Skip to content

Politics. The feel in your country.

1133134136138139635

Comments

  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    @Fardragon Is it overpopulated though?
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    The global food supply has been growing faster than the human populations for decades now. In rich countries like the U.S. and poor countries like India, calories per person have been increasing, not decreasing. Humankind's ability to provide for itself is outpacing its ability to reproduce. The amount of food we produce now can only support so many people, but our food supply is increasing, which means the population can safely increase as well.

    There is, of course, a point at which the human race will be unable to expand further on this planet. There's only so much energy on the planet; eventually we won't be able to get any more of it. But people have been predicting societal collapse and catastrophic famine over and over for generations, and the prediction never comes true. Considering we're only beginning to tap the potential of genetic engineering, considering we could vastly expand food production by switching from an omnivorous diet to vegetarian (since meat takes more energy to produce than plant matter), considering we've barely harnessed the food energy of the ocean, and considering humans and our crops and livestock only represent a tiny fraction of the Earth's biomass, even now, it could be generations if not centuries before overpopulation causes a problem.

    Based on the data we have now, and the fact that humankind's food supply keeps outpacing reproduction, there is no reason to believe global overpopulation will reach a critical point in the foreseeable future.
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,235
    Fardragon said:

    1) The Earth is seriously overpopulated with humans;

    2) A person is the sum of their experiences;

    3) Ergo, the more terminations the better. They should be actively encouraged.

    You just made me twitch.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited February 2017
    The Russian connection house of cards has started to crumble. You are about to watch what happens when an incompetent White House tries to handle a Category 5 politcal scandal. Of course, all of us who have been warning about this for months and called conspiracy theorists?? Turns out we're proved correct on Trump AGAIN. Remember the names Paul Manafort and Carter Page in addition to Flynn. You'll be hearing alot more about them.

    Oh, and look at this. Whatdaya know?? Who could have predicted??

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-communications-trump.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&referer=https://t.co/CoEn674tya

    Turns out when you declare war on the media and the deep state, they will more than likely end you. You're now looking at the second biggest scandal in American political history, with a a bullet.
    Post edited by jjstraka34 on
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited February 2017
    The level of collusion between Russia and Trump has been too much.

    Off the top of my head:
    During the campaogn trump going on TV saying Russia if your listening hack my opponent.

    Flynn calling Russia to reassure then that when Trump gets to power he'll undo Obama's sanctions leading to his resignation. After 3 weeks of knowing about it.

    Pissgate. True? Maybe.

    Trump trotting out the lawyer at his one press conference that was part of the 2016 Russia law firm of the year to explain how it's totally cool to own a business and make money of off the presidency as long as your kids are running the day to day operations.

    Rex Tillerson has deep ties to Russia and was awarded their highest honor personally by Putin.

    And there was something that Democrats found out the Comey knew that he wasn't revealing (perhaps this is what is coming out).

    And now we have the not so shocking revelation that their campaign was in contact the whole time with Russian operatives.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited February 2017
    There is a phrase about coincidences, and that's that ""coincidence takes a lot of planning." How in the hell can Comey justify making a public spectacle of duplicate emails while essentially sitting on straight up espionage?? This was nothing less than a bloodless coup. Impeachment isn't even enough at this point. The only thing that would suffice would be a complete invalidation of the election itself, which isn't remotely possible.

    Also, that Buzzfeed dossier that was partially dismissed as a joke is now looking ALOT more credible by the day. The fact is, this has been known information since the summer. People have just chosen to ignore it and dismiss it as liberal bitching and moaning. Unfortunately, those people were dead wrong.

