Mad_Machine76
Mad_Machine76's JournalWhat is it
with sensible-seeming liberals/Democrats constantly blaming fellow liberals/Democrats for Republican obstructionism, especially in situations where Democrats aren't in control and there are literally no obvious mechanisms for Democrats in Congress to overcome it? It's annoying and just stupid.
I feel like the idea that Democrats are making everything about Trump to be a myth
though it seems nearly impossible for anybody to ignore how Trump is a flaming dumpster fire in almost every aspect. And I also don't agree that "Democrats don't have a message." Anybody can read the Democratic platform, listen to statements made by Democrats at the federal, state, and local levels to figure out what Democrats stand for. If you mostly watch cable news, you'd think that Democrats don't have much to say, mostly because they are so rarely invited on. Most of the time, you see centrist/right-wing/Republican pundits on the air. Not sure why that is or how we fix it. But, at any rate, I'll take the scatterbrained, not-totally-cohesive Democratic Party over the racist, xenophobic, hate-everybody-but-the-wealthy-and-white-and-privileged Republican Party
Since 2001
Democrats keep making deals and Republicans keep undermining them.
And FWIW President Obama:
1. Would have prepared strenuously for the meeting, calling in experts and having meetings
2. Would not have been tweeting random threats and calling the other country's leader names for weeks/months beforehand, needlessly escalating the situation dramatically
3. Would not have ever been canceled than rescheduled out of spite
4. Would not have made any promises and/or agreements without consultation with the stakeholders and would (probably) not have agreed to any private meetings with Kim
5. Would not have walked out of the summit without some kind of tangible deal and would have probably stayed a little longer to continue working out details.
6. Would not be kowtowing to and/or slobbering about how "great" Kim is
Trump's Summit with Kim Jong Un could reasonably be considered a "success"
as long as you ignore:
1. He didn't prepare for the summit and, in fact, felt that he didn't need to.
2. The verbal insults he lobbed at Kim Jong Un at rallies and on Twitter over the last year, which could have potentially erupted into a shooting, possibly nuclear, war. Thankfully, it didn't though Trump apparently discussed giving North Korea a "bloody nose".
3. Initially canceling the planned Summit due to perceived hostility from Kim and sending a hostile letter to Kim Jong Un before the Summit was on again.
4. Agreeing to cancel joint US-South Korean military exercises, apparently even before consulting with South Korea. We don't even know what exactly Trump and Kim talked about in private.
5. Walking away from the Summit with a vague and amorphous "agreement" with Kim Jong Un that appears, by all accounts, weaker than the Iran Deal that he recently pulled us out of. Worse, he didn't even bother to stick around long enough to really work on the agreement more just because he was in a hurry to get back home for no discernible reason.
Half of Americans Approve of Trump's Handling of North Korea
Source: Reuters
In a joint declaration following their meeting in Singapore on Tuesday, the North Korean leader pledged to move toward complete denuclearization and Trump vowed to guarantee the security of the United States’ old foe. Forty percent of those polled said they did not believe the countries would stick to their commitments.
Another 26 percent said they believed the United States and North Korea would meet their commitments, while 34 percent said they did not know whether they would follow through.
Thirty-nine percent believe the summit has lowered the threat of nuclear war between the United States and nuclear-armed North Korea, slightly more than the 37 percent who said they did not believe it changed anything.
Trump received a 51 percent approval rating for his handling of North Korea and also led the list of leaders who should take the most credit for the summit and the joint pledge. Forty percent say the former reality television star should take the most credit, followed by South Korean President Moon Jae-in
Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-usa-poll-exclusive/exclusive-half-of-americans-approve-of-trumps-handling-of-north-korea-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1J92N8
Today in WTF news.
Unf**kingbelievable.
Let me explain how it works to Rubio in sentences he should be able to understand:
Obama WAS/IS enlightened
Trump WAS/IS reckless and foolish
So, no hypocrisy.
My main concern
is that, in future situations, people caught discriminating against LGBT persons in protected areas by way of citing their religious beliefs, could try to wiggle out of complaints against them by spuriously accusing government officials of being "hostile" to their religious beliefs and it's not entirely clear to me how an official handling such a complaint could prove they weren't being "hostile". Of course, to me, the religious objections of business owners to serving LGBT persons should be immaterial in what is supposed to be our secular-based society, but we have too many politicians whom have opened the door to religious beliefs, particularly Christianity (or some interpretations thereof) having outsized influence on public policies despite having (or supposed to be having) a defined "wall" between Church and State. Religion in our society is, paradoxically, much better protected than LGBT persons are and, ironically, IS an actual "choice" as opposed to being LGBT, which isn't.
What the hell?
The Democrats ARE progressive!
I guess that she means that we need to crown Bernie as King of the Democratic Party- even though he's not a Democrat himself?
The thinking that employers essentially "own" their employees
needs to be rejected, especially in this situation. I don't like the idea that employers can have access to the social media accounts of their employees and can discipline and/or terminate them for off-duty pictures/behaviors/expression of political beliefs. I don't agree with the idea that all employers can make random drug testing a condition of employment unless it appears to be a safety issue with the type of job or is believed to be adversely affecting job performance. I definitely don't agree with what the NFL is doing here either. Taking a knee as a form of protest during the National Anthem is not disrupting anybody or anything and if some fans want to get their shorts up in a bunch over it, that's their problem.
Nobody deserves to be called "animals"
certainly not by the President of the United States but whatever.........If you consider all of Trump's comments about immigrants, starting with calling Mexicans "rapists" during the campaign, it's not really hard to imagine him calling all immigrants "animals". If there is something to quibble about, I doubt that the media actually went out of their way to intentionally misquote him.
Profile Information
Name: Mara Alis ButlerGender: Female
Hometown: Indianapolis, Indiana
Home country: USA
Current location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Member since: Sat Feb 28, 2004, 01:13 AM
Number of posts: 24,412
