American Politics Thread: Orange is the new POTUS (Archive)

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Azure

Pelosi is a big reason the Democrats are where they are. Maybe she should resign and let someone younger with more brains take her spot.

Pretty sure Americans are why the Democrats are where they are.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

Do tell, I'm legitimately curious from a conservative viewpoint why exactly is Pelosi to blame?

The problem is liberal echo chamber right? So from your view how did Pelosi get Democrats "where they are"?

Yeah, that is a good talking point that Azure is relying on, but what has she done? Has she been an obstructionist and not done her job of representing all Americans? What is the gripe here? Should she be more like McConnell or Ryan, completely ignorant to the needs of their constituents and just focus on ideological agenda?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Big, beautiful, slightly invisible wall

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Big, beautiful, slightly invisible wall

The Emperor's New Wall.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

Do tell, I'm legitimately curious from a conservative viewpoint why exactly is Pelosi to blame?

The problem is liberal echo chamber right? So from your view how did Pelosi get Democrats "where they are"?

you'll probably get the same answer I got the other day, when someone said Hillary was corrupt, and that's why she didn't win and I asked for proof, .
the answer was crickets

[DuffMan]

I would bet, that if the ED-209 was available, Trump would invest in a few to put on the border patrol.

[rubecube]

Pretty terrifying stuff here.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/u...-churches.html

WASHINGTON — President Trump vowed Thursday to overturn a law restricting political speech by tax-exempt churches, a potentially huge victory for the religious right and a gesture to his political base.

Mr. Trump said his administration would “totally destroy” the Johnson Amendment, which prohibits churches from engaging in political activity at the risk of losing their tax-exempt status.

Repealing the law would require approval by Congress. Certain tax-exempt organizations — in this case, churches — are not allowed to openly endorse or campaign for political candidates. If they do, under existing law, they risk losing the benefits of their tax-exempt status.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by photon

A small rolling back of Russian sanctions already?

The U.S. Treasury Department said it will allow companies to do some transactions with Russia's Security Service (FSB), despite cyber-sanctions put in place by former President Barack Obama.

U.S. intelligence agencies accused the FSB of involvement in hacking of Democratic organizations during the 2016 presidential election.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN15H244

So they are making it easier for the Russian hackers to do their hacking? that sounds like good policy.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Pretty terrifying stuff here.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/u...-churches.html

What separation between church and state?

[Ozy_Flame]

Regarding the wall: do we not have technology to just enforce a laser wall (from space or from ground-based scout points) that can cover the whole thing? So any time anyone crosses a digital signal sounds for US Border Patrol?

A wall seems so archaic, Cold War-esque technology.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by New Era

What separation between church and state?

tax free political activism

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Big, beautiful, slightly invisible wall

This what currently exists.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Too much to hope that he also eliminates their tax exempt status altogether?

Yeah, thought so. This is terrible, obviously. Another campaign promise that was awful when he gave it and now he's kept it. And another support structure for the Republic torn down. First, destroy the rule of law by having federal employees openly ignore court orders. Then, erase the church / state divide. He's already cast the free press as the enemy. What's next for week two?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Big, beautiful, slightly invisible wall

"Mexico agreed to pay for the wall as long as it was imaginary. I negotiated that deal. Another great success. Everyone says so. I am a great negotiator, the best, fantastic.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

"Mexico agreed to pay for the wall as long as it was imaginary. I negotiated that deal. Another great success. Everyone says so. I am a great negotiator, the best, fantastic.

This also ensures he never lied all the times he said "The Wall just got 10 feet higher". "It got so much higher, you can't even see it!"

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Too much to hope that he also eliminates their tax exempt status altogether?

Yeah, thought so. This is terrible, obviously. Another campaign promise that was awful when he gave it and now he's kept it. And another support structure for the Republic torn down. First, destroy the rule of law by having federal employees openly ignore court orders. Then, erase the church / state divide. He's already cast the free press as the enemy. What's next for week two?

