Top flight gilet work from Mert.
Top flight gilet work from Mert.
I've long disagreed with Hannan but always thought he came across as quite a sensible man. I didn't realise that he was in fact, a bit of a nutter.
No-one Daniel? No-one?
P.S. Love that John Bolton has 'Ambassador' in his Twitter name despite not holding an ambassadorial role in a decade and lasted all of 18 months.
Stop responding to my shitOriginally Posted by Mert
In the modjern era, he can legally respond to you as much as he likes unless you say 'Don't @ me'. It's the law.
God bless phonics for kids
Ah, I finally understand Mert.
He's so fucking daft he must be illiterate. At some point he confused "Armenian" with "American" and then he just rolled with it as much as he could.
The level of debate is just too damn high.
It's almost as if that wasn't a well thought out policy.
Jeff Sessions for AG... Christ. It's gonna be a real depressing few years.
You should claim to be an illegal and then they will house/protect you forever.
For everyone saying that Trump will be held in check by those around him, most of the people he appoints will be far worse than he is.
You get the impression that he wants to be a non-interventionist, but he loves America (and 'freedom and democracy') far too much to not occasionally end up all over the place.
We all love America too much. Most of our political class seems to be utterly dazzled by it. Still, lol at all those Labour activists who flew over to help the Clinton campaign.
'Sanctuary cities' might be all well and good (I think mert raises decent questions on this one though) but this wouldn't be a city, only a campus. Do you really think people are going to be arrested during class? Not that we have any undocumented students as far as I know*. The lol part, however, is the whole 'protect us from Trump!' shit. Someone should probably tell them how many people their hero Obama deported. If they really cared about deportation, well, they are eight years late to the party. This is nothing but yet another 'I don't like the outcome of democracy so I'll toss my toys out' moment.
*When I was in MDC, where there were a lot of undocumented students, I knew professors who had extensive knowledge of which universities took undocumented students and which didn't. At the time, WashU did not take undocumented students. That was several years ago so things might have changed but I doubt it.
If you justify anything with "deal with democracy", there will be literally no checks on democracy. If something is genuinely fucked, you try to garner support for protest or resistance, not sit around pretending everythings chill and laughing at the plebs for trying to do something
Alright.
So what is the 'genuinely fucked' thing happening that this people are trying to 'resist?'
EDIT: I was all for the protests regarding adjuncts work conditions btw. No one gave a shit about that though, I think there were like 100 people in the 'walkout.'
People can try and change the system if they want to, but the people moaning or saying that the result isn't valid because of the current system are fucking stupid. Trump won, fair and square by the system they're working with over there. There's a higher principle at stake which some people feel happy to ignore.
Who do you think pays for their funding? But perhaps more influentially, they want to see environmental reforms for personal political reasons.
And for the record the 98% figure is FALSE, by continuously restating that dogma you are either lying or shockingly ignorant:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepst.../#4ba5ec1c7187
I really haven't taken enough advantage of this so far although, as discussed before, I don't really count as a POC for most things since I am an actual Mexican. Still, if I apply for academic jobs over here I will go balls deep into my heritage and my life experiences.
lol pussy, special millennial snowflake can't handle having to actually explain the logical inconsistencies of his emotion based world view shocker
Is this the same one we went over before?
I met Alex Epstein a few months ago. While I disagree with the 'war on fossil fuels' I also don't really like his outlook on things. It was also lol to see him chimp out at hecklers during his presentation, especially when you consider that he offers workshops on 'how to speak to left wing environmentalist nutters.'
(The answer is that it's a strong majority but short of 97%)
I thought ethnic background and nationality were seperate you disgusting bigot, those Somalians immigrants gang raping your women are just as Swedish as you are !
So are you advocating for revolutionary overthrow of the government or...what's the point here aside from I don't like democracy when the outcomes are contrary to my personal views.
Honestly if you see progressive ideology as a religion filling the spiritual void left in the minds of millennials raised in a post-modern society, all of their behaviors / attitudes are tiresomely formulaic, primitive and predictable.
He pretty miuch admits that it is correct in the 5th paragraph.
