Next thing you know we’ll be negotiating with ISIS.
1 Like
I have to say on the raj’s sake -
I’ve only seen him lose self composure a couple of times.
Not sure if:
A Paid per post by some right wing benefactor
B Bot with pretty good AI algorithm
C Moderator with good sense of humor
D Think Tank poster floating ideas to gauge responses
E Troll
F = to a short in trading, used to facilitate liquidity (in the conversation)
G evil genius
H or the amalgamated embodiment deserving of the vituperation directed his way
5 Likes
That’s still a better option than continuing to do nothing or bringing in the fed.
Why do you expect a perfect solution?
He’s quite the conundrum I’ll give him that.
Do you believe that the Nobel Prize for Peace awarded to Yasser Arafat was valid?
I don’t expect a perfect solution, but I sure as hell don’t want real bona-fide psychopaths to use the lives of the citizenry of a city as a bargaining chip.
The trick is to let them think that they are getting what they want while assembling a task force to utterly destroy them.
2 Likes
I’m coming in late (been busy with work), but someone needs to throw the damn towel for Raj.
6 Likes
The CIA has had multiple successes throughout its history. >Decade-old blunders, many of which were the fault of the White House’s selective reading/citation of intelligence rather than of the agencies collecting it, doesn’t somehow undue [sic] their track record.
See how stupid your reasoning is?
Anyway, again: under consideration is specific evidence for a specific set of allegations. Talking about different, entirely unrelated evidence for a different, entirely unrelated set of allegations is never going to rescue you from this hole you’re in. You could spend the next year learning the ins and outs of the Duelfer and SSCI reports – neither of which you’ve ever read – and still not be able to rebut a single word of the case against Trump.
If you actually wanted to figure this out, you would not have admitted last night that you don’t even fucking know when any of it happened.
Yes, Iranians in Iran are generally the least religious and most pro-American of all Muslim countries in the world. This ridiculous travel ban affects them disproportionately - from what I’ve read most of those who could enter (come back) were Valley tech workers, PhD students and university professors.
Pretty ludicrous, I’ve yet to see a single salafi islamist get pulled off a plane - but that’s because countries supporting salafi islam are exempt from this travel ban.
I’m sorry but that’s bullshit. This is an oft-repeated argument by islamic demagogues that Islam values women so highly that is strives to protect them from sin and the horror that is the single man.
First of all, trust me - there’s something deeply unsettling about these male-only countries such as Saudi Arabia. I say “male only” because you pretty much don’t see women in public except as a blob of black fabric scuttling by.
As a consequence, most of Saudi men do not interact with women before their marriage except their mothers and if they’re well off a Philippine or Thai slave/servant whom they sexually harass as a rule. This in turn creates incredibly sexually frustrated social, moral an emotional cripples. A true recipe for disaster.
I haven’t been to prison but a colleague of mine who did time swears that the Saudi vibe/social dynamic is identical.
1 Like
I believe a strong case can be made for declaring Islam a full blown political system, that has a religion and judicial system woven into its tapestry. Based on its own teachings and examination of a 1400 year record of conquest through violence, it is totally at odds with the precepts laid down by our Constitution.
If this distinction were made, it would certainly deflate the ‘freedom of religion’ argument that is being championed by the largely irreligious Left.
Laws still prohibit the immigration of active members of any totalitarian party, so as to preserve our nation.
1 Like
That may be a safe assumption, but I can only speak from the experiences I have of the issue. US exceptionalism may win out once again.
1 Like
Regarding Muslim integration in the US - I believe two of the reasons are as follows:
-
A successful supra-national identity not linked to a specific ethnic group or religion (the old “melting pot” cliche). Like I said here before, living in the US leaves a huge social and cultural imprint on an individual, almost like getting a stars-and-stripes tattoo on your forehead.
-
Dispersion and lower numbers in general which facilitates the breakdown of old tribal/family groups. The much lamented breakdown of traditional family ties in first-generation immigrants is a curse for some, for others it’s a blessing.
Hence in general there are no ethnic neighborhoods which facilitate social exclusion, and for @Legalsteel that means no Bradford.
3 Likes
Re: Gorsuch: credit to Trump for delivering in his campaign promise to appoint a Scalia-esque justice. Gorsuch is a very impressve guy, and interestingly, he is well-respected on both sides of the aisle.
Downsides? He 100% part of the “elite,” from childhood to now, which doesn’t square with the populist theme Trump’s been riding. But I don’t think it means much at this point.
Second, he’s an ardent critic of executive overreach. How many of Trump’s autocratic larks will get struck down (when challenged) by Gorsuch and a liberal bloc?
3 Likes
Well put. I suppose seeing these places would colour my views to the negative. Some of the stories coming out of these high-rises and ethnic areas could blanche even the doughtiest of observers.
I would add that the problem is significantly less pronounced in the Caribbean, Indian, SIkh, or Polish communities. Make of that what you will. I can’t deny that my conclusions border on the extremely pessimistic.
Bolt:
You and usmc have brought up an important point on this thread that I think people don’t appreciate; and that’s the “danger” of labeling a Supreme Court Justice as “Liberal” or “Conservative”; and viewing it as some “betrayal” if their opinions don’t naturally translate into a win for “your side”.
I think Gorsuch is impressive too. (and at 49, can be on the Court for Decades).
With the behavior of the Trump administration and it’s spokesman so far; and with Bannon appearing to set the “tone”; I will predict here and now that its a question of when there will be a policy difference between the Administration and a Gorsuch opinion and/or one he sides with.
2 Likes
Another observation.
The DEMS are getting steamrolled.
There objections and tactics are coming off (IMO) weak and “whiny”.
I personally think that their best tactic will be to select their battles…or the Mid-Terms will be an even worse Bloodbath.
3 Likes
Pelosi has been in rare form…
Seems doubtful DeVos can be confirmed
Where are you seeing this? I’m hunting around, but can only find summaries of the initial vote (12-11) stating that every person voted along party lines, it goes to the Republican controlled Senate for the official vote soon. But that is about all the info I’ve been able to find.
True…but she under impressed some GOP members too.
Also…keep in mind that these are smart Politicians. Rest assured that many in the GOP are selecting their battles too. The Secretary of Education wasn’t going to be one that a lot of them were going to fall on their sword for.
So far: