Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[Yankguy1]

What a surprise!

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/opinion/articles/2019-01-14/trump-tax-cut-turns-out-both-better-and-worse?__twitter_impression=true

Not like anyone predicted this would happen in real time...

It looks like some of us are more prescient than we are given credit for.

[NeedsAdjustments]

The existing regulations do not overturn Roe v Wade.

Exactly!  You get it.

Hence, supporting those regulations (“some restrictions “ is the terminology the poll used, well assume you don’t change it here for any reason...) does not equate support for overturning RvW.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Gotta keep our essential national services up and running for the sake of the country and those at risk.

Like the hunters...

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/government-restaffs-wildlife-refuges-during-shutdown-to-allow-hunters-access

And off-shore drilling:

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/425501-trump-administration-to-bring-back-offshore-drilling-staff-during?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Priorities.

[REDSTATEWARD]

The existing regulations do not overturn Roe v Wade.

Exactly!  You get it.

Hence, supporting those regulations (“some restrictions “ is the terminology the poll used, well assume you don’t change it here for any reason...) does not equate support for overturning RvW.

Wow. You do eventually get the point.

[NeedsAdjustments]

The existing regulations do not overturn Roe v Wade.

Exactly!  You get it.

Hence, supporting those regulations (“some restrictions “ is the terminology the poll used, well assume you don’t change it here for any reason...) does not equate support for overturning RvW.

Wow. You do eventually get the point.

The "point" was to post a piece with a deceptive headline; a claim that 65% of Americans support overturning RvW when in fact that is not the case?

Huh.  Ok.  Then you probably should have added more commentary when you first posted it.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Huh.  Seems Chris Christie doesn't think that Trump has hired "only the best people."

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/christie-on-trump-staff-weaklings-felons

The President has a “revolving door of deeply flawed individuals—amateurs, grifters, weaklings, convicted and unconvicted felons—who were hustled into jobs they were never suited for, sometimes seemingly without so much as a background check via Google or Wikipedia,” he wrote.

Of course, kidcarter8 has no issue with Trump's hires.  He does, however, think Obama brought in too many black people.

[barton]

Marist College has become a better poll since they moved away from their former land-line only system.   This poll does usefully show how being pro-choice doesn't necessarily mean being in unqualified support of late-term abortion.   That's why push-polls can garner such divergent results.  You have to ask specific questions to get at people's real thinking.

   I meet a lot of pro-choice people who have qualms of conscience about the procedure after the embryo stage is passed and the fetus is closer to viability.  I don't judge - many have strong metaphysical beliefs about the state of consciousness of a later-term fetus.

I just wish that the more restrictive pro-choice position would also encompass improved access to birth control,  sex ed,  and other means to empower and dispel youthful ignorance.   If you REALLY don't like abortion,  then teach young men to respect and support women's choices,  and,  if contraception isn't available in the moment,  then keep it in their pants.   Make that happen and 90% of abortions Just. Don't.  Happen.

The baby deserves to live if it has survived in the womb for 24 weeks.

But earlier than this - decisions of convenience are fine

Got it.

 If you read my post you would know that was not the argument I was making.  I was expressing respect for the first term pro choice position, even if my beliefs about fetal consciousness differ from theirs.   

No one was suggesting a woman's decision was one of "convenience. "  I'm pretty sure it's usually agonized over and made with regard to more than convenience.  Since you and I don't have to endure the difficult and risky business of carrying a child in our bodies for nine months,  we are probably not experts on the woman's state of mind or how her life changes.   That's why I believe it's her decision.   

The law seems to tend toward setting the definition of citizenship at viability as an independent being,  IOW outside the womb.   That's somewhere around 24 weeks.   

[bankshot1]

The existing regulations do not overturn Roe v Wade.

Exactly!  You get it.

Hence, supporting those regulations (“some restrictions “ is the terminology the poll used, well assume you don’t change it here for any reason...) does not equate support for overturning RvW.

Wow. You do eventually get the point.

The "point" was to post a piece with a deceptive headline; a claim that 65% of Americans support overturning RvW when in fact that is not the case?

Huh.  Ok.  Then you probably should have added more commentary when you first posted it.

Red would rather distract with a misleading haadline about Roe v Wade, than deal with real issue of his political party turning a blind eye to a Russian puppet in the WH, and now lighly vetting an AG candidate who is both sympathetic to unchecked Executive powers and who it seems will continue the cover-up and keep the truth of the Mueller Report from the American people.

There is no other lens which would provide a clearer picture of Red's pathetic partisan intent.

America needs the Mueller Report, (lightly redacted as needed) not the abridged too far Barr sinopsis (sic)

The truth needs to come out.

 

[REDSTATEWARD]

The existing regulations do not overturn Roe v Wade.

Exactly!  You get it.

