Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Wild Hoss]

Really, the only discussion that matters is whether the Rural/Urban split is actually geographic in nature, or actually racial ("ID Political") at its core. How do rural blacks vote? Urban whites?

IDK that there's one definitive answer, but I think the question is important in regards to election planning.

[hack]

I really thing the idea is insider/outsider. Insiders talk in those calculated ways designed for mass appeal, but we've all seen through those veneers. Outsiders sound more like a person. In truth I think everything's there for the person who can learn from Trump in the service of Bernie's policy. Bernie was too decent a guy to do it, but what I think fear drives people to the polls more than anything else. Nobody ever thought to question Trump on his solutions -- just the fact that he identified a problem and articulated it clearly was enough to win them over. People can't handle thinking about the policy solutions that get us back to a sane financial-services sector, but they sure can respond to venom thrown at the titans of Wall Street. Turn those people into real, animated villains -- which they, for the most part, genuinely are -- and you're in business. The first step is to obliterate all traces of Clintonism. Everybody agrees on that, surely. Chelsea had better stay the fuck away from the Democratic Party.

[Coop]

[ame]https://youtu.be/rHJoj9IqeKg[/ame]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Da Geezer]

1. Do the Ds take back the Senate in '18, so is it truly a two-year window for change?

2. Is Obamacare up first for repeal? How much time and energy does that take?

3. Obama is still president for the next 2.5 months. Government is funded for another month. What does he do with his time in office? Get a budget passed? End-aroudn the Senate by appointing Garland, and hoping that sticks?

If I may take a shot at these:

1. SENATE IN 18: If Trump is smart, he will make the 18 Senate election a referendum on cloture (not the filibuster). The Dems will filibuster any SC nominee. A good start would be to make a filibuster require senators to actually be speaking all the time. At least then the optics are right in determining who is "holding up the process". Unless Trump breaks his word, expect R gains in the Senate.
2. OBAMACARE REPEAL: Way too complicated for quick action. As a start, look for a simple bill allowing private insurers to be allowed to sell health insurance. Again, just a start.
3. OBAMA as LAME DUCK. A recess appointment is possible. FOX is lobbying hard to have Trump pardon Clinton, but I think Obama will do that first. Make no mistake, this vote was PRIMARILY a vote against Obama and his lawlessness. History will judge him as the worst president at least since Carter. His signature domestic achievement, Obamacare, must be dismantled because it was never even intended to work. His treaty with Iran is "low fruit" which Trump will immediately renounce, and, hopefully, reinstitute sanctions.

First action as President: Again, easy. Do away with all unconstitutional executive orders. Trump has time to sort through the policy differences in other executive orders, but ones that are cut-and-dried unconstitutional like amnesty, EPA (like killing the coal industry), and sanctuary cities, should be eliminated immediately.

Sanctuary cities are again low fruit. I don't know anyone who believes that illegals who have committed a felony other than coming into the US illegally, should be supported by governmental units that disdain the law.

[hack]

I think my first question was whether he has 2 years or 4. Talent's usually got a good command of the possibilities there and he's helped a bit to underscore the challenge. It's probably reasonable as of today to have a four-year strategy than a two-year one. I doubt a recess appointment is possible, but the Republicans deserve to have their own tactics thrown back at them, so that's what I'd do if I was Obama, and force the new administration to undo it.

I agree with you that history may not be kind to Obama, but in the end the political obituary will be that he was a centrist at a time when that was foolish. There will be proper health care in this country in due time, and he'll be remembered for taking a first stab, but one too timid. I think this was a vote against Obama not because he was ``lawless'' but because it's easy to fool people.

We'll see what goes on, but I'm looking for the Democratic Party to avail itself of the options the Republicans have made available through their willingness to bust up convention. That's the only reason why Obama was so busy with executive orders -- b/c Dick Cheney needed them. I think if I were the Ds that I would for now be cultivating a Never Trump GOP faction to stand with them on votes, and blocking as much of everything as possible. The Rs felt entitled to do that to Obama for eight years, and didn't pay a political price.

[Da Geezer]

Re: "freedom to worship":

I choked on that too. I would hope that it's the opposite. An unintelligent Christian may take offense, but anyone of intelligence is aware of basic freedoms in the constitution.

As I said, you know so little of the "facts" that some things don't even enter your paradigm. I'm behind in reading still, so if someone has said this already, I apologize.

The first words of the Bill of Rights are "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

The left's formulation of "freedom of worship" is radically different than the First Amendment. Evangelicals, by the very definition of the word, evangelize, seek to exercise their religion in the public sphere. There is a lot of canonical literature now from the leftists who dominate the Protestant Seven Sisters, that worshiping in a place, a location, is not "confrontational" to non-believers. Best, they claim, to stay in our "places of worship" and not to piss off the natives. This is what destroyed the Protestant Churches in Europe.

Going back to our conversation on Breitbart locating in Europe, you made the point that profit was not a way to judge a magazine or web site, but rather "truth" or "non-truth". Hopefully, you can see where my truth, and that of much of the country, simply does not even enter your paradigm. I may be wrong, and if so, I apologize, but I doubt if you have read much about the ongoing turmoil in mainline Protestant churches.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Looks like Wyoming was the most pro-Trump state in the country (+70%). West Virginia (68%) and Oklahoma (65%) after that.

[entropy]

I'm not anti-BO, but I'm really not pro-BO either... that said, BO will not be viewed as the worst president since Carter. I believe his Middle East policies will be continued by Trump and will end up being viewed positively in the future. He's going to get credit for social changes.. many of which I think society is in full support and will be in the future. He'll be viewed as superior to Bush and I voted for Bush twice. Bush got the US in a war that accelerated global terrorism.

Frankly, he hasn't been a bad president, despite my disagreements in policy. I would have voted for him over Trump or Hillary without pause. Would have voted for Romney too, just to be clear.

[*JD*]

Well said, SVG:

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nba/pistons/2016/11/09/detroit-pistons-stan-van-gundy/93551178/

[entropy]

I can't help but think back to the article that was posted here months ago (wish I could find it) that discussed the issue about demonizing people like Bush leaves you nothing when someone like Trump comes along... that those labels are dismissed as politics and then when they apply, they're dismissed again without thought.

[hack]

Re: "freedom to worship":

As I said, you know so little of the "facts" that some things don't even enter your paradigm. I'm behind in reading still, so if someone has said this already, I apologize.

The first words of the Bill of Rights are "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

The left's formulation of "freedom of worship" is radically different than the First Amendment. Evangelicals, by the very definition of the word, evangelize, seek to exercise their religion in the public sphere. There is a lot of canonical literature now from the leftists who dominate the Protestant Seven Sisters, that worshiping in a place, a location, is not "confrontational" to non-believers. Best, they claim, to stay in our "places of worship" and not to piss off the natives. This is what destroyed the Protestant Churches in Europe.

Going back to our conversation on Breitbart locating in Europe, you made the point that profit was not a way to judge a magazine or web site, but rather "truth" or "non-truth". Hopefully, you can see where my truth, and that of much of the country, simply does not even enter your paradigm. I may be wrong, and if so, I apologize, but I doubt if you have read much about the ongoing turmoil in mainline Protestant churches.

I lived in Turkey, which is a great education in the difference between freedom to... and freedom from... But, overall, well, I don't give a crap. All religions are equally offensive to me. Here's Kapuscinski, who says it in terms more stark than I would agree with, because brains are not uniformly broken and minds are not always closed to the same extent, but this is basically the case:

Three plagues, three contagions, threaten the world.

The first is the plague of nationalism

The second is the plague of racism

The third is the plague of religious fundamentalism.

All three share one trait, a common denominator — an aggressive, all-powerful, total irrationality. Anyone stricken with one of these plagues is beyond reason. In his head burns a sacred pyre that awaits only his sacrificial victims. Every attempt at calm conversation will fail. He doesn’t want a conversation, but a declaration that you agree with him, admit he is right, join the cause. Otherwise, you have no significance in his eyes, you do not exist, for you count only if you are a tool, an instrument, a weapon. There are no people there is only the cause.

A mind touched by such a contagion is a closed mind, one-dimensional, monothematic, spinning round one subject only — its enemy. Thinking about our enemy sustains us, allows us to exist. That is why the enemy is always present, is always with us.

I'm for anything that removes peoples' ability to falsely believe themselves superior to others, and against anything that reinforces it. You get all types in every place, and anyone who has ever looked in a critical mass of places knows that. We've got to stop selling people this false hope, and this false premise that their religion isn't the dominant one or is somehow on the defensive. It isn't, and whatever internal struggle in whatever denomination's churches is irrelevant.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Geezer,
Your explanation of the freedom of religion point didn't make sense to me. Are you saying that people have the right to evangelize and express their beliefs at all times and that others do not have a right to be free from that religious practice?

[froot loops]

I can't help but think back to the article that was posted here months ago (wish I could find it) that discussed the issue about demonizing people like Bush leaves you nothing when someone like Trump comes along... that those labels are dismissed as politics and then when they apply, they're dismissed again without thought.

It worked against Clinton. "Hang that bitch " was a common refrain. They demonized Obama. They called Kerry a french cheese eating surrender monkey. They are still demonizing Bill Clinton. It's worked.

[Da Geezer]

...in truth, most of Bernie Sanders' platform was merely a return to how things were under Reagan.

Hack, I'm being kinda hard on you. This is simply untrue, in almost every respect. For example, Reagan's first act as President, absolutely the first, was to lift the price controls on gasoline at the pump. You can look up the data for yourself. My recollection is that prices roughly doubled. After a relatively short time, they dropped below the former, controlled, price and stayed there. Reagan cut taxes from 70% to 28%. Bernie was exactly the opposite. He said a 90% tax rate (phrased as the rate during the Eisenhower Administration) was acceptable, and he proposed price controls on medicines and other products. And I doubt Reagan would have given free college to everyone even if he saw it as a wonderful opportunity to indoctrinate youngsters.

[entropy]

It worked against Clinton. "Hang that bitch " was a common refrain. They demonized Obama. They called Kerry a french cheese eating surrender monkey. They are still demonizing Bill Clinton. It's worked.

The emails and corruption were newer... Attacking vs same story is different, imo. She wasn't the racist the dems have called every pub since 1992. And I'm not promoting the attacks, just saying the dem's approach has come across as very repetitive to me.