    Also, to anyone who voted for Trump as a "shock to the system" or as a "molotov cocktail thrown into the machinery of government." Yeah, that molotov cocktail will certainly shake things up. It also burns and destroys the machine you throw it into. And, believe it or not, government needs to work, no matter what BS you've been fed about it for the last 3 or 4 decades. You now have a Administration that is essentially unable to function on any level. They are incompetent, and almost without question in collusion with a foreign power. And they have a craven Republican Congress at their back. No, this isn't Hillary Clinton's fault for being such a bad Democratic candidate. It's the fact that Trump voters decided to go with a traitorous psychopath to occupy the Oval Office to prove some kind of point. It is the absolute height of irresponsibility.
    Post edited by jjstraka34 on
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    I honestly do not find the Trump dossier very convincing. It began as an uncorroborated report, created for political purposes (digging up dirt on the opposition) by a British intelligence official working on contract, and so far there's been little indication that the allegations were true.

    The Russian hacking of the DNC is substantiated and the intelligence community reached a consensus on the matter weeks ago, but the Trump dossier remains unconfirmed--and therefore I cannot place my faith in it. Not all allegations, after all, are equal.

    Just because it says something bad about Trump doesn't mean it's true.
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964

    I honestly do not find the Trump dossier very convincing. It began as an uncorroborated report, created for political purposes (digging up dirt on the opposition) by a British intelligence official working on contract, and so far there's been little indication that the allegations were true.

    The Russian hacking of the DNC is substantiated and the intelligence community reached a consensus on the matter weeks ago, but the Trump dossier remains unconfirmed--and therefore I cannot place my faith in it. Not all allegations, after all, are equal.

    Just because it says something bad about Trump doesn't mean it's true.

    I doubt it's true. But it might be true and that wouldn't be unbelievable either. That says something about him.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited February 2017

    I honestly do not find the Trump dossier very convincing. It began as an uncorroborated report, created for political purposes (digging up dirt on the opposition) by a British intelligence official working on contract, and so far there's been little indication that the allegations were true.

    The Russian hacking of the DNC is substantiated and the intelligence community reached a consensus on the matter weeks ago, but the Trump dossier remains unconfirmed--and therefore I cannot place my faith in it. Not all allegations, after all, are equal.

    Just because it says something bad about Trump doesn't mean it's true.

    Just watch. These stories are coming from leaks within the intelligence community. They are going to be dropped in such a way that it will be impossible for the White House to react to them without getting trapped in a web that would make Shelob blush. Who knows how long it will take with this craven Congress, but you can mark 2/14/17 as the beginning of the end of the Trump Administration. Manafort and Flynn are now NAMED as having been in regular contact with Russian operatives throughout the campaign. Manafort was his campaign manager through the frickin' convention. Flynn you (and everyone) now knows about. Don't be surprised if you see the names Carter Page and Roger Stone show up as well. All high level campaign operatives close to Trump who were engaging in a sabotage of an American Presidential Election. Again, this is hardly news to anyone who was paying attention to the Russian ties through the summer. It's just that the media couldn't stop talking about Hillary's damn emails long enough to pay any attention to it.
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    Fake news NYT at it again. Trying to undermine the president. So sad. NYT founded Russia!

    -realDonaldTrump
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    By the way, the big question, which is "what does Russia have on Trump and why is this all taking place??" is in a very obvious place, and it's why we've never seen them: His tax returns.
  • AyiekieAyiekie Member Posts: 975

    By the way, the big question, which is "what does Russia have on Trump and why is this all taking place??" is in a very obvious place, and it's why we've never seen them: His tax returns.

    Putting aside all the Russia hijinks, the outrage over this interests me. Why does Trump have to release his tax returns? It's not a legal requirement. It's not normal in most countries in the world for elected officials to do this (I do not believe I have access to Justin Trudeau's tax return). It's a clear invasion of privacy for unclear reasons.

    So, clarify them, if you would. I argue it is none of my business to see Trump/Obama/Bush/Clinton's tax return, as it would be none of their business to see mine. I do not see why or how running for president changes this equation (do governors, senators, et cetera have to do this too?). Do you? Does anyone?

  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    Why should he not show his tax returns? The only reason for keeping them secret is that they show something illegal, or at best, immoral.

    The public has a right - a duty in fact - to scrutinise anyone running for office. You don't want to be scrutinised? Don't run for office!

