Jump to content

U.S. Politics megathread (merged)


trex

Recommended Posts

Craig Gordons Gloves
32 minutes ago, SpruceBringsteen said:

I love it over here, but imagine voting for a guy that would - without exaggeration - struggle to read the Very Hungry Caterpillar. :lol:

 

That's unfair, it's a difficult book, there are holes in the plot... 

 

sorry, i'll get my coat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 32.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • JFK-1

    2793

  • Maple Leaf

    2199

  • Justin Z

    1584

  • Watt-Zeefuik

    1483

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

All roads lead to Gorgie
5 hours ago, Notts1874 said:

I'm beginning to think he does this sort of shite on purpose. How many things can you get wrong in one tweet?

 

 

C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_D88eHwnXkAAxfi4.jpg

Wow! I used to think George W was a bit dim but this guy is practically a blackout. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watt-Zeefuik

Hey, remember when I said John Bolton joining the admin meant we'd try to start a war with Iran?

 

I ****ing hate being right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watt-Zeefuik
1 hour ago, jake said:

Can you hear yourself?

 

Jake everything in that post is easily verifiable using uncontested, publicly available documentation. I know you don't want it to be true, but there's not a bit of that that's controversial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unknown user
5 hours ago, Notts1874 said:

I'm beginning to think he does this sort of shite on purpose. How many things can you get wrong in one tweet?

 

 

C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_D88eHwnXkAAxfi4.jpg

 

prince_of_wales.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huckabee Sanders leaving the White House after 3 1/2 years..... Donald's actual words.

 

Are you sure Donald?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Barack said:

Speaking of Satan Sanders.

 

Resigning at the end of the month apparently. Just announced.

It's normally polite to read the most recent posts before replying ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ugly American said:

 

Jake everything in that post is easily verifiable using uncontested, publicly available documentation. I know you don't want it to be true, but there's not a bit of that that's controversial.

I know.

And no you dont  know what truth I want.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, jake said:

I know.

And no you dont  know what truth I want.

 

Jake I do not know what truth you do want, but the one thing I do know is if it has anything to do with Donald Trump, truth is not a word that jumps to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watched Tucker Carlson going into a frenzy about the attacks on Trump. Of course his biggest point is what about the Dossier, what about Hillary. As happens with us octos my old mind slipped back about seventy five years, and my practical mother when I used the excuse "the other laddies were doing it" she commented as she did quite often if they jumped off the Forth Bridge would you do that too. Basic but so smart, be responsible for what you are doing and do not use others as an excuse or reason. Trump made the statement, Clinton is history, I am sure Jefferson or Lincoln or somebody else made faux pas, but Donald and cohorts you did it be a man once in your life and say I erred and I am sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jake said:

I know.

And no you dont  know what truth I want.

 

It seems that most people connected at the FBI and the DOJ knew that the dossier was a political fabrication and not real intelligence. Amazingly they did not inform the judge of this scenario because it would have been flung out. McCabe admitted this.

The case was clearly and uncontrovertibly misrepresented in order to get a warrant against Carter Page. They knew the dossier seemingly paid for by the Clinton machine was fake, yet the warrant was renewed three times using only the dossier. Incredible.

I guess in the progressive world truth is what ever you want it to be.

 

 

Edited by alfajambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/06/2019 at 10:00, Justin Z said:

 

Not well, but watching him, a Gay Christian, make bigoted evangelical Christians squirm while they continue to support Donald Trump, is a thing of beauty.

Post biblical Christians navigate towards progressivism because it provides a kind of intermediate landing position that allows its adherents to retain their religious persona and socially responsible ethos. At the same time, it relinquishes them from the need to hold on to what the world sees as antiquated biblical teachings such as, supernatural miracles, perhaps the sinfulness of humanity, sanctification, the authority of scripture really. It’s all fluid.

Progressivism is neither in nor out, it may have its day but it will surely wither on the vine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Captain Ahab Trump the whales man, now totally rescinds his statements that he would accept information about a campaign opponent and would report it to the FBI, mentioned all the people he referred to in the original statement, and says many of them say they don't like his opponent. Remind me who is his 2020 opponent, I am sure the Queen is very familiar with and referred to him as that man whats his name who is trying to steal your so succesful, ethically, correct, sincere and honest presidency, I am with you Dwight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watt-Zeefuik
7 hours ago, alfajambo said:

Post biblical Christians navigate towards progressivism because it provides a kind of intermediate landing position that allows its adherents to retain their religious persona and socially responsible ethos. At the same time, it relinquishes them from the need to hold on to what the world sees as antiquated biblical teachings such as, supernatural miracles, perhaps the sinfulness of humanity, sanctification, the authority of scripture really. It’s all fluid.

Progressivism is neither in nor out, it may have its day but it will surely wither on the vine.

 

Once again, "post-Biblical Christians" is a lie and a slur. The Bible has exactly 6 verses which deal directly with same-sex relations, with none in the Gospels, despite same-sex relations being well known in Jesus' time. Compare this to Jesus' red-letter exhortations against divorce or the literally hundreds of passages hammering home the importance of welcoming the immigrant, including Jesus' own direct illustration of what he identified as the second-most important commandment (which presumably means not taking their children from them and starving them in cages).

 

Christian theologians almost completely ignored the subject until Aquinas came along with his Natural Law theology, which also underwrote Catholic prohibitions on birth control and oral sex. Aquinas is the first one who reads the story of Sodom as a lesson about human sexuality.

 

All of this can be learned through Bible study and a deep engagement with the Christian church, which Buttigieg has done in his Episcopalian tradition. The fact that you routinely dismiss this as "post biblical" is only evidence that you have no reply to it and must instead use a dismissive and false slur against a devout Christian man.  

Edited by Ugly American
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watt-Zeefuik

And just so I'm being extra extra clear here.

 

Trumpism is inherently anti-Biblical and there is no denial of it which isn't deeply, deeply dishonest.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Ugly American said:

All of this can be learned through Bible study and a deep engagement with the Christian church, which Buttigieg has done in his Episcopalian tradition. The fact that you routinely dismiss this as "post biblical" is only evidence that you have no reply to it and must instead use a dismissive and false slur against a devout Christian man.  

 

Whatever necessary for him and his bigoted, trash beliefs to be able to sleep at night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watt-Zeefuik
1 hour ago, Justin Z said:

 

Whatever necessary for him and his bigoted, trash beliefs to be able to sleep at night.

 

I should ignore it but folk coming on here ignoring the crimes against God and humanity happening at the border at the explicit direction of this oaf and then sneering at Buttigieg for being gay and Christian get my blood hot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ugly American said:

 

I should ignore it but folk coming on here ignoring the crimes against God and humanity happening at the border at the explicit direction of this oaf and then sneering at Buttigieg for being gay and Christian get my blood hot.

 

Ignore it? Nah. Making bigots' lives as uncomfortable as possible and calling out their bullshit at any opportunity is the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Space Mackerel

According to the MSM, I see Iran is attacking Japanese oil tankers in the Gulf and trying to start a war with the US now.

 

Whilst the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was in Iran. ??

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Space Mackerel said:

According to the MSM, I see Iran is attacking Japanese oil tankers in the Gulf and trying to start a war with the US now.

 

Whilst the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was in Iran. ??

 

 

 

 

 

I doubt if the Iranians want to start a war with anyone, least of all the USA.  But if they did want to start a war with the Americans, attacking a Japanese tanker seems like a strange way of doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Space Mackerel
1 hour ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

I doubt if the Iranians want to start a war with anyone, least of all the USA.  But if they did want to start a war with the Americans, attacking a Japanese tanker seems like a strange way of doing it.

 

Something along the lines of this again? 

 

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2008/february/truth-about-tonkin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Yes, I can easily imagine the Trump administration using the attack against the tankers as an excuse to escalate the situation with Iran.  There are some, like John Bolton, who are open in their opinions that US policy should aim for regime change in Iran.

 

I've said it before, if the US attacks Iran it will be a disaster for all concerned, although it would probably have a positive effect on Trump's approval rating among American voters.  But both sides will run out of body bags. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
25 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Yes, I can easily imagine the Trump administration using the attack against the tankers as an excuse to escalate the situation with Iran.  There are some, like John Bolton, who are open in their opinions that US policy should aim for regime change in Iran.

 

I've said it before, if the US attacks Iran it will be a disaster for all concerned, although it would probably have a positive effect on Trump's approval rating among American voters.  But both sides will run out of body bags. 

The Gulf of Tonkin thing is long established fact - it was used as a falsified excuse to escalate US involvement in an undeclared war. 

It is maybe a little premature and in fact just plain wrong to easily imagine the Trump regime doing the same thing. So far Trump has been one of if not the most Presidencies responsible for fewest civilian and US military deaths.  But the anti-Trump obsessives live in hope it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
10 hours ago, Ugly American said:

And just so I'm being extra extra clear here.

 

Trumpism is inherently anti-Biblical and there is no denial of it which isn't deeply, deeply dishonest.

 

 

Trumpism is inherently anti-biblical?

At last a positive post about Trumpism!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

The Gulf of Tonkin thing is long established fact - it was used as a falsified excuse to escalate US involvement in an undeclared war. 

It is maybe a little premature and in fact just plain wrong to easily imagine the Trump regime doing the same thing. So far Trump has been one of if not the most Presidencies responsible for fewest civilian and US military deaths.  But the anti-Trump obsessives live in hope it seems.

 

Who are these anti-Trump obsessives of whom you speak? And if you're referring to anyone who's posted on this thread, show me where any of them are hoping for a war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
21 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Who are these anti-Trump obsessives of whom you speak? And if you're referring to anyone who's posted on this thread, show me where any of them are hoping for a war.

Hoping is too strong. Predicting on the basis of the thinnest of evidence less so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Hoping is too strong. Predicting on the basis of the thinnest of evidence less so.

How many reporters have be attacked, lost their jobs or even died, since Trump and his Trumpists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Space Mackerel
11 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

The Gulf of Tonkin thing is long established fact - it was used as a falsified excuse to escalate US involvement in an undeclared war. 

It is maybe a little premature and in fact just plain wrong to easily imagine the Trump regime doing the same thing. So far Trump has been one of if not the most Presidencies responsible for fewest civilian and US military deaths.  But the anti-Trump obsessives live in hope it seems.

 

Hmmmmmmmmmm...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

I don't think the USA has the balls to take on Iran. This would be the end.

 

Don't underestimate stupidity.

 

Or the need to increase the chances of winning re-election.

 

Or the need to give the US arms industry a wee boost. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is armed conflict with Iran the U.S. because of superior numbers and weaponry will win. However the International repercussions would be strong, and the probable flag covered coffins arriving home would be not only very sad, but also a condemnation of a President who sent young people to their death, when it no doubt will be mentioned that he avoided servicein the war of his time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Don't underestimate stupidity.

 

Or the need to increase the chances of winning re-election.

 

Or the need to give the US arms industry a wee boost. 

 

Apparently the Saudis need an oil price of $70 or above to break even. Would imagine them and the Israelis would be only too happy for the US to start a war with Iran. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Don't underestimate stupidity.

 

Or the need to increase the chances of winning re-election.

 

Or the need to give the US arms industry a wee boost. 

Or oil prices. Probably Iran and US are at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Craig_ said:

 

Apparently the Saudis need an oil price of $70 or above to break even. Would imagine them and the Israelis would be only too happy for the US to start a war with Iran. 

Breakeven for what? When you add up all the costs of getting it out the ground and refined, the Saudis can do it for below 20 believe it or not - source of that is a good friend who works for Aramco. That's why the last time the oil price tanked they INCREASED production to kill off competitors.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, trotter said:

Breakeven for what? When you add up all the costs of getting it out the ground and refined, the Saudis can do it for below 20 believe it or not - source of that is a good friend who works for Aramco. That's why the last time the oil price tanked they INCREASED production to kill off competitors.  

Yemeni genocide is costing them a fortune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, trotter said:

Breakeven for what? When you add up all the costs of getting it out the ground and refined, the Saudis can do it for below 20 believe it or not - source of that is a good friend who works for Aramco. That's why the last time the oil price tanked they INCREASED production to kill off competitors.  

State spending in Saudi needs an oil price of over $100 per barrel was what I read. They can rip it out of the ground for pennies but they need to quell the population some how.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dicksojo said:

State spending in Saudi needs an oil price of over $100 per barrel was what I read. They can rip it out of the ground for pennies but they need to quell the population some how.

Ahh, crossed wires

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood

Trump criticising Khan on London violence.

Trump how is the violence in the USA these days?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Trump criticising Khan on London violence.

Trump how is the violence in the USA these days?

 

26 killed by gun violence yesterday alone if “gun violence archive” is reliable. 

 

Edit: over 6400 gun deaths so far this year. 

Edited by gjcc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood
1 minute ago, gjcc said:

 

26 killed by gun violence yesterday alone if “gun violence archive” is reliable. 

Probably true unfortunately.

In Trump’s world that wouldn’t count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Mighty Thor
58 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Trump criticising Khan on London violence.

Trump how is the violence in the USA these days?

Approximately 39,000 gun deaths per annum. 

Over 100 on any given day per average.

 

Perhaps Khan should tweet that back to the president and ask him how that's all working out for him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Approximately 39,000 gun deaths per annum. 

Over 100 on any given day per average.

 

Perhaps Khan should tweet that back to the president and ask him how that's all working out for him?

Do Americans just shot first and then ask questions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gjcc said:

 

26 killed by gun violence yesterday alone if “gun violence archive” is reliable. 

 

Edit: over 6400 gun deaths so far this year. 

 

I realise that the topic is violence.

 

That number probably excludes death by suicide, deaths by police, and accidental deaths. Gun deaths from all causes is much higher than 26 per day.

 

oops, just saw the post by The Mighty Thor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/06/2019 at 00:28, Space Mackerel said:

Go back further.

USA v Spain.

 

It's actually laughable when you compare the 2 navy's at the time.

 

The commodity was sugar.

 

It doesnt matter who the president is or was .

 

The papers at the time told stories of Spaniards throwing sick kids out of hospitals in Havana.

 

Edited by jake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

Do Americans just shot first and then ask questions. 

 

An American friend in Tampa told me that if I ever go drinking in a bar, never get into a discussion with another patron about anything. He said that lots of people are carrying and, if you say something they object to, will use it to settle the argument.

 

He was an ex-cop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unknown user
On 14/06/2019 at 19:19, Ugly American said:

 

I should ignore it but folk coming on here ignoring the crimes against God and humanity happening at the border at the explicit direction of this oaf and then sneering at Buttigieg for being gay and Christian get my blood hot.

 

FWIW I'm glad you don't ignore it, when reasonable Christians call out the lunatic fringes it make me think there maybe are some decent values and positivity in what usually seems a spiteful and nasty church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Kalamazoo Jambo changed the title to U.S. Politics megathread (title updated)
  • Maple Leaf changed the title to U.S. Politics megathread (merged)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...