|
Leofish posted:The other thing is that CNN cropped out the ISIS salute in their twitter image.  I hope she gets hit by a bus.
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
It is sickening how the crypt keeper brings up such a horrible incident to defend American-Mussolini.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Anyone have issues immediately telling Kellyanne and Andrea Mitchell apart?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Covok posted:Then, work with your party to show them the light. Maybe you can get them woke and realize how dumb they're being for supporting a man who will metaphorically destroy their homes and sell the land to Putin and his corporate friends. People won't wake up on their own, comrade. Yeah, but some people are so consumed by their own racism that they won't wake up. Though even with all of that it all went to Obama both times by 51 percent, but went to Trump by 57
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:Yeah, but some people are so consumed by their own racism that they won't wake up. Though even with all of that it all went to Obama both times by 51 percent, but went to Trump by 57 That says you can get past their racism, you just need to reach them through a strong enough message.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Plus every minute Trump is distracted with bullshit is a minute he isn't enacting horrible policy. Bills that reach his desk become law after ten days if he ignores them. This has been your horrifying/depressing civics lesson for the day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Polygynous posted:Bills that reach his desk become law after ten days if he ignores them. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Polygynous posted:Bills that reach his desk become law after ten days if he ignores them. Wait, seriously? I thought that bills the president ignored got automatically vetoed. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
21 Muns posted:Wait, seriously? I thought that bills the president ignored got automatically vetoed. Nope, the President doesn't have to approve bills, he just has the right to veto. He waives that right after ten days. If you think about it, it makes sense, but only when you assume someone actually wants to be President.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
21 Muns posted:Wait, seriously? I thought that bills the president ignored got automatically vetoed. That's if the president ignores them and Congress is out of session. When Congress is in session, any bill not signed within 10 days (not including Sundays) automatically becomes law.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
the best part is the person he's responding to her primary source of income is being a sex object
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
Also remember that Trump has requested that after he's president he can stil go around doing tours and events. He's gonna sign jack poo poo while congress just drops in whatever they want while he goes around having rallies since that's all he cares about
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
It's not like Trump wasn't going to rubber stamp everything anyway. Him randomly shaming the GOP via twitter is probably a more effective check on congress than anything else could be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:Also remember that Trump has requested that after he's president he can stil go around doing tours and events. He's gonna sign jack poo poo while congress just drops in whatever they want while he goes around having rallies since that's all he cares about Gonna point this out: this is still, functionally, the same situation we all assumed would happen. That being Trump rubber stamping everything. Our only hope is Trump hate-watching CNN again and going "Not now you fools, not now! The sheeple might wake up and realize the devil has become king!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
21 Muns posted:Wait, seriously? I thought that bills the president ignored got automatically vetoed. Reminder, that lovely New England governor thought that was true and accidentally let a good(?) bill pass.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
Yeah, Pocket Vetoes only work when the legislative body isn't in session.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Covok posted:It is sickening how the crypt keeper brings up such a horrible incident to defend American-Mussolini. The good Ol' "gotta cover everything or nothing at all" argument. I assume that FOX always give both sides equal amount of exposure in any given issue from now on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
Womp womp Texasquote:A federal judge continued to block new state rules mandating proper burial of aborted children in Texas until late this month, signaling he may block them permanently.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBpkMCa_D50
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 14:13
|
|
|
Polygynous posted:Bills that reach his desk become law after ten days if he ignores them. Well, yeah, but the President still has a role in pushing policy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
tone def piece of poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Well, yeah, but the President still has a role in pushing policy. Are you sure, because the message I've gotten over last 8 years from some Democrats is that the Bully Pulpit doesn't exist and the president is powerless when it comes to getting legislation passed
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:Are you sure, because the message I've gotten over last 8 years from some Democrats is that the Bully Pulpit doesn't exist and the president is powerless when it comes to getting legislation passed When congress is made of the opposition party whose decided that they will not allow a single law past and even stops a supreme court nomination from even being reviewed, then, yes, the President is powerless. When congress is your own party and the house representatives and senators are afraid of you going rogue and splitting the establishment and the base, then, no, the President is extremely powerful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
It just all ring hallow when their own party was in control and they still insisted they couldn't do anything
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:It just all ring hallow when their own party was in control and they still insisted they couldn't do anything They had party control of the congress for all of 2 years, and the super-majority of the senate for far less than that. During that time they passed the Affordable Care Act, which is a flawed law, but a step in the right direction. If you want to scapegoat a mother fucker during the Obama admin for abusing a bully pulpit, you should probably direct your rage at Harry Reid for blocking many House Bills from ever being considered... but also... the Republican leadership that constantly flung garbage legislation from the House to the Senate that they knew was a total non-starter for the Democrats. "Look what we're doing, we're at least working!" was what they wanted their constituents to take away. Well, it was nakedly obvious and they've instead been recognized pretty resolutely as "the obstructionist congress". Do you know the number of "repeal Obamacare" bills that passed US House in the years since they wrested control? To quote my main man, K2.... "It's high". You can play your "well, check your own porch" bullshit card all day, man. Yes, both parties are prone to partisan bickering and we all know it. All of this poo poo rings hollow, which is why both parties were overtaken by populist presidential candidacies in 2016. You want to know what rings hollow? People bitching that rich people (Meryl Streep) should shut the gently caress up, because they don't understand the common mans' problems, but who all probably unflinchingly pulled the lever for a candidate whose only qualifications were him being rich and bombastic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Dems should have gone for the jugular when they had a super majority instead of doing the half-assed ACA. They were too afraid of Republican messaging to loving do anything drastic and basically spent the following years apologizing for the signature achievement of that Congress. Republicans are about to put on a clinic in how you actually exercise power.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