    You want to see my tax returns? You are welcome to do so, they show nothing private.
  • StormvesselStormvessel Member Posts: 654
    edited February 2017
    The thing that bothers me through all of this is how the media is behaving.

    The media is very important right now. The GOP controls two of the three branches of the federal government and are about to gain control of the third branch. On a state level, it's even worse. The gerrymandering GOP is approaching a level where they could just about call a national convention and rewrite everything. This is the sort of one-party state crap you see in communist or fascist regimes, not a constitutional, democratic republic.

    And this is precisely why the mainstream media is so important, particularly right now: they are literally the only real check against the government. If we woke up tomorrow and the media was pro-GOP, that'd be it for the constitution and republic.

    I say this without bias. If it were the other way around and the dems had such a stranglehold on the current political processes, I would feel exactly the same way. We desperately need a government with at least two healthy, equally powerful and equally represented political parties.

    But the media is actually helping Trump. He's playing them for fools. That little bit about the media not reporting terror? Good job for taking the bait, media outlets. You just re-reported virtually every significant terrorist attack of the last several years, and played right into Trump's scare tactics.

    And then there are things like the "deportation force". Less than a thousand, mostly criminal aliens deported, and all of a sudden the media spins it as state tyranny. In one year alone, Obama deported over 400,000 criminal aliens, and he did so using the same agency of government that was used for the current deportations.

    We need an objective media who will hold Trump's feet to the fire. What we don't need is a selectively reporting, implicitly biased, hit job after hit job media. It actually helps Trump.

    http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/02/09/poll-americans-find-trump-administration-more-truthful-than-the-media/

    The media is screwing the pooch big time. We need them to get it together and they are failing the American people.
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited February 2017
    So Trump is upset about leaks in the intelligence community - rather than the allegations of treason that he either knew about already and was doing nothing about or was directly involved with to begin with.

    Nice priorities buddy. You were so thrilled with leaks when it affects Hillary (and allegedly in Russia with prostitutes). Speaking of Hillary, he's blaming the Russian leaks on Hillary's failing campaign (Hahaha what!? How long can you milk that one this is about you, the election is over). Also attacked the old standards - fake news, Obama, and claimed that the FBI and NSA can't be trusted.
    Post edited by smeagolheart on
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    Now the administration is wagging the dog, floating the possibility of ground troops in Syria. But I thought Hillary was the war candidate *rolls eyes*
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,235
    Its almost like both candidates are similar *gasp*
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    ThacoBell said:

    Its almost like both candidates are similar *gasp*

    One was a moderate republican who leaned left on a couple social issues and the other is Donald Trump.

  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,811
    Ayiekie said:

    Putting aside all the Russia hijinks, the outrage over this interests me. Why does Trump have to release his tax returns? It's not a legal requirement. It's not normal in most countries in the world for elected officials to do this (I do not believe I have access to Justin Trudeau's tax return). It's a clear invasion of privacy for unclear reasons.

    So, clarify them, if you would. I argue it is none of my business to see Trump/Obama/Bush/Clinton's tax return, as it would be none of their business to see mine. I do not see why or how running for president changes this equation (do governors, senators, et cetera have to do this too?). Do you? Does anyone?

    No. But in Canada there is an ethics commision that must be approached if you get elected. They will put your business through the ringer looking for any conflicts of interest you might come across after being elected.

    Trudeau already got in hot water with them when he went on winter vacation.

    I dont think the US has something like this in place. If his tax returns states he has taken money or loans from a foreign government, the public should be made aware of this.
  • BillyYankBillyYank Member Posts: 2,768
    deltago said:

    No. But in Canada there is an ethics commision that must be approached if you get elected. They will put your business through the ringer looking for any conflicts of interest you might come across after being elected.

    Trudeau already got in hot water with them when he went on winter vacation.

    I dont think the US has something like this in place. If his tax returns states he has taken money or loans from a foreign government, the public should be made aware of this.
    IMO, the reason he won't release his tax forms is they'd show he's not as rich as he says he is.
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    I count 5 reasons that people have called on Trump to release his full tax returns:

    1. To prove that Trump has not used his money for unethical purposes.
    2. To prove that Trump has not avoided paying taxes (illegally or legally).
    3. To prove that Trump's claims about his financial status are true.
    4. To prove that Trump has no conflicts of interest involving Russia (or any other groups you wouldn't want the President to be in bed with).
    5. Because Hillary Clinton released her full tax returns, like nearly every other presidential candidate has done for decades.

    Personally, I don't care about 3, but the other reasons are important to me.

    Trump has offered two reasons for NOT releasing them:

    1. I'm under audit; I'm not supposed to.
    2. It's not your business; I don't have to.

    I disagree with both reasons:

    1. The IRS has confirmed that audits do NOT prevent you from releasing your tax returns. There is no such requirement at all.
    2. Trump's business is now the government's business, and as an American citizen, the government's business is my business. I don't care if Trump is poorer than he claims, but I do care if he's done something unethical with his money, because he now has control over the budget and therefore our tax dollars.

    Tax returns are not classified information. Releasing them doesn't endanger national security. It's not like we're asking him to publish any information that our enemies could use against us.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited February 2017
    There are two important things going on right now:

    #1 Trump has declared open war on the US intelligence apparatus and the Deep State. If they have anything on him, he's finished. Signs point to them having alot on him.

    #2 people act like Russia is still the Communist country we were in a Cold War with until 1989. It's not. It's an autocratic petro-state that is pushing for and funding far-right politcal figures in every major Western country to destabilize NATO, the bedrock of the post WWII peace.

    People should consider that no Democratic Republic since the Roman Empire has lasted 300 years. We are in the 240s. We aren't special, and there is no reason Trump can't be the end of it. This is simple history.
    Post edited by jjstraka34 on
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited February 2017
    House GOP wants to investigate

    the leaks that have outed the investigation against flynn that led to his resignation. Trump had known about the Flynn issues for about a month but kept him his nominee anyway and wasn't going to do anything about anything. Until the public learned the truth and he was forced to ask him to resign.

    Just to be clear the House GOP doesn't want to investigate Flynn, Russia, Trump anything. They want to investigate that people learned the truth.
  • StormvesselStormvessel Member Posts: 654
    edited February 2017
    I can't help but wonder what moral right the intelligence community has to be listening in on civilian conversations and then purposely leaking information to the media to undermine an administration. I'm just trying to be fair about the whole thing. Too many people are giving the intelligence community a pass because it suits their own political agenda (e.g "I hate Trump, so good for them.").

    The fact remains, this is a situation where government workers in the intelligence community listened in on civilian conversations and then leaked classified information to the media to undermine a political opponent. How can anyone defend this?

    About this, Donald Trump is 100% correct.
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    @Stormvessel That's a separate issue. Two wrongs don't make a right, as they say.
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited February 2017

    I can't help but wonder what moral right the intelligence community has to be listening in on civilian conversations and then purposely leaking information to the media to undermine an administration. I'm just trying to be fair about the whole thing. Too many people are giving the intelligence community a pass because it suits their own political agenda (e.g "I hate Trump, so good for them.").

    The fact remains, this is a situation where government workers in the intelligence community listened in on civilian conversations and then leaked classified information to the media to undermine a political opponent. How can anyone defend this?

    About this, Donald Trump is 100% correct.

    They weren't listening to random civilian conversations. ALL calls with Russian diplomats are intercepted. The fact that Flynn didn't realize this in the first place is stunning. He was directly undermining the President at the time (Obama) when he was placing sanctions on Russia for interfering in the election. Flynn was in violation of the Logan Act, a felony if enforced, which forbids civilians (which he was at the time) from engaging in diplomacy with a foreign power. As for the campaign officials who were in contact with Russian agents, they specifically got a FISA warrant to do so, on the basis they were committing espionage in regards to a Presidential election.