Hence, supporting those regulations (“some restrictions “ is the terminology the poll used, well assume you don’t change it here for any reason...) does not equate support for overturning RvW.

Wow. You do eventually get the point.

The "point" was to post a piece with a deceptive headline; a claim that 65% of Americans support overturning RvW when in fact that is not the case?

Huh.  Ok.  Then you probably should have added more commentary when you first posted it.

You should take a remedial course in reading comprehension..

[REDSTATEWARD]

The Tax Foundation threw some cold water on the Progressive/leftists in the democrat party and their desire to raise the marginal tax rate on higher earners to 70 per cent.  Contrary to the Washington Post's estimate of a windfall of $700 billion in 10 years the Foundation puts the estimate at $291 million   And that is just counting ordinary income. When Capital Gains are figured in the windfall is negative since the more you tax people the more they seek tax shelters.

Of course the Ocasio-Cortez geniuses won't estimate how much the " New Deal of Green Energy" will actually cost but it is sure to be in the trillions, not billions. We now know that taxing the rich won't get us much of a "Deal" so look out middle class!

You can the entire report at Taxfoundation.org









5

[barton]

Thanks, "5."

Trouble seeing the forest for the trees is common.



BANKS - do you think Barr will interfere with Mueller?  Sometimes these guys surprise us by showing their fealty to the rule of law. 

--- yours,

Susy Sunshine

[bankshot1]

Thanks, "5."

Trouble seeing the forest for the trees is common.



BANKS - do you think Barr will interfere with Mueller?  Sometimes these guys surprise us by showing their fealty to the rule of law. 

--- yours,

Susy Sunshine

Bart-I doubt that Barr will interfere with the investigation, but he could, and that's the fear and the problem.

But of greater concern is his possibly having the last edit on the investigation and report.

IMO America need the Mueller Report, not a white-washed version that shields a possible small army of corrupt Republican operatives that sold out America.

Mueller and his team will have spent over two years investigating this matter. I want to know, and I beleive most Americans, independent of politcal affiliation, want to know the absolute truth of the Mueller findings, not what a politcal appointee decides in a highly charged atmoshphere a year or so from the 2020 elections, what we should know.

The Report needs to be released as clean as possible of any partisan taint. And even with an independent report I suspect we will be living under this cloud of mistrust for decades,

The Russian won when the Repubs empowered this traitor and sanctioned his anti-american behavior.

Dems and indies now have to clean this shit up as best and as soon as possible.

[Driver125]

Huh.  Seems Chris Christie doesn't think that Trump has hired "only the best people."
The President has a “revolving door of deeply flawed individuals—amateurs, grifters, weaklings, convicted and unconvicted felons—who were hustled into jobs they were never suited for, sometimes seemingly without so much as a background check via Google or Wikipedia,” he wrote.

    Just another example of the type of person Trump employs……Mick Mulvany. Trump screams at him—in front of others at a White House meeting—-and tells him that he has personally ‘fucked up’ whatever it was they were discussing….und zo, what does the spineless Mulvaney do? Does he stand up and tell Trump to blow it out his ass and then go storming out of the meeting? Nope…of course not. Does he go back to his office and write out his resignation from his ‘temporary’ position as Trump’s chief of staff? Of course not. Why, that might be something a person with some sort of personal sense of pride or self-worth might do. Of course, that leaves out Mulvaney. Instead, he apparently has decided just to lay low until the Orange Ogre once again allows him to reinsert his nose between Donalds fleshy butt cheeks---whereupon all will be forgiven….well, not all, since Donald never, ever ever forgets any whiff of disloyalty. And so, once again, forget any sense that Trump is hiring only ‘the very best people’ to fill positions in his administration. So far, he has been almost universal in hiring completely unqualified boobs to join his mad circus. He must not want to be embarrassed by people who perhaps know something more than he does on any particular subject, which is actually pretty hard to do since he knows practically nothing about anything.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Thanks, "5."

Trouble seeing the forest for the trees is common.



BANKS - do you think Barr will interfere with Mueller?  Sometimes these guys surprise us by showing their fealty to the rule of law. 

--- yours,

Susy Sunshine

Guess you didn't watch his testimony.

[oilcan]

Meanwhile, some GOP Senators are getting back to basics:

WASHINGTON — A group of 11 Republican senators broke ranks with their leadership and the administration on Tuesday to side with Democrats in a showdown over sanctions on Russia, underscoring the political sensitivity of the issue amid questions about President Trump’s relationship with Moscow.

The Republicans voted with Democrats seeking to keep sanctions in place on companies controlled by an influential Russian oligarch with connections to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

The 11 Republican votes allowed Senate Democrats to advance a measure that would reverse a decision last month by the Treasury Department to lift sanctions that it imposed last year on companies controlled by the oligarch, Oleg V. Deripaska, including the aluminum giant Rusal.