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]

After fucking things up in Syria, Trump turns his sights on Iraq:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/04/world/middleeast/trump-iraq-iran-reaction.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Unfit.

Have we in fact left Syria?

Its unclear what the plan is in Syria.  At first we said we would only leave if we had assurances from Turkey that they wouldn't attack the Kurds.  Then there was word that we were beginning the draw-down.  And now Trump is saying yes, we are leaving, but no worries we can always come right back because "we have very fast airplanes."

If, somehow, we end up doing the right thing in Syria it will be because Trump was told (including by his own party in Congress) that he doesn't know what he is doing and takes that to heart.  Signs aren't good that this will happen.

Nothing is done til it is done

Right now troops are still in Syria.  The harpy press is banging these guys for answers to what Trump said in December - and did not act on.

That's Kid's way of saying that Trump pulling all of the troops out of Syria would be a stupid thing to do. 

[kidcarter8]

Kamala Harris tweeted after the results were in last year in the Virginia Gubernatorial race that
"Thank Goodness that Virginia has been preserved from racism by Ralph Northam!"
Harris was among the first of the democrat Presidential hopefuls to throw Northam under the bus when the year book pictures became public.
Is there any evidence that Northam has, in any way, demonstrated racism in his adult life?
Just asking.

And if the democrats are so strong about giving convicted felons another shot at society, from voting rights on up, how do they square that with telling Northam to take a hike for a 35 year old year book photo?

He was an adult when that picture appeared. And he gets to keep voting. What is your point, other than the opposite of what your criticism would be if Harris HADN'T called for his resignation?

I suppose, to some, it is gratifying that a politician who won an election by falsely playing a race card is now about to be hoist on his own petard. And democrats are rightly  derided for the messy bed of identity politics they now squirm in.  But this is another example of politics run amok and a further reminder that without a change in course there will be no decent people willing to serve in public office.

"a politician who won an election by falsely playing a race card is now about to be hoist on his own petard"

Oh, is Trump being hoist on that petard, too?

Meanwhile, keep ignoring your racist party, like you always do.

Amoral hypocrite.

Why do you ask Republicans to defend every member of their party?  And seldom take the time to make a case for your guy.

[barton]

I want to be clear that I've never asked a Republican to defend Trump.   His actions are indefensible.  Including withholding his tax returns...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/05/we-may-finally-see-trumps-tax-returns-republicans-are-panicking/?utm_term=.8188779ecf93

Nice, clear analysis by Waldman.

Kid, i have yet to hear you "make a case" for Trump. 

[kidcarter8]

https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/1092901347693871105

[kidcarter8]

https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1092881163985801217

[kidcarter8]

After fucking things up in Syria, Trump turns his sights on Iraq:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/04/world/middleeast/trump-iraq-iran-reaction.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Unfit.

Have we in fact left Syria?

Its unclear what the plan is in Syria.  At first we said we would only leave if we had assurances from Turkey that they wouldn't attack the Kurds.  Then there was word that we were beginning the draw-down.  And now Trump is saying yes, we are leaving, but no worries we can always come right back because "we have very fast airplanes."

If, somehow, we end up doing the right thing in Syria it will be because Trump was told (including by his own party in Congress) that he doesn't know what he is doing and takes that to heart.  Signs aren't good that this will happen.

Nothing is done til it is done

Right now troops are still in Syria.  The harpy press is banging these guys for answers to what Trump said in December - and did not act on.

That's Kid's way of saying that Trump pulling all of the troops out of Syria would be a stupid thing to do.

I wouldnt know

[bambu-wisdom]

Australia's a man's country!

https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/381696/australia-turns-away-women-fleeing-from-saudi-arabia

More like a border-secure country...where floodgates are not welcome.

Four Corners has evidence of at least two young Saudi women who arrived at Sydney Airport in the past two years but were turned back after making their asylum claims clear to Australian officials.
Four Corners has also been told that Saudi women who arrive alone at Australian airports are being questioned as to why they are travelling without a male guardian.

At least 80 Saudi women have sought asylum in Australia in recent years, many of them fleeing Saudi Arabia's oppressive male guardianship laws, which allow their husbands, fathers, brothers, uncles and even sons to strictly control their lives.

Four Corners has spoken to several Saudi women who managed to escape the Middle Eastern kingdom and make it to Australia. All of them remain on bridging visas waiting for their asylum claims to be processed.

Way to prove the point.

If Saudi WOMEN are being excluded, that has nothing to do with floodgates, misogynist.

Oh yes it does.
First a few, then a few more, and before you know it the trickle has become a flood.

No, you woman-hater.

If they let the men in and not independent women, if they question the women asking where their men are, then this has nothing to do with floodgates and everything to do with sexism.

But you wouldn't know anything about that, would you?

Don't see any Saudi men flying in and seeking asylum in Australia.

That woman boss of facebook said in her speech that care would need to be taken with the 'me-too' type allegations against men...because some women would be lying.

[kidcarter8]

I want to be clear that I've never asked a Republican to defend Trump.   His actions are indefensible.  Including withholding his tax returns...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/05/we-may-finally-see-trumps-tax-returns-republicans-are-panicking/?utm_term=.8188779ecf93

Nice, clear analysis by Waldman.

Kid, i have yet to hear you "make a case" for Trump.

pay site

[NeedsAdjustments]

https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1092881163985801217

...and her response was "You also had some very fine people on both sides."

Or...no.  It wasn't.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Why do you ask Republicans to defend every member of their party? 

Not every member.  Just the racist ones.  Including the one that happens to be the head of the Republican Party.

And seldom take the time to make a case for your guy.

What is the above supposed to mean in the context of the conversation?  Are you asking for someone to make a case for Northam?

[kidcarter8]

No.

Not if you dont want to

It is a little sad though the lack of support he gets.

[REDSTATEWARD]

And seldom take the time to make a case for your guy.

What is the above supposed to mean in the context of the conversation?  Are you asking for someone to make a case for Northam?

I'll gladly make the case for Northam.  Despite his ugly campaign smears against his opponent and his insulting position on late term abortions there is nothing to, repeat nothing, to the claim he is a racist.  No one on either side of the aisle in the Virginia Legislature believes that( and the GOP has the majority) Where does Nancy Pelosi get off on telling an elected GOVERNOR to resign his office. When did she, or any other federal politician, assume the power of a dictator?  If Northam is to be removed from office then it is up to the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia to do it.

[REDSTATEWARD]

I want to be clear that I've never asked a Republican to defend Trump.   His actions are indefensible.  Including withholding his tax returns...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/05/we-may-finally-see-trumps-tax-returns-republicans-are-panicking/?utm_term=.8188779ecf93

I can't imagine anything Trump would want more than a full-fledged-democrat-led attack on his privacy rights.
Given the low esteem Americans give the IRS(thanks Obama) I bet he is rooting for that fight.

[NeedsAdjustments]

I want to be clear that I've never asked a Republican to defend Trump.   His actions are indefensible.  Including withholding his tax returns...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/05/we-may-finally-see-trumps-tax-returns-republicans-are-panicking/?utm_term=.8188779ecf93

I can't imagine anything Trump would want more than a full-fledged-democrat-led attack on his privacy rights.
Given the low esteem Americans give the IRS(thanks Obama) I bet he is rooting for that fight.

"Privacy Rights?"  LOL.  Every President (even nominees) over the last 40 years has released their tax returns.  There is a well-established precedent that recognizes the public's right to know who has been paying their President. 

And of course, while running Trump didn't have an argument about his "privacy rights" when he said he would release his returns just as soon as the IRS is done with their audit.  That turned out to be a straight up lie.

So what is Trump hiding?  REDSTATEWARD doesn't care.  Follow the party line, no matter how corrupt the "President" is.

[NeedsAdjustments]

I want to be clear that I've never asked a Republican to defend Trump.   His actions are indefensible.  Including withholding his tax returns...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/05/we-may-finally-see-trumps-tax-returns-republicans-are-panicking/?utm_term=.8188779ecf93

I can't imagine anything Trump would want more than a full-fledged-democrat-led attack on his privacy rights.
Given the low esteem Americans give the IRS(thanks Obama) I bet he is rooting for that fight.

"Privacy Rights?"  LOL.  Every President (even nominees) over the last 40 years has released their tax returns.  There is a well-established precedent that recognizes the public's right to know who has been paying their President. 

And of course, while running Trump didn't have an argument about his "privacy rights" when he said he would release his returns just as soon as the IRS is done with their audit.  That turned out to be a straight up lie.

So what is Trump hiding?  REDSTATEWARD doesn't care.  Follow the party line, no matter how corrupt the "President" is.

BTW, you have no right to privacy in re: your tax returns.  Congress can ask the IRS to turn over the returns of any American for review.  Which is what has Republicans so worried after the Democrats took the House. 

Which begs the same question asked a different way:  If there is info in those returns that would be so devastating for Trump, why does the public not have a right to it?