    By your way of thinking, Nixon would have never been touched by Watergate. The only reason anyone knew anything is because the #2 at the FBI started leaking to Woodward and Bernstein. Trump himself was encouraging Wikileaks against Clinton DAILY during the campaign.

    It's absolutely hilarious that Trump thinks he's smart enough to go to war and come out victorious against professional spooks in the CIA and NSA. As for this Deep State rebellion, yeah. Damn the torpedoes as far as I'm concerned. It's becoming increasingly clear the Trump campaign engaged in espionage with Russia to win a Presidential election. The rules went out the window a long time ago. Parts of the intell community are attempting to save the country from an unhinged, narcissistic madman who many believe simply stole the Presidency. Every day that conclusion draws closer to being proved correct.
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    edited February 2017
    Yes, these are not random civilian conversations. These are calls to Russian intelligence personnel that are monitored. Because they monitor who Russian intelligence agents are talking to. The fact the Trump is either in on it or merely doing nothing about it is the real story.

    The fact that the government records communications massively is something that Snowden revealed.

    Post edited by smeagolheart on
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,850
    edited February 2017
    Jesus god, watch this man's press conference today. He is a 5 year-old child told he can't have ice cream. If your child acted like this, you'd punish them. He's a 70-year old who has never been told "no" in his life. If THIS is who 40% of America thinks is doing a good job, then I have no other choice but to assume those millions of people are as emotionally stunted and misguided as this lunatic. Sorry. This is madness.

    Trump doesn't lie some of the time, or even most of the time. He lies about EVERYTHING. This is unsustainable. You cannot keep the country running at this many RPMs for 4 years. It hasn't even been a month.

    Perhaps the MOST ridiculous moment in a 75-minute tantrum was when April Ryan, an African-American reporter, asked him a question about the Congressional Black Caucus. First off, it was clear that Donald Trump had no idea what the CBC even was. Second, he asked her "are they friends of yours?? maybe you can set up a meeting." He, quite literally, assumes she can do this because SHE is black and THEY are black, as if they all know each other and have a secret handshake. The only way a human being can think this way is if their thoughts about African-Americans are nothing but rancid stereotypes. This man is a f*****g clown.

    By the way, all you people bitching about liberals needing "safe spaces"?? Your President just spent over an hour demanding his entire Administration be a safe-space from anything but absolute praise and loyalty. If you were hiring a plumber, or someone to hang your drapes, or looking for an eye doctor, you would DEMAND a modicum of competence, decorum, and professionalism. Anyone would. The fact that a good portion of the country does not demand it of their President, presumably because he hates all the same people they do, is beyond troubling. Well, you were warned. You were told. And what's going to happen is on you.

    By the way, Flynn lied to the FBI. Why would he do so (knowing the automatic felony implications) if he wasn't trying to cover up something far more serious??:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/flynn-in-fbi-interview-denied-discussing-sanctions-with-russian-ambassador/2017/02/16/e3e1e16a-f3d5-11e6-8d72-263470bf0401_story.html?utm_term=.d2e387021c72
    Post edited by jjstraka34 on
  • AyiekieAyiekie Member Posts: 975
    edited February 2017

    I count 5 reasons that people have called on Trump to release his full tax returns:

    1. To prove that Trump has not used his money for unethical purposes.
    2. To prove that Trump has not avoided paying taxes (illegally or legally).
    3. To prove that Trump's claims about his financial status are true.
    4. To prove that Trump has no conflicts of interest involving Russia (or any other groups you wouldn't want the President to be in bed with).
    5. Because Hillary Clinton released her full tax returns, like nearly every other presidential candidate has done for decades.

    Personally, I don't care about 3, but the other reasons are important to me.

    Trump has offered two reasons for NOT releasing them:

    1. I'm under audit; I'm not supposed to.
    2. It's not your business; I don't have to.

    I disagree with both reasons:

    1. The IRS has confirmed that audits do NOT prevent you from releasing your tax returns. There is no such requirement at all.
    2. Trump's business is now the government's business, and as an American citizen, the government's business is my business. I don't care if Trump is poorer than he claims, but I do care if he's done something unethical with his money, because he now has control over the budget and therefore our tax dollars.