Well, yeah. Also, it isn't "tapering off" http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/If you look at the literature, the specific meaning of the 97% claim is: 97 percent of climate scientists agree that there is a global warming trend and that human beings are the main cause–that is, that we are over 50% responsible. The warming is a whopping 0.8 degrees over the past 150 years, a warming that has tapered off to essentially nothing in the last decade and a half.
Also, Eppstein isn't even a climate scientist.... he majored in Philosophy.
He never tries to hide that fact though.
I don't think that discredits his stance. His rather narrow view of progress does.
So your generic middle of the road Republican is now a problem? If you truly believe your party's democratic opposition is by default an apocalyptic threat, there is an issue with how detached you are from reality. Half of the country isn't insane.
John Sessions was blocked by a bipartisan vote from becoming a federal judge because he's a racist. I wouldn't call him a middle of the road republican. He's just been given the highest prosecution job in the land.
Yes.
Agreed. It is a lot more than half.
There was something on Radio 4 on my way home about Trump and his potential relations with Russia. They had a clip from Aleksandr Dugin on it and just introduced him as a 'political scientist'.
Here's the flag of the political party he used to be the leader of:
Toggle Spoiler
...you sure about that?
YUP...you sure about that
On June 5, 1986, the Committee voted 10–8 against recommending the nomination to the Senate floor, with Republican Senators Charles Mathias of Maryland and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania voting with the Democrats. It then split 9–9 on a vote to send Sessions' nomination to the Senate floor with no recommendation, this time with Specter in support. A majority was required for the nomination to proceed.[19] The pivotal votes against Sessions came from his home state's Democratic Senator Howell Heflin of Alabama (ironically, Sessions would succeed Heflin in the Senate just a decade later). Although Heflin had previously backed Sessions, he began to oppose Sessions after hearing testimony, concluding that there were "reasonable doubts" over Sessions' ability to be "fair and impartial." The nomination was withdrawn on July 31, 1986.[13]
No I know I messed up the bolding which made the joke complete / more obvious
Interesting that you're so well versed in his career that you can proffer an informed opinion and yet not even get his name right. Unless you're referring to the British comedian, in which case it would be quite a shock if he was appointed AG.
It's come to something when I see the prospect of Mitt Romney as Secretary of State as a thing to be hoped for...
As religion has become less influential in the west, politics has become dramatically more tribal on both sides. It's probably not a coincidence.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/tahliapritc...4yk#.njjmq62KL
It's shit like this that helped Trump win.
Gentrification on a plate.
Chocolate as we know it is white people 'ruining' a bitter indigenous South American drink by adding sugar.
This is part of the problem as well. You (in the plural, generalised sense) vilify someone like Mitt Romney to the extent you do, and all sense of credibility and perspective has been lost.
It's much the same in the UK, where the left refer to the Tories as "Tory scum", "evil" or "Nazis". Great. What language is left to direct towards the more extreme elements of UKIP or the BNP? There isn't any, so people don't listen when they're told that these more extreme elements are nutters because "you say that about everyone". So you've lost perspective, and thus the argument.
Romney would be a very good appointment as Secretary of State - not just the lesser of two evils.
The media has laid some deep roots in that, too. You get sensationalist ends of the spectrum for the sake of circulation and article hits.
I assume that ruining thing is more than a little tongue in cheek, but I still like the idea of 'white people' ruining croissants.
i wonder how well an article about brown people ruining everything would go down.
Where did I say that? There are a lot of fine Republicans. Mitt Romney would be a fine Secretary of State, potentially better than Clinton and Kerry were (odd how that position is basically 'failed presidential candidate' now). Chris Christie's a dickhead wannabe, but he would be fine doing whatever. Plenty of randomers from Congress would be just fine. Jeff Sessions and Steve Bannon aren't middle of the road, or at least I dearly hope they're not.
President Trump calls for theatres to become safe spaces.
He's doing it on purpose, and yet people continue to bite. Presumably there would be less biting in the absence of a desire to be outraged.
I don't think it is. I've seen people seriously discuss the 'cultural appropriation' of food.
Reply With Quote
