David Duke.
Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats
- Thread starter GasBandit
- Start date
GasBandit
Staff member
Well, you're also talking to a guy who thinks weed should be legal, here...
But I think you're stretching a bit to assert white collar crime happens as often/more often than robbery/assault/homicide.
Part of the problem is, we don't know if they are, because there isn't nearly as much scrutiny, because they're not as obvious. Though logically a lot of them would be rarer, just because the opportunities to commit them are less available.
He got less than 1 percent of the vote in each primary he ran in. Not exactly a major presidential candidate the way Trump is.
B
BErt
You cant ignore the statistics, 100% of black on black crimes are committed by black people.
What about Putin? I fear him, and wouldn't TRUST him, and think he's a dictator, but I'd be foolish to not offer some respect I'd say.
But that may not be what type of "respect" we're talking about.
CNN ran the story as "Johnson can't name favorite foreign leader" so yeah, probably not.
I'd have more respect for Putin if it wasn't clear that his cult of personality is no longer in his control.
It's one thing if the person on the street can't name a single foreign leader. It's a whole other when it's someone who is allegedly running for President of the United States.
I mean, for fuck's sake, David Cameron? Tony Blair? Gordon Brown? Theresa May? Stephen Harper? Tony Abbott? Angela Merkel?
And even if you go, "Well he just doesn't respect any of them," that's a fucking problematic point of view for an office that requires international cooperation.
I mean, for fuck's sake, David Cameron? Tony Blair? Gordon Brown? Theresa May? Stephen Harper? Tony Abbott? Angela Merkel?
And even if you go, "Well he just doesn't respect any of them," that's a fucking problematic point of view for an office that requires international cooperation.
GasBandit
Staff member
Half those people are no longer in office.
But they were world leaders, they are all still alive, and most of them were of their nation's conservative party or took conservative positions, so in theory they would be ideological allies. And almost all of them held office until recently. They are also often mentioned in the news, to the point where one should be aware of them.
Trump is now saying that he let Clinton win the debate on purpose, because he didn't want to embarrass her.
That's exactly like a 10-year old bully getting beat down by a girl saying "he let her win".
http://winningdemocrats.com/after-h...use-he-didnt-want-to-embarrass-clinton-video/
This is at least his third justification for his performance at the debate. First, it was "Lester Holt is a Democrat who was biased against him" (Holt is a registered Republican). Then it was "My microphone was defective". Now, he claims he lost on purpose.[DOUBLEPOST=1475128701,1475128472][/DOUBLEPOST]At the same meeting where he couldn't name a single foreign leader, Gary Johnson revealed his plan to help college students deal with student loan debt: telling students to not take student loans, and to boycott college until the cost goes down.
That's exactly like a 10-year old bully getting beat down by a girl saying "he let her win".
http://winningdemocrats.com/after-h...use-he-didnt-want-to-embarrass-clinton-video/
This is at least his third justification for his performance at the debate. First, it was "Lester Holt is a Democrat who was biased against him" (Holt is a registered Republican). Then it was "My microphone was defective". Now, he claims he lost on purpose.[DOUBLEPOST=1475128701,1475128472][/DOUBLEPOST]At the same meeting where he couldn't name a single foreign leader, Gary Johnson revealed his plan to help college students deal with student loan debt: telling students to not take student loans, and to boycott college until the cost goes down.
Hello there.
GasBandit
Staff member
I was under the impression that the question was about current world leaders, so I had to think for a minute or two as well, going "no, he's out of office, no... no..." etc.
Regardless, it is definitely egg on Johnson's face, but I still think he'd be better than either major party candidate.
Gary Johnson, with much prompting eventually answered Vincente Fox of Mexico, who was President of Mexico from 2000 to 2006, so no, not current leaders.
To be fair, Jill Stein *tried* to troll by naming hers... with the problem that, while the three she mentioned ARE important political figures in their nations, they are not heads of state or world leaders. Jeremy Corbyn is the head of the Labour party in the UK, and he was touted as a possible Prime Minister briefly in the wake of Brexit, but Theresa May got the position instead. Elizabeth May is a member of the Canadian House of Commons. Joao Stedile is an economist and the founder of the Landless Rural Workers Movement in Brazil.
So that's a swing and a miss from both amateurs.
To be fair, Jill Stein *tried* to troll by naming hers... with the problem that, while the three she mentioned ARE important political figures in their nations, they are not heads of state or world leaders. Jeremy Corbyn is the head of the Labour party in the UK, and he was touted as a possible Prime Minister briefly in the wake of Brexit, but Theresa May got the position instead. Elizabeth May is a member of the Canadian House of Commons. Joao Stedile is an economist and the founder of the Landless Rural Workers Movement in Brazil.
So that's a swing and a miss from both amateurs.
Yep, that's why it's the first thing I mentioned.
I haven't seen this mentioned, surprisingly.
A bill was passed into law. The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) was brought by the families of 9/11 victims, to allow them to sue any member of the Saudi government suspected of playing a role in the attacks. In practice, the bill permits civil claims against a foreign state or official for injuries, death, or damages from an act of international terrorism, providing an exception to the rule of sovereign immunity.
President Obama vetoed the bill, largely because the bill will leave America open to similar suits from other nations, especially as there is no international consensus over what constitutes an act of terrorism. Thus, the next of kin of drone strikes victims, for example, could file suit against the United States or various members of the government.
Both parties overwhelmingly voted to overturn the veto - the first time in Obama's presidency. (Dubya had 4, Bill Clinton had 2)
Now the Republicans are realizing that it may have been a huge mistake to do so, for the aforementioned reasons - especially with as hawkish as many of their members have been in public. Less than a day after overturning the veto, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan have talked about having to "fix" the bill, probably during the Lame Duck period after the November 8th election (Nov 9th for Trump voters).
https://www.yahoo.com/news/key-u-senator-tried-compromise-saudi-sept-11-151953051.html
A bill was passed into law. The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) was brought by the families of 9/11 victims, to allow them to sue any member of the Saudi government suspected of playing a role in the attacks. In practice, the bill permits civil claims against a foreign state or official for injuries, death, or damages from an act of international terrorism, providing an exception to the rule of sovereign immunity.
President Obama vetoed the bill, largely because the bill will leave America open to similar suits from other nations, especially as there is no international consensus over what constitutes an act of terrorism. Thus, the next of kin of drone strikes victims, for example, could file suit against the United States or various members of the government.
Both parties overwhelmingly voted to overturn the veto - the first time in Obama's presidency. (Dubya had 4, Bill Clinton had 2)
Now the Republicans are realizing that it may have been a huge mistake to do so, for the aforementioned reasons - especially with as hawkish as many of their members have been in public. Less than a day after overturning the veto, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan have talked about having to "fix" the bill, probably during the Lame Duck period after the November 8th election (Nov 9th for Trump voters).
https://www.yahoo.com/news/key-u-senator-tried-compromise-saudi-sept-11-151953051.html
GasBandit
Staff member
Ok, now THIS is when it is ok to invoke Darwin.
Phillippines president compares himself to Hitler, says he would "gladly slaughter" the 3 million drug addicts in his country.
Phillippines president compares himself to Hitler, says he would "gladly slaughter" the 3 million drug addicts in his country.
Darwin, or Godwin?
That's the wrong question to ask, you should know better. People can be terrified at whatever they wish, but whether their fears are cause of action for third parties is abso-fucking-lutely not a given. After all, many 2nd amendment people being terrified that the Democrats are coming for their guns has hardly been a cause for concern in voting blue. I'm sure some white supremacists were terrified of Obama's election as well, but most don't give a shit about them. I'm sure many Muslims abroad are horrified at the idea of the U.S. being lead by a woman, specially one complicit in the murder of so many innocent co-religionists already, but you clearly must have a different 'Muslims' in mind.
Instead, the question to ask is why the fears of (part of) Jews, Muslims, and other minorities residing in the U.S. are not being listened to more.
Don't overestimate that. Plenty of large Muslim countries - Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, to name...Gee, 4 out of the 5 countries with the largest amount of Muslims in the world - have been led by women. Certain interpretations of Islam put women down and want them restricted, confined, reduced to nearly sub-human - but so do some interpretations of Christianity.
I do agree with what you say, otherwise, but I didn't want to let that slip by. The idea that Islam is somehow by definition less pro-woman than Christianity is frankly nonsense. We're letting our view of "Islam" bez determined far too much by Saudi Arabia, Iran and, more generally, the Middle East.
That's probably because of the large difference between a "Muslim country" and a "country with a large muslim population" whether that's fair or not is for someone else to decide.
According to Wikipedia (I know, I know), three of those 4 countries I named have 85+% Muslims. They're Muslim countries. India, admittedly, isn't.
Ah yes, not what I meant to imply, thank you for raising the point! The last example should have been split into one about her womanhood and one about the civvy assassinations, specially since one is definitely more fringe-y than the other.[DOUBLEPOST=1475242835,1475242757][/DOUBLEPOST]On that point, though, we can add "religious Americans concerned that a woman shouldn't lead the household, much less the country" as another minority group
GasBandit
Staff member
Yeah, that. It was late.
GasBandit
Staff member
The Chicago Tribune has endorsed Gary Johnson.
GasBandit
Staff member
I hope they send him stacks of their world news section as a gift.