    Tax returns are not classified information. Releasing them doesn't endanger national security. It's not like we're asking him to publish any information that our enemies could use against us.

    Tax returns are not classified information, but they are private information.

    1 & 2 are basically the same thing (1 simply being broader). If a candidate has had illegal dealings or nonpayments, this is supposed to be found out and prosecuted in court (Trump has, in fact, been in court over such things; despite this public knowledge, he won the election). Public business dealings and private tax returns are not the same thing.

    4 is irrelevant because a) the President cannot have a conflict of interest in a legal sense, and b) tax returns alone do not prove anything of the sort. To prove this you would need to have public access to any and all aspects of their personal and financial lives. This is both unworkable and, I would argue, undesirable.

    5 - "Everyone else does it" isn't a good argument. Every President also issues a pardon to a turkey every Thanksgiving, which doesn't equate to a compelling reason to do this.

    None of these reasons explain why only Presidents have to do this. Surely you also don't want your governors, senators, city councilmen, etc. to be in hock to presumably perfidious foreign governments? You're concerned about Trump's control over tax dollars, but you aren't demanding that everyone working for the IRS also make their tax returns public - why not? They handle that sort of thing a lot more directly than the President, right? It also doesn't explain why few (if any) other countries do this, and yet have not all fallen under sinister foreign control.

    Tax returns are private personal information. The rule should always be that there must be a compelling reason to delve into someone's private information, not that there needs to be a compelling reason to NOT do so. The latter is an unfortunately common ethos in the United States as it is.

    Being "personal information and thus none of your damn business" is a better reason to not share anything than "it's classified" ever was.
    Post edited by Ayiekie on
  • AyiekieAyiekie Member Posts: 975


    They weren't listening to random civilian conversations. ALL calls with Russian diplomats are intercepted.

    Was this legal? Do you care?


    As for the campaign officials who were in contact with Russian agents, they specifically got a FISA warrant to do so, on the basis they were committing espionage in regards to a Presidential election.

    Ah yes, the FISA courts, well-beloved of lefties for their staunch defence of people's right to privacy.


    By your way of thinking, Nixon would have never been touched by Watergate. The only reason anyone knew anything is because the #2 at the FBI started leaking to Woodward and Bernstein.

    Having just reread All the President's Men (then and now an amazing book), you're wrong. While we can't be sure as to what would have happened in an alternate reality, what Deep Throat leaked to Woodward happened after they had already discovered and written about quite a bit of stuff that showed that the Watergate burglary had tendrils going a lot further up the Nixon administration. Most of what DT did in their conversations was confirm what they already suspected and give cryptic hints as to areas of inquiry; he rarely provided new information (since doing so would have made it much easier to find out who he was).


    Trump himself was encouraging Wikileaks against Clinton DAILY during the campaign.

    Was he wrong to do so? If so, then it's not really a point in favour of your argument.


    It's absolutely hilarious that Trump thinks he's smart enough to go to war and come out victorious against professional spooks in the CIA and NSA.

    I miss the days when lefties still hated and distrusted the US intelligence community for exceedingly good reasons.

    The way these things are going, if Dick Cheney does an interview bashing Trump, he'll be a new political hero of the left by the next day.

    The enemy of your enemy is not your friend. In a war between Trump and the CIA/NSA, I sincerely hope they both lose. And if I had to pick just one of them to lose, I'd pick the CIA/NSA, because Trump will be gone in a maximum of eight years, but the bloated, incompetent, malevolent, constitution-shredding intelligence agencies could outlive us all.

    It's becoming increasingly clear the Trump campaign engaged in espionage with Russia to win a Presidential election.

    Even the intelligence services you seem to now admire don't believe this.

    I also miss the days when lefties and President Obamas thought Russophobia was a sad relic of the 80s.
This discussion has been closed.