This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Testy Calibrate
Maybe this article belongs here more:that's very well put.
America's Version of Capitalism Is Incompatible With Democracy
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/americas-brand-of-capitalism-is-incompatible-with-democracy.htmlQuoteBut there are real stakes to that dispute. Beyond the aforementioned implications for how the anti-Trump opposition should be organized, the goal of preserving norms, and that of redistributing economic power, can -- and, if Democrats ever regain power, will -- come into conflict.
Let's say Chuck Schumer becomes Senate Majority Leader next year. If restoring norms is the paramount objective, then he will have to implore his caucus to confirm any conventionally qualified judicial nominees that the president puts forward; if combating runaway corporate power is the first priority, however, he'll need to have those nominations killed in committee, to keep seats open for future, pro-labor judges. Similarly, if Democrats secure full control in 2020 (or 2024, or 2028), abolishing the filibuster will almost certainly be a prerequisite for any major redistributive reform. And if Trump is able to appoint multiple Supreme Court justices -- and a "neo-Lochner era" commences, with the court's far-right majority routinely vetoing landmark progressive legislation (as it came within one vote of doing to the Affordable Care Act) -- then it will be very important for progressives to know whether norm-erosion or economic inequality is the more fundamental threat to their democracy.
What the fuck use is culture if this is the result? Fuck culture.
I guess I am torn regarding the use of violence in this situation.
So, we need to figure out Male voter suppression tactics. Should be easy. Put boobs on TV on voting night?
I do not respect trump.It's his hereditary name.Yeah, it is just great that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign, right?Did you note the part about Drumpf making up the quote by Clapper? That Drumpf was making up FAKE NEWS? That none of this paranoid fantasy of Drumpfia happened?
If it was the other way around you would be calling for an investigation and impeachment.
Yeah, childishly saying Drumpf sure strengthens your argument.
I don't see what its use has on the facts of the matter.
Now, if I messed around with Obama's name, with something like Obozo for example, especially when he was the sitting POTUS, I am fairly sure you would give me a ration of shit for disrespecting the president; maybe even calling me a racist. But I don't resort to that sort of childishness. Trump is your president too, whether you like it or not! You might at least try to show him a modicum of respect.Drumpf made up the Clapper quote.
Deal with it.
Don't deal with my childish pokes at the Orange Flame of Making Amerika Great Again.
Those are just sidelines.
The issue is Drumpf made up the quote he attributed to Clapper. Either because he's a liar or because he's got comprehension issues similar to Bluffy's.
And, apparently, yours.
So, putting all that aside, is Our Dear Leader's quote of Clapper correct or incorrect?
That is the question?
I really don't see where Trump is attributing a quote to anyone.
Trump said: "Trump should be happy that the FBI was SPYING on his campaign"
He didn't say that "Clapper said that Trump should be happy that the FBI is spying on his campaign"
There is a subtle difference between misquoting and hyperbole, which even I, as a non-native English speaker understand, but either you do not or you yourself are misquoting or using hyperbole.
Anyway, we know who the spy is! The spy's name is Stefan Halper, a professor at Cambridge University who has high-level ties to both U.S. and British intelligence.
This is about as ignorant a statement as can pass for just ignorant and not screaming insanity.This is bullshit.(1) The FBI and other intelligence agencies were not "the Obama administration".
(2) People (like Page and Papadopoulos) participating in foreign efforts to influence elections don't get a pass because they're official team members of a political campaign.
(3) I think the Clintons SHOULD be investigated for things like Bill's $500,000 speaking gig in Moscow.
Don't be such a tool.
The DOJ is part of the executive branch. They were working for the Obama administration.
Yeah, the DoJ is part of the executive branch. But up until Trump, the idea of the president ordering investigations was way beyond the pale. Learn about Watergate.QuoteAccording to the tapes of Strzok and his girlfriend, Obama was kept fully informed.
Bullshit! Obama had full control of the DOJ with Loretta Lynch! The meeting on the plane with wild Bill should have been enough evidence to have somebody impeached.
This entire matter is a witch hunt and you need a citation to know that the tapes explicitly said that Obama was to be kept fully informed?
How the hell did you miss that detail?
we get it. Well, aside from MSG that is.
I wasn't sure of where to put this tale of the horrible oppression suffered by noble, hardworking Trump supporters, so I'll put it here:In a saner time I would have said the lawsuit wouldn't move past the first judge, but...
Damn. Was hoping for more. He'll just appeal again later, right?
Damn. Well done.
So you guys are worried that my sheep and goats will escape and go feral? What do you think would happen if they did? Remember... We're talking about rainforest here complete with jaguars and God knows what other predators.https://www.pestsmart.org.au/pest-animal-species/feral-goat/
And lol at "God knows what other predators".
already deleted. What did it say?Kris Kobach is now formally held in contempt of court.
That is severely disheartening to think about.
Problem is electronic surveillance makes resisting a very different kind of game than it was in 1899.I feel like mass riots and burning cities is the inevitable outcome of the current American trajectory.
we are on track to party like it's 1899
motherfuckers want to talk about class warfare, well the days are coming when unions are going to have to form militias again
Eta: that said, yeah. That's what looks like is coming down the pike.
Light gaps are where a tree falls. You are going to feed sheep and goats in light gaps? It's fortunate that you actually aren't going to do this.You're full of shit. I'm tired of arguing with idiots. Maybe I'll be in the mood another day. Nothing will be destroyed. I'm simply going to open up some "light gaps" and feed sheep and goats therein. The end.Dave, when a single tree falls it doesn't clear a saw the 300ft wide and a mile long. You're not proposing to clear a little false here and there at the kind of rate you'd expect to be happening in the forest anyway. You wanted to "thin the canopy by 50%". All those animals attracted to light gaps by the abundance of food? Normally they live in the canopy. Remove half of it and you destroy their habitat.Is opening up some "light gaps" comparable to those described in the article the same as thinning the entire rainforest canopy to 50%? No I don't think so.
Did I say it was? No, no I did not. I'm pointing out to you that natural breaks in the canopy are not what you are proposing to create. They, and the huge amounts of leaching that you will open the soil up to, are not comparable to a gap in the canopy that lasts a few years at most, is rapidly colonised by shrubs and (comparatively) low growing trees that will still be supplying the thin topsoil with nutrients, and taking those nutrients up almost as fast as they are applied. The bulk of the biomass is still in the plants, not the soil. It still doesn't get a chance to build up, because those plants, being rainforest plants, are adapted to soils with very few nutrients and take everything up as fast as they can. And yes, there will be increased leaching in that little area, because there will be more rainfall reaching the forest floor in large bursts, rather than gradually as a result of being delayed by the canopy and all the plants living up there.QuoteI stopped talking about the 50% thing when I saw too many heads exploding. We can talk about that again later once you've gotten your heads around "light gaps."
Dave, we understand light gaps as being a standard part of rainforest ecology. They form, there;s a brief flurry of activity around them, and then they close up again. More importantly they're small and widely spaced. Totally unlike your proposals.
Dave, once you've gotten your head around basic rainforest ecology maybe you can start thinking about exactly what effects your idiotic and utterly destructive policy will have on animals and plants that depend on the canopy and near continuous rainforest cover have. How do you think sloths will be able to get to their communal middens with 330ft gaps between trees? Did you even know sloths have communal middens?