Burgold Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: The market is an excellent servant of council but can also be a cruel master. Protecting the environment is a humanistic issue. You don't have to do whatever the market tells you when self interest and profits are posing a threat to people's lives. I'm all for helping orphaned children in Africa get mosquito nets so that they can avoid catching malaria and dieing in horrible pain... IF the market says it's needed. This is true, but on a more mercenary/capitalist note there's also the Steve Jobs philosophy. The market doesn't know it wants something until you put it out there. Put a simpler way, the market loves what it knows, but will also run to the novel. If you build a better mousetrap the market will run to you and then you have the market cornered. If you wait, you are one vendor shouting among thousands just hoping to get your piece of the pie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justice98 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 34 minutes ago, Burgold said: As the Pentagon said, the Paris Accords are beneficial for National Security reasons. That extends into many things. More efficient use of energy, healthier population, better agriculture, etc. The positives outweigh the negatives for anyone whose timeline extends beyond 24 hours. That's one thing that's not being presented enough when the administration is being asked about it. Pruitt was on CNN yesterday and Jake Tapper kept harping on the CEOs wanting to stay in the agreement. How about asking him about the national security implications and the Pentagon objecting to leaving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 A healthy, well functioning right wing government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsMayne Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Wonder what Comey is going to say next week. If there is damning testimony, that's when we will hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 37 minutes ago, visionary said: Am I wrong to read a little more into this. Conway is probably in the top 10 people who know what's going on in the WH. Her husband is likely well informed of goings on. If this withdrawal was an aberration, then I'd read less into it, but so many people have withdrawn. It feels like something is up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 19 minutes ago, No Excuses said: A healthy, well functioning right wing government. Can't say this would be a surprise. Trump doesn't come off as much of a "thinker" It definitely feels like he is being dragged around by someone(s) with a specific ideology/agenda who want to inflict as much as they can before Trump is kicked to the curb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 20 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said: If this withdrawal was an aberration, then I'd read less into it, but so many people have withdrawn. It feels like something is up. Getting there. Be patient. Just gonna take the time to make it stick. We may only get one shot at this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 18 minutes ago, RedskinsMayne said: Wonder what Comey is going to say next week. If there is damning testimony, that's when we will hear it. People shouldn't get too hyped up. It's an open hearing so we won't get classified intel, and I don't know how effective the Congress will be in outlining the edges of the classified info. There's also the fact that Trump could still attempt to claim privilege on the conversations. I think realistically, all the times he's talked about talking with Comey, he's waived that privilege, but if Trump claims it, it might need to be litigated or Comey may, even if he doesn't fully believe in the privilege, still choose not to testify (either in part or at all) to "honor" the claimed "privilege" of the convos, even if the contents might later be given to Mueller. If allowed to testify without privilege constraints, we will likely hear what has already been rumored, that Trump personally appealed to Comey to end the Russia investigation, and go easy on Flynn. I doubt we'll hear any smoking guns on obstruction or anything else, unless Trump was stupid enough to threaten Comey with firing if he didn't let up. Trump, however, from what I've read, is actually a big wuss about firing people IRL. The Apprentice was basically him role-playing a tough guy, while in the real world he usually just froze people out until they left on their own, or he would, like with Comey, send one of his people to deliver the news. So I highly doubt he would have the balls to threaten Comey to Comey's face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 https://twitter.com/noahbarkin/status/870734880350535681 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 one thing with the waivers, per bannon....he'd have been in violation of ethics rules by talking with breitbart prior to this issuance, which watchdog groups have accused him of doing....keep in mind the rules against such while having even an appointed admin position are partly to prevent an official from using media orgs he's previously worked for/with as a tool against political opponents...which in bannons's case include kushner and priebus and of course ryan...all of whom have been relentlessly hammered hard by breitbart all this time...but for the first time ever, trump's admin has declared these "retroactive" waivers, covering any activity back to the inaugural...though the actual ethics dep't says there's no such thing as "retroactive", that if something had been done in violation previously, it's a violation....the waiver is only active post issuance...not to worry, however, i think there is