|
No better way to avoid blame than abdicating responsibility entirely.
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 08:58 |
|
|
facialimpediment posted:Donnie had a good 24 hours. Fake news  (literally what 40% of the country will believe)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
suboptimal posted:Got a link to this? http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/first-lady-visits-childrens-national-300416419.html
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Slim Pickens posted:I dunno, it reads more like Melania said "Kids should play outside more, fresh air is good for them", not "medicine just makes you sicker, drink this plant slurpee and focus your chi" Context. She's saying "kids should play outside more, fresh air is good for them" which is well and all, but her husband is pushing policies that will result in kids losing access to actual healthcare.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
This article is really sparse on the backstory. Are they specifically banning Turkish officials from political speech in Germany, or is it a broad measure against foreign officials? AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Mar 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
A Handed Missus posted:I'm not sure what the specific case is in Germany, but it I assume it is similar to the case in Austria. They have banned Turkish officials from campaigning in support of the referendum among Turks living there. That seems even weirder, why ban foreign officials from discussing foreign politics among foreign nationals on your soil? Like what is the risk to Germany/Austria they're trying to get in front of.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:Here was my progression through news stories on this, starting with that one. Yup, let's keep fighting that drug war. Surely success is right around the corner.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
Bernard McFacknutah posted:Have you guys thought about just giving Donald J Trump a chance at being president? Maybe things will all work out fine. This position is too important for on the job training! Oh wait, it's not 2009 any more? Never mind, surely Trump will figure things out as he goes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Bernard McFacknutah posted:Fillon is Turbofucked, by the way. It's always the petty corruption that gets people in trouble. Appointing an energy executive to run foreign policy? Accepting political donations from financial executives and letting them slide for widespread fraud? Sure, that seems fine. Accepting a payment for your daughter's wedding (or in this case giving paying her for pretend work)? Whoa there, we can't let this slide. Not that petty corruption is acceptable (not to mention it's far easier to prove), but still amusing what people get worked up over. AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Mar 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Svartvit posted:Understanding the nature of the crime is essential in order for crime prevention and law enforcement to work properly, or sometimes at all. There are many horror stories. Just saying it's conspiracy to commit murder and then taking the day off is improper on so many levels. How many of these actually happen a year in the US? Is it even double digits?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:Did the leaks even show any evidence that the CIA was spying on Americans domestically? Because that would be an even bigger story than the existence of the hacking tools. The CIA has a long history of illegally spying on Americans domestically. You can take their assurances that they've cut it out at face value, but I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about them expanding their capabilities.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Kuroyama posted:Isn't there a point where we have to just trust that the three-letter agencies aren't spying on Americans illegally? I'm not saying they would or wouldn't, but is there a way to prove if it is or isn't happening without putting everyone's private info out there? That's the issue though, there's not a good way to establish that illegal spying (or illegal information sharing where it's not outright spying) is not still going on and from the information that has gotten out there's good evidence that these agencies have regularly flouted the law. If there was legitimate oversight it would be a different conversation, but recent leaks have been very clear that intelligence agencies are outright lying to the people that are supposed to have the authority to reign them in - and this has not resulted in any consequences. If you ignore everything else, then sure, the CIA should be developing these tools and we should not be hearing about it. But in the context of what we've learned about intelligence agencies in recent history  .
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
Looks like the President is once again up early and lying on Twitter. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/839433678275153921
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
The one with the sample tests. The one without follows. When the one with the sample gets TB, the one who is following picks up the sample and tests.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 13:44
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:lol Alternatively, stare into your camera when you masturbate.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Perhaps, and this is crazy, he has no plans to actually allow his name to be used for an escort service and did this simply so that some shady Chinese businessman was prevented from doing so instead. The escort trademark is just a humorous aside. The main issue presented by the article is that the process appears to have gone unusually smoothly, suggesting that Trump's status as President is effectively enriching him. This is the essence of why the ethically appropriate thing for him to do was divest all of his holdings in the Trump Organization after being elected.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
e: Not gun chat.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
Getting death threats from the military is very 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
BigDave posted:Some good news, the economy added 235k jobs last month. Thanks, Obama.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
So entirely without specifics?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I imagine it's because good Samaritan protections don't cover people you just shot. Better to wait for the actual paramedics to get there, from a strictly medico-legal perspective. Doesn't hurt that dead people make for terrible witnesses.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
That's not really interesting without the schedules though, is it?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
Godholio posted:From the very last page, and there are plenty of public officials that like using DOD as the "perfect target" for budget cuts. We've seen it since 1992, and at some point we go too far, but the defense budget is still the big target because it's a huge amount of money and barring a major war when it's too late, there's almost no way to prove that we've gone too far. It's like the Laffer Curve. Yes, theoretically there is a tax rate at which raising taxes will decrease revenue, but every developed country in the world and especially the US are so far from that point that it's barely worth discussing. And yes, theoretically there is a level of defense spending cuts that could leave the United States unable to meet its defense needs and foreign policy commitments. But that point is far below the current standard of "spending as much of the rest of the world combined", so maybe let's shelve that argument for now?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Why not do this for all federal assistance, starting with those who get the most? I bet a lot of people who take the mortgage interest deduction will get hit before we get to unemployment benefits or welfare. Surely there's nothing underhanded about only applying these conditions to recipients who are likely to be poor.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:... That's a funny way of pronouncing liberty.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 08:52
|
|
|
Hot Karl Marx posted:expensive oil is good for canadian oil fields (expensive to process tar sands) but not consumers Why every energy rich devoloped state does not run its energy industry like Norway mystifies me.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
Missionary Positron posted:(apologies for the moonspeak, y'all 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 20:40
|
|
)
|
psydude posted:Baltimore has a pretty low COL, so a $15 minimum wage is probably a bit overkill compared to Seattle or DC, where $15/hr barely gets you a cardboard box. Overkill based on what exactly? To date, I have not seen any solid empirical data showing employment significantly impacted by a minimum wage that's "too high". There's probably a level where that is the case (that is, the effect of decreased employment overwhelms the wage increase), but the pearl clutching from business owners keeps the debate far, far away from any such hypothetical minimum.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
psydude posted:Living wage for the cost of living? Which is exactly what I said in my post? The arbitrary $15 amount that a lot of people have latched on to doesn't account for the high variance in COL between localities. In NYC, $15 isn't nearly enough to live off of. In Eastern Kentucky it's probably far more than many places can realistically afford to pay their lowest level employees. Seattle and Baltimore have nearly identical costs of living*. But that's not even the point. Severely economically depressed areas like Appalachia are the exception, and $15 an hour is more than reasonable for most metropolitan areas in the country - including many parts of the country where a state-level minimum wage is not even a remote possibility and the only hope is a federal increase. And even the $15/hr level still leaves plenty of room for an economically viable higher local minimum wage in some of the higher cost of living metros. That said, yes, $15/hr across the board is semi-arbitrary. But messaging is important, and what fits better in a political sign/slogan/commercial - "Fight for $15" or "We would kindly request that you set the minimum wage to an empirically determined level that meets a definition of living wage, to be determined, that is regionally adjusted for cost of living and indexed to inflation, with further reevaluation in the future as economic conditions change"? * http://livingwage.mit.edu/metros/42660 http://livingwage.mit.edu/metros/12580
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 08:58 |
|
|
Prop Wash posted:The story is a thing of beauty. It was only like a week though The best part was where he was claiming he was 'hiking the Appalachian Trail' for most of the week.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 22:04
|
|