This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - More Than Mortal
Pages: 1 ... 202122 2324 ... 502
631
« on: November 14, 2016, 02:10:46 PM »
Fair enough, do you have any books/articles I could look into?
Too many. What area specifically are you interested in?
632
« on: November 14, 2016, 01:53:19 PM »
elements of the American Right have some pretty horrible ideas...auditing the Fed
I don't see how that's a bad thing, the people responsible for printing America's currency should be held to high level of scrutiny.
Monetary policy functions well when independent; the Fed already has a high level of Congressional oversight. Increased meddling runs the risk of interest rates being set politically, instead of empirically. Almost invariably, conservatives pushing the audit the Fed line are just goldbugs who don't have a fucking clue.
633
« on: November 14, 2016, 01:33:51 PM »
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokenism
So? He could not appoint a gay cabinet minister and nobody would say a fucking thing, because why would they expect him to in the first place? I really don't care if he's stroking his own ego, or trying to pander, because we already know he is. If it helps remove stigma against LGBT people--especially among fucking conservatives--then his motives are irrelevant.
634
« on: November 14, 2016, 12:56:05 PM »
BASED DONALDPresident-elect Donald Trump has been blasted by the media and many on the left for being “racist, sexist and homophobic.” However, is the 45th President of the United States really the divisive figure that has been plastered on the television screen these past few months?
Looking back at Trump’s past interviews (pre-presidency), presidential campaign statements and purported cabinet short-list, it appears that the candidate may not only be an LGBT advocate, but the advocate that the Democrats have failed to give the LGBT community in the past. In fact, Trump’s LGBT stance seems to be by most accounts more liberal than conservative providing a gateway for the LGBT community into a more accepting Republican party.
To fully understand Trump’s stance on the LGBT community, we must look to his actions and interviews prior to throwing his hat into the presidential race. While many politicians on the left campaign on a platform of LGBT rights, many in the community have felt their voices have been marginalized as LGBT issues are placed on the back burner by the very party claiming to cater policy to their needs. Trump actually blasted politicians openly for their stance on LGBT issues and gave a very blunt interview to the Advocate magazine, a publication that caters to the LGBT community.
In the interview from 2000, Trump notes that he judges each person their “capability, honesty, and merit” and says that the lifestyle of those talented individuals is of no interest to him.
“I grew up in New York City, a town with different races, religions, and peoples. It breeds tolerance. In all truth, I don’t care whether or not a person is gay. I judge people based on their capability, honesty, and merit. Being in the entertainment business — that is, owning casinos and … several large beauty pageants — I’ve worked with many gay people. I have met some tough, talented, capable, terrific people. Their lifestyle is of no interest to me.”
He went on to say that he supports the amendment of the 1964 Civil Rights Act that would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. He goes on to show support for gays in the military noting that the “don’t ask don’t tell” doesn’t work and that we should follow the lead of other European countries in this regard.
“Gay people serve effectively in the military in a number of European countries. There is no reason why they can’t serve in the United States……I favor a total reorganization of all branches of our military, and I would address the gay question more forthrightly within that reorganization.”
Trump doubled-down on his assertion calling Bush a disappointment for not passing a hate-crime bill.
“This is one of my great disappointments with George W. Bush. He had the opportunity in Texas to show national leadership by passing a hate-crimes bill but didn’t — presumably from pressure from the Christian right. When somebody is victimized because of their ethnicity, the color of their skin, or their sexual orientation, that must carry a harsh penalty.”
The Advocate even asked Trump, if he were to ever become president, would a gay person be included the Trump Administration. The businessman stuck to his guns noting that he doesn’t care what the sexual orientation of an individual is, he picks the best and the brightest regardless of their personal lifestyle choices.
“I would want the best and brightest. Sexual orientation would be meaningless. I’m looking for brains and experience. If the best person for the job happens to be gay, I would certainly appoint them. One of the key problems today is that politics is such a disgrace, good people don’t go into government. I’d want to change that.”
Though the interview was given 16 years ago, it seems Trump hasn’t changed his opinion on the hiring of people in the LGBT community. In fact, Trump has placed openly gay Richard Grenell on his short list of potential candidates for the position of UN Ambassador. If Trump brings Grenell on as U.N. Ambassador, the Gateway Pundit notes that he will become the first president to appoint an openly gay person to his cabinet, marking a huge milestone for LGBT rights in the United States.
Grenell has not been shy about his support of Trump and says that the media has ignored many of the LGBT milestones that took place this election because it didn’t “fit their narrative.” In an op-ed for the Washington Times, Grenell says that no other Republican candidate in history has embraced the LGBT community like Trump. Grenell notes that Trump proudly held a flag for gay equality at one of this rallies but that the media simply ignored it or refused to report it.
“On Sunday, at a rally in Colorado, Mr. Trump proudly held up a rainbow flag with the words ‘LGBT for Trump’ written on it to a cheering crowd of thousands. It was an historic moment for gay equality and the Party of Lincoln as the 2016 GOP nominee for President of the United States held high the flag for gay equality. No other Republican Presidential nominee in history has embraced the LGBT community in such a loud and proud way. And yet, the moment was barely reported by the media despite the fact it happened in front of the traveling press corps accompanying Mr. Trump. Political reporters, not unsurprising, largely failed to write on the moment where a Republican challenged their negative media stereotype.”
Trump’s campaign spokesman Jason Miller also confirmed that Trump doesn’t care about anyone’s sexual orientation, he wants to be a president for all Americans. He says Trump was proud to hold that flag and that he wants to help protect minorities, women and gays from the repressive regimes of the past.
“Mr. Trump is campaigning to be President for ALL Americans and was proud to carry the ‘LGBT for Trump’ rainbow flag on stage in Greeley, CO yesterday. He will protect all Americans from the radical Islamic extremists who perpetuate hate and violence around the world, unlike Hillary Clinton who dangerously plans for open borders and has accepted millions of dollars from repressive regimes with a history of violence, discrimination and oppression against women, gays and minorities.”
To further ensure representation of the gay community, Trump has added Peter Thiel to his presidential transition team. Therefore, it seems that the president-elect is at least paving the way for more LGBT involvement in the Republican Party moving forward.
635
« on: November 14, 2016, 11:06:26 AM »
Free press-hating """""libertarian""""" billionaire Peter Thiel
What's your beef with Thiel?
636
« on: November 14, 2016, 10:20:06 AM »
Considering that conservatives tend to have the most incorrect opinions ever when it comes to economics, I'm very disinclined to believe anything a conservative has to say (and that goes for any subject--but especially economics).
Literally what dude Most conservatives and liberals don't have a fