|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Also note this is from, of all places, the notorious Libertarian rag Reason Magazine. That's not surprising. Libertarians are shitheads, but at the heart of libertarianism is the ability to vote with your feet, and that means also relatively permissive immigration laws between countries. Also, they are generally even less fond of onerous regulations and bureaucracy than the average conservative. After all, how can John Galt and his posse form the perfect libertarian/objectivist paradise, while leaving the socialist masses behind, if immigration laws are too restrictive?
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 01:33 |
|
|
mlmp08 posted:In the purest sense, this is accurate. But it turns out libertarians IRL are often Republicans who also want to be able to legally smoke weed and have sex with kids and underpay their employees. Oh, absolutely. But the folks at Reason are mostly "real" libertarians, and it's not rare to see articles voicing genuine criticism of the current immigration laws. Just don't read the comments, which are infested with Trump fans. The only worthwhile part of Reason is mostly the Volokh Conspiracy. Especially the "Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Decisions" articles. These are often interesting, sometimes funny summaries of what's going on in various federal courts.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2018 05:24
|
|
|
Hexyflexy posted:It ain't that, it's 100% anti-macron. The riots have been on the last year. He increased fuel taxes and slashed benefits. They are 100% anti-Macron, but some have always hated him, and some people joined the protests over fuel prices and cost-of-living increases (that they're blaming Macron for).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2018 07:21
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MarkHarrisNYC/status/1072205577948983297 I'm very immature
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2018 15:24
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:It's kinda cool how the treat your security as family thing seems to sorta edge towards a feudalism-ish thing. Why not marry your kid to the kid of the head security guy while you're at it and whoops you're there. I always knew CK2 was both the past and the future.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2018 13:07
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Even odds this gets pulled or by omission or tweet POTUS declares this unclassified info. Actually maybe more 80/20 in favor of the latter. I mean, there's no real point to this anymore, is there? I'm 100% sure the Chinese and Russians already saved the video to some hard drive.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
As far as I understand, this is not a real deal. A vote of no-confidence for the prime minister is just for show, it has no force behind it. A vote of no-confidence for the government would force her to resign, similar to being impeached as president. It's apparently the similar to something like the senate vote voicing disapproval for how Trump handled the Saudis. An interesting show of how the senate/parliament think about Trump/May, but with no legal force behind it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2018 11:33
|
|
|
I think there can be situations where you can understand soldiers acting very dumb and killing PoWs. If they are smart, then they keep their mouths shut, and maybe get away with it. And if they get caught, the military justice system will hopefully punish them. Perhaps the punishment isn't appropriate to the crime, but at least there is recrimination for breaking the laws of war. But if you go to TV and admit that you executed a PoW, and if you then get away with it because your country is fine with it... that's the point where you lose any moral high ground. Abu Graib and other such things made me look at the US military with fresh eyes. You guys are still much better than most of the other armed forces on this planet (I'm not talking about military power here), but I've held you in higher esteem. If that guy just doesn't get punished because his victim was a dirty muslim terrorist foreigner - it would be another let down for me. I've already read about cases where the US military let people get away with war crimes, but these were handled internally. But going on air with your crimes and the public declaring this okay, that would be something else. Basic human decency demands that war criminals get punished, especially when they are not shy about the fact that they committed these war crimes. Not punishing them would be a level of brazen contempt for every non-American that would be really hard to stomach.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:You mean to say someone with a rose in their Twitter handle would take something completely out of context so they could dunk on the libs? Well no sir I don't believe it. What does a rose in somebody's Twitter handle represent? FAUXTON posted:she's only got a 93% lifetime rating from the league of conservation voters, might as well have just hired ted cruz She will still oppose Trump on all the things that are dear to his heart, and she's better at holding the caucus together than anybody else. AND she will be gone in four years at the latest. It's a transition period, and having pulled one of the most effective Speakers of the House to the left is a good achievement. Edit: https://twitter.com/rabrowne75/status/1075909439176216577 Lol, great NATO ally. Torrannor fucked around with this message at 06:19 on Dec 21, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
I wonder if Trump would accept DACA legislation in exchange for the wall. Would that be a bad deal? 5 billion is just some starting money, and eminent domain lawsuits will probably hold up a lot of the construction.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2018 04:00
|
|
|
Proud Christian Mom posted:Not a goddamned dime for the wall jfc I'm not American, but is there really nothing you would trade for 5 billion for the wall? He won't get far with those 5 billion, I think. Legalizing Dreamers has been a long term goal anyway. The wall isn't popular, DACA is. Would it not be politically advantageous for Democrats to get the Dreamers safe status, while the Republicans get blamed for building an unnecessary wall? And Dreamers really do deserve to be safe from overzealous ICE employees. I can't see Republicans agree to DACA should Dems take the presidency (but not the Senate) in 2020. And even if Dems have unified control of government, they would still need GOP votes to get anything done in the Senate, unless they nuke the filibuster.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2018 06:27
|
|
|
If I were American, and dreaming about constitutional amendments, I would look at the system of directly elected Representatives that massively favor rural regions and states. Even a ban on gerrymandering won't help, because the lowest population states still get an advantage (if you have districts, they need to cross state lines), and single member districts are bad in general if your voters are highly concentrated in cities (if you don't go with something like Mixed-Member Proportional [look it up!], you should at least get multi-member districts). Torrannor fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Dec 22, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2018 18:14
|
|
|
As Nero Danced posted:Another new rule: when the government shuts down, mandatory call of the house. Every representative must report to the capitol under threat of arrest until a new budget is adopted. Then bar the doors. They can only leave when they do their job. Perhaps this is news to you, but other countries usually don't/can't have government shutdowns. In the most extreme cases, like in Westminster systems, losing the budget vote ("loss of supply") is the same as a vote of no confidence, and either requires forming a new government coalition if there are more than two parties in parliament, or fresh elections. But even when losing the budget vote doesn't end the government, in nearly all countries spending just continues on last year's level instead of lapsing completely. Perhaps consider updating your political system for the 21st century. Or even the 20th century, since the US was the outlier regarding government shutdowns even then. Also, why the hell are there months long gaps between elections and the newly elected people taking their seats? Why are the people who lost elections still allowed to pass major laws? The US constitution was a ground breaking document when it was designed, but it had some major bugs that later adopters of democracy could avoid. You're unlucky that you never got around to fixing these bugs.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
Happy Holidays, comrades 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
Sorry to continue the pronunciation chat (not sorry!), but French people pronounce their Orleans quite differently from the way Americans pronounce New Orleans. I saw this strange video on twitter where someone native to New Orleans complained about other Americans doing it wrong by either using the English pronunciation, or mangling the "native" New Orleans pronunciation (something like "Nawlins" or so), both of which are still so different from the way a French person would say Orleans.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2018 05:30
|
|
|
my kinda ape posted:Watch yourself or we'll cut off the supply of corn and society will collapse. Oh wow. Amazing. Do read the whole thread. Even table salt is made with corn? It's 100% true, I've consumed corn every single day of this year.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2018 07:09
|
|
|
Wait! Is that a snake.. or a tail? 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 01:33 |
|
|
That's cool. Poor lizard though, it didn't work this time 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2018 16:44
|
|