re: Race for the least desirable job

« on: July 24, 2019, 07:46:25 PM »

As predicted, Johnson is in. I'm sure he'll have that whole brexit thing squared away before Halloween.

An American friend asked me if I was excited about Johnson. Mostly tongue in cheek. I replied that I was excited about him like I'm excited about the strange lump on my testicle I discovered last week. It's a change of pace for sure but the chances of it being positive are really low.

47

General Comments / Re: Our Racist President

« on: July 18, 2019, 05:21:28 PM »

That was irony... 

And on this day I got thoroughly whooshed.

48

General Comments / Re: Our Racist President

« on: July 18, 2019, 04:39:00 PM »

That never happens, DJQuag... oh, wait:

• https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/11/us/burger-king-mexico-florida-spanish-trnd/index.html
  
• https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/nation-world/customer-tells-puerto-rican-woman-to-go-back-to-her-own-country-after-she-spoke-spanish/67-86a18fd2-2e76-45ac-a5b0-07b4c2ff41ce
  
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2018/10/23/go-back-your-country-woman-yells-obscenities-family-speaking-spanish-virginia-restaurant/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d625999cb36a

My friend, I too have read things too fast and or/made snap analyses of written pieces.

I would ask you go back and read what I wrote.  Your quotes back up a very large part of what I wrote.

Unless you mean me saying a white person wouldn't be asked to go back where they came from in the 2010's is supported by your links of racist people saying that to Hispanics speaking Spanish?

49

General Comments / Re: Our Racist President

« on: July 18, 2019, 03:37:46 PM »

Take out the politics, picture yourself in a 7/11 and some tells a ranting white guy that if he doesn't like he should get out of the country.  Do you really have a problem with that?

This is why this particular point is tricky.  It's "clear" to the left its racism, it's "clear" to non-liberal elite, maybe even just the non-university professor elite, that telling someone to get out of the country doesn't have to be about race.

Sorry, I've decided to reply as I go down the thread.

Literally no one is going to tell a white dude in a 7/11 to go back to where they came from. Ever. Come on.

Is there a long history of racists in this country telling blacks and Hispanics and whoever else to go back to their country? You better believe it. It's, like, a go too line. It is said every single day in the US in a completely racist fashion against American citizens. Do you actually deny this?

I don't care if you're claiming Trump was too frigging stupid to understand what he was saying. What he said was racist based upon how his followers heard it and how minorities heard it. It was a racist statement. As was that chant.

So choose a side. The man is racist or he's too stupid to understand or have read basic attacks against minorities in the last century or so.

Including, like the Mooch said, Italians, Germans, and Irish, who were all told to go back to their country.

50

General Comments / Re: What are Democrats running on in 2020?

« on: July 18, 2019, 03:00:35 PM »

And I'll just say that yes, if I went all out, I could absolutely get both the pump and a CGM based on my history. I have zero doubt.

I guess...I dunno. I'm busy with work. They really do make you state you're helpless and weak if you don't have these things. The last ten years of my life in the States taught me that calling in sick for diabetes complications on an hourly job affected your hours the next week. Be a Google MD and take care of yourself. Even now I don't bother my employers with that stuff, when it happens, even though they're legally required to deal with it. Reflexive responses for rent for the win.

I get what you're saying about availability. I just disagree.

As it stands people who REALLY need these state of the art devices in the UK will get them. Regardless of what money they have.

A lot of people in the US will get them, even if they could get by on test strips, and those people who were too poor who DO need them won't get them.

I know which one you'll pick, but I feel we'll just agree to disagree.