How about an executive order to expand the freedom to discriminate based on religious beliefs!

President Donald Trump may soon hand a major victory to conservative Christians with a “religious freedom” executive order that would cripple anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people, among others.

If signed, the order would appear to allow employers to deny employee health coverage for contraception and abortion. It also would permit federally funded adoption and family services organizations to discriminate against same-sex couples.

Further, it would protect the tax-exempt status of any religious organization or privately held company that “believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with the belief that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, sexual relations are properly reserved for such a marriage, male and female and their equivalents refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy, physiology, or genetics at or before birth, and that human life begins at conception and merits protection at all stages of life.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0af07cb6b8672

[Senator Clay Davis]

Alright, some poll numbers for Trump and co. to piss and moan about (seriously though....who has "No Opinion" anymore?)

[burn_this_city]

Spare us your crooked polls, what does Breitbart say, probably 100% approval I would imagine.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by dobbles

The reason I bring them up here, is that when thinking about Milo Y., and what should and could be done as a response, I think about how people deal with a similar troll group like WBC. Rarely do we see violence against them even when they do things like protest a soldiers funeral. They hit people at their most vulnerable but you don't hear about much violence anymore. People have responded by counter protesting and trying to just drown out their evil message.

So is that not what the goal should be here? Just continue to drown out the voices of those trolls? Its certainly easier to do against WBC who often can only send a handful of protesters compared to the throngs of support trolls like Milo attract. But to me the response still needs to be the same, just on a larger scale.

I think the big difference here is that the Milo/Breitbart/Alt-Right message has a large following and resonates more with those in America who are of the Tea Party/Trump lines of thinking, hence the bigger emphasis on getting out and pushing back as hard as possible. The WBC protests, while still important in repressing hate speech, were more widely denounced by all than what Milo has been doing. In a similar vein, those who were not pleased about the nazi punching discussions on the internet because it entails violence also need to realize that dangerous discussions that uproot our ideals or harken back to darker times in history should not be allowed. This is much bigger than what WBC has always preached.

Simply put, Milo knows he has more weight behind his words, and takes full advantage of it. This isn't being denounced in the same way, and therefore gives him more leverage to lean on people's fears and convince them that his message is worth listening to. It's a hate speech that can resonate more than others.

Taking the high ground is ideal, yes. Violence isn't ideal, yes. Where is the line that tells you when words and ideals no longer get the job done though?

Finally, while both sides desperately want to blame the other for the violence, it wouldn't be surprising at all if fringe elements from both were taking part in the chaos.

[photon]

WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY Sean Spicer asserted at Thursday’s press briefing that Iran had attacked a U.S. naval vessel, as part of his argument defending the administration’s bellicose announcement that Iran is “on notice.”

National Security Adviser Michael Flynn on Wednesday said he was “officially putting Iran on notice” following the country’s ballistic missile test and an attack on a Saudi naval vessel by Houthi rebels in Yemen (the Houthis are tenuously aligned with Iran’s government but are distinct from it).

The White House press corps wanted to know what being put “on notice” entailed, and Spicer responded by claiming that Iran’s government took actions against a U.S. naval vessel, which would be an act of war. “I think General Flynn was really clear yesterday that Iran has violated the Joint Resolution, that Iran’s additional hostile actions that it took against our Navy vessel are ones that we are very clear are not going to sit by and take,” he said. “I think that we will have further updates for you on those additional actions.”

A reporter in the press room quietly corrected him, saying “a Saudi vessel,” and Spicer then responded almost inaudibly: “Sorry, thank you, yes a Saudi vessel. Yes, that’s right.” He did not in any way address his false claim that it was an Iranian attack, however.

Pentagon Spokesman Christopher Sherwood confirmed to The Intercept that the attack was in fact conducted against a Saudi warship, and that the Pentagon suspects Houthi rebels. “It was a Saudi ship – it was actually a frigate” said Sherwood. “It was [conducted by] suspected Houthi rebels off the coast of Yemen.”

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/02/...an-act-of-war/