Hahaha what? A satanic conspiracy? That Cheney was running things (almost the universally accepted view) and Bannon currently is running things (the widely accepted view)? How is going with the widely and wholly accepted views a conspiracy?
No, neither of these are universally accepted outside of a particular Rachel-Maddow-inclined echo chamber. Particularly not Cheney's role as some sort of puppet master. While it's far too early to say what the power dynamic will be in this administration, Bannon seems to have pushed his luck too far too quickly in the first couple of weeks and has lost some face and influence.
You're talking about theory and conjecture as if it were indisputable. This is what comes of talking to a bunch of people who think the same things as you do.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
"He was the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Maryland from 1984 until his retirement in 2013. As a pioneer in neurosurgery, Carson's achievements include performing the only successful separation of conjoined twins joined at the back of the head, pioneering the first successful neurosurgical procedure on a fetus inside the womb, performing the first completely successful separation of type-2 vertical craniopagus twins, developing new methods to treat brain-stem tumors, and reviving hemispherectomy techniques for controlling seizures.[5][6][7][8][9] He became the youngest chief of pediatric neurosurgery in the country at age 33.[10] He has received more than 60 honorary doctorate degrees, dozens of national merit citations, and written over 100 neurosurgical publications.[11] In 2008, he was bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the United States"
The Following User Says Thank You to Flamenspiel For This Useful Post:
So basically they are advocating having separate public and private personas???? I vaguely remember that concept not being too popular when Clinton came up with it!
No, it was right the first time. Most people won't see any difference in their day to day lives regardless of who wins elections.
People may not see the difference but that's more because they're not paying attention.
For example, GWB had two unfunded wars and a massive tax cut. This, along with the removal of several key Wall Street regulations by Reagan and Clinton led to the sub-prime mortgage crisis which plunged the entire world into the worst recession in 80 years. People lost their jobs, homes and savings. We're still recovering to this day.
Elections matter. Those who claim it would be the same regardless of who is in office either haven't been paying attention or are willfully ignorant.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Red Slinger For This Useful Post:
"He was the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Maryland from 1984 until his retirement in 2013. As a pioneer in neurosurgery, Carson's achievements include performing the only successful separation of conjoined twins joined at the back of the head, pioneering the first successful neurosurgical procedure on a fetus inside the womb, performing the first completely successful separation of type-2 vertical craniopagus twins, developing new methods to treat brain-stem tumors, and reviving hemispherectomy techniques for controlling seizures.[5][6][7][8][9] He became the youngest chief of pediatric neurosurgery in the country at age 33.[10] He has received more than 60 honorary doctorate degrees, dozens of national merit citations, and written over 100 neurosurgical publications.[11] In 2008, he was bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the United States"
I knew he was a successful neurosurgeon, I was just surprised he had his own exhibit. Learn something new every day.
No, it was right the first time. Most people won't see any difference in their day to day lives regardless of who wins elections.
Certainly not the millions of people that gained health coverage thanks to the ACA and stand to lose it depending on what the GOP decides to do. Certainly not the millions of immigrants who may be deported under Trump. (and lets not open up the pandoras box of what happens to the economy if this cheap labor source leaves) Certainly not the people who live near natural resources that may no longer have clean air and water thanks to the EPA being run by someone that hates it.
The sad part is there are a lot more examples that could be brought up here that will have real impact on peoples lives. Hopefully the impact is minimal and a lot of these proposals never come to pass. But lets not pretend that what is being talked about by Trump and republicans is not serious change.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dobbles For This Useful Post:
People may not see the difference but that's more because they're not paying attention.
For example, GWB had two unfunded wars and a massive tax cut. This, along with the removal of several key Wall Street regulations by Reagan and Clinton led to the sub-prime mortgage crisis which plunged the entire world into the worst recession in 80 years. People lost their jobs, homes and savings. We're still recovering to this day.
Elections matter. Those who claim it would be the same regardless of who is in office either haven't been paying attention or are willfully ignorant.
You're an average blue collar or white collar worker. You make an average salary, explain to me how the Iraq and Afghan wars impact your day to day existence. Without using abstracts, using tangible impacts to the average person.
The subprime collapse, I agree
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Slinger
This, along with the removal of several key Wall Street regulations by Reagan and Clinton led to the sub-prime mortgage crisis which plunged the entire world into the worst recession in 80 years. People lost their jobs, homes and savings. We're still recovering to this day.
But you see the problem here? Implemented by Reagan, skirted by Clinton and Bush and then ultimately not fixed when it finally exploded near the start of another Democrat presidency.
So the average person affected had two presidencies from each party and nothing was done that would have lessened the impact on their lives.
Nice non-rebuttal. I can't argue with you, but that's due to a lack of readily available drugs that would make that sort of thing tolerable. There's nothing fake about actually giving a crap about the experience of your fellow humans.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
The Following User Says Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
You're an average blue collar or white collar worker. You make an average salary, explain to me how the Iraq and Afghan wars impact your day to day existence. Without using abstracts, using tangible impacts to the average person.
Okay, how about your taxes go up to pay for the war?
Quote:
But you see the problem here? Implemented by Reagan, skirted by Clinton and Bush and then ultimately not fixed when it finally exploded near the start of another Democrat presidency.
So the average person affected had two presidencies from each party and nothing was done that would have lessened the impact on their lives.
I do see the problem and I see your point. However, I used a relatively recent wide-known problem for effect. Instead, I could use an example like ACA. Or maybe fixing a road due to an increase in infrastructure spending. Or perhaps, clean drinking water. Maybe the cost of food. These are all day-to-day issues that are a direct result of political decisions often made at the highest level, and often with divergent results depending on which party/leader is running things.
History is the aggregate anecdotes of political decisions. All politicians are not the same and it does matter who you vote for. If you vote for the better candidate it doesn't result in Shangri-La. But if you vote for the worst candidate it can result in Trumpland.
edit- I guess I'd also like to say that governing for the "average" is probably a recipe for disaster. Governing should be aspirational. A true leader should at least attempt to inspire us to be our best. So, maybe it doesn't matter how the average person thinks they're affected or not.
Last edited by Red Slinger; 02-21-2017 at 02:46 PM.
You're an average blue collar or white collar worker. You make an average salary, explain to me how the Iraq and Afghan wars impact your day to day existence. Without using abstracts, using tangible impacts to the average person.
How do you not consider the emotional impact of being part of a country at war as tangible? You don't need to personally go to Iraq or Afghanistan to feel distress, fear, concern over these things. To consider 'day-to-day' life as limited as going to work, getting a paycheque, buying groceries, etc. is extremely limited. Day to day life is our interactions, conversations, emotions, personal feelings. Something that I see on the news that happened to someone else probably has more impact on me than an incremental raise that goes into my bank account and which I won't think about until I retire or need to make a major purchase.
I'm not even American and the election has had more impact on my actual life than just about anything else in the last six months, given the amount that it comes up in conversation both at home and with others, the amount I read about it and the mental space it occupies. And I don't think I'm alone in that; my interactions with Americans suggests a preoccupation with the issues that I don't think you can abstract from their lives.