Was never going to happen:
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Tender Bender posted:Dems should have gone for the jugular when they had a super majority instead of doing the half-assed ACA. They were too afraid of Republican messaging to loving do anything drastic and basically spent the following years apologizing for the signature achievement of that Congress. Republicans are about to put on a clinic in how you actually exercise power. They were hamstrung by conservative blue dog dems. The supermajority never really existed due to Al Franken not being sat for 6-7 months due to recount shenanigans and Ted Kennedy having the temerity to die from brain cancer (and then getting replaced by Scott Brown because of Martha Chokely)
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Tender Bender posted:Dems should have gone for the jugular when they had a super majority instead of doing the half-assed ACA. They were too afraid of Republican messaging to loving do anything drastic and basically spent the following years apologizing for the signature achievement of that Congress. Republicans are about to put on a clinic in how you actually exercise power. Among other things, Joe Lieberman, who at that point was an independent (since he'd lost his Democratic primary challenge but won the general with a decent chunk of Republican support) vowed to prevent anything with a public option via refusing to vote for cloture. And nobody was able to find anything he'd take in exchange for not doing that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
If you're going to wish conservative Dems and independents were liberals instead, you might as well wish Republicans were socialists while you're at it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
He looks like he belongs in that Gob Bluth "We demand to be taken seriously" photo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
Mister Macys posted:Was never going to happen: Yeah, can't argue with this. What is the source for that piece, though? It sounds familiar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:Yeah, can't argue with this. What is the source for that piece, though? It sounds familiar. Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People? by Thomas Frank. This, and 'Pity the Billionaire' have been my go-to books for the last four years. Highly recommend the audiobook.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Republicans posted:He looks like he belongs in that Gob Bluth "We demand to be taken seriously" photo. Those comments are amazing. "Who is Meryl Streep?" Oh get the gently caress out of here. I also love Gavin McInnes talking poo poo about someone becoming a millionaire when he did exactly that w/ VICE.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Recommended video "How the Left pushes pedophilia"  Also rebranding of the past status quo as rebellious is some of the most insidious propaganda of the 21st century.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Eponymouse posted:Recommended video "How the Left pushes pedophilia" no no, they mean like, johnny reb, the CSA, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Not exactly sure where to put this, but thread, I need help. One of my best friends is a former liberal turning more and more conservative the longer he stays in this loving valley, and it's driving me nuts. He started listening to a lot of Glenn Beck and it started to go down hill from there. I can handle him being very strong pro 2 amendment, now, that's fine. He hates the ACA, because he pays $500 a year to opt out because he can't "afford it" but still bought himself over a grand of guns and ammo and an apple watch for christmas. (He already has a number of other fire arms, but thought he really needed an AR just to be able to protect himself from crazies now that Trump's president.) He did vote for Hillary, even though he "couldn't stand her". The problem is, Vaccines. We got in a debate over the Trump news this morning of meeting with an anti-V person. Basically, his point is that we shouldn't require people to get vaccines, because we are a "free country, freedom of religion". My point is that if you walk around and infect other people, and end up getting some of them killed, you should be charged with manslaughter. If you want to go live in the woods and not get a vaccine, fine. But being in society, you agree to not be a basic hazard to others. Which he just said he disagreed with. How the gently caress do I talk to him? another direct quote from him is "if the government forced you to eat kale five times a day because they told you it was good for you, would you?" He sounds like a moron from these quotes, but he is sensible about a fair amount of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
LionArcher posted:Not exactly sure where to put this, but thread, I need help. One of my best friends is a former liberal turning more and more conservative the longer he stays in this loving valley, and it's driving me nuts. He started listening to a lot of Glenn Beck and it started to go down hill from there. I can handle him being very strong pro 2 amendment, now, that's fine. He hates the ACA, because he pays $500 a year to opt out because he can't "afford it" but still bought himself over a grand of guns and ammo and an apple watch for christmas. (He already has a number of other fire arms, but thought he really needed an AR just to be able to protect himself from crazies now that Trump's president.) Explain to him how we destroy polio through vaccines and how this has saved many lives. Also, point out that the kids who don't get vaccines don't have a choice in the matter. Their parents decide they shouldn't be healthy and impose that on them. Would your friend feel okay if they heard their parents didn't give their kid cancer treatment because they were afraid they'd get autism from it? The reality is that a lot of diseases that vaccines cure are lethal. It's not just the flu, but measles, small pox, polio, and many other diseases that can and will kill you. And these diseases are coming back. We've had a resurgence of them across the country because of this. Children are dying because of their parents, is that something you are morally comfortable with? Should parents be allowed to kill their 10 year old child due to fear of autism? Try that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
Speaking of Beck*** how is he? Has he finally bent the knee? ***reminder he's a crazy attention whore shill, never ever fall for his "grown up/last reasonable regressive person con, holy gently caress thread it's been 8 years come on***
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
LionArcher posted:Basically, his point is that we shouldn't require people to get vaccines, because we are a "free country, freedom of religion". My point is that if you walk around and infect other people, and end up getting some of them killed, you should be charged with manslaughter. If you want to go live in the woods and not get a vaccine, fine. But being in society, you agree to not be a basic hazard to others. Which he just said he disagreed with. How the gently caress do I talk to him? another direct quote from him is "if the government forced you to eat kale five times a day because they told you it was good for you, would you?" He sounds like a moron from these quotes, but he is sensible about a fair amount of stuff. Vaccines are 100% for the public good. It has nothing to do with the govt saying "This is healthy if you don't do this you break the law" There are decades of medical research and studies that have shown via numbers that the mandating of vaccines directly reduces the amount of human suffering at a negligible cost to personal freedom. If he doesn't agree with that, then he is actively refusing to accept information that directly contradicts his opinions and there is no helping that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 21:22
|
|