really no enforcement of these kind (level) of violations other than a castigation from some other-party committee member or a talking head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Jumbo said: one thing with the waivers, per bannon....he'd have been in violation of ethics rules by talking with breitbart prior to this issuance, which watchdog groups have accused him of doing....keep in mind the rules against such while having even an appointed admin position are partly to prevent an official from using media orgs he's previously worked for/with as a tool against political opponents...which in bannons's case include kushner and priebus and of course ryan...all of whom have been relentlessly hammered hard by breitbart all this time...but for the first time ever, trump's admin has declared these "retroactive" waivers, covering any activity back to the inaugural...though the actual ethics dep't says there's no such thing as "retroactive", that if something had been done in violation previously, it's a violation....the waiver is only active post issuance...not to worry, however, i think there is really no enforcement of these kind (level) of violations other than a castigation from some other-party committee member or a talking head Makes me sick reading it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Veterans into law enforcement... well can't bat .000, there's a lone single for ya. Just talking trash though. Good idea all around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 eh, small deal in context...(bannon waiver) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 14 minutes ago, Mooka said: Veterans into law enforcement... well can't bat .000, there's a lone single for ya. Just talking trash though. Good idea all around. Think again. With the number of soldiers coming back with PTSD because they've done 3,5, or 9 tours, another "battlefield" is the last thing they need to see. (Hint: we're running out of poor kids willing to defend us.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 14 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said: Think again. With the number of soldiers coming back with PTSD because they've done 3,5, or 9 tours, another "battlefield" is the last thing they need to see. (Hint: we're running out of poor kids willing to defend us.) They're not being forced into it. It's a benefit to veterans who are actively looking to get into that line of work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 6 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: They're not being forced into it. It's a benefit to veterans who are actively looking to get into that line of work. You're right, I just think we may end up with more police "issues" than we have now, if I'm making any sense? Sure, some are able to get over what they've seen and some of the situations they've endured. But maybe some haven't. And don't get me started on how our police departments are already militarized. (I think that's more of the connection I was trying to make.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 29 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said: Think again. With the number of soldiers coming back with PTSD because they've done 3,5, or 9 tours, another "battlefield" is the last thing they need to see. (Hint: we're running out of poor kids willing to defend us.) The military keeps reaching enlistment goals....or were you talking about defending us on the streets here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 minute ago, twa said: .or were you talking about defending us on the streets here? haha, or wreaking more than just a little havoc if something goes wrong. Don't know if I'm devil's adv here, but I'm damn sure not goin' down the hole you're diggin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said: You're right, I just think we may end up with more police "issues" than we have now, if I'm making any sense? Sure, some are able to get over what they've seen and some of the situations they've endured. But maybe some haven't. And don't get me started on how our police departments are already militarized. (I think that's more of the connection I was trying to make.) Not to mention that the principles between law enforcement and military are drastic. Military training is meant to become second nature, police training most often requires restraint. The guiding principles between the two are not the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, twa said: The military keeps reaching enlistment goals....or were you talking about defending us on the streets here? And yet all the recent studies are showing that our current system is creating a warrior caste system that is being fed by certain demographics (namely southern poor) and not the population at large. So despite the numbers there are real problems they are facing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BornaSkinsFan83 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 2 hours ago, DogofWar1 said: Am I wrong to read a little more into this. Conway is probably in the top 10 people who know what's going on in the WH. Her husband is likely well informed of goings on. If this withdrawal was an aberration, then I'd read less into it, but so many people have withdrawn. It feels like something is up. She's been my sleeper candidate for the Master Leaker position. And as I posted before, the only thing that had been giving me pause was her husbands position. Now? Well I think the Conways are defintely smarter than the Trumps. So we'll see how that plays out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 good point, we need to draft some different ones....know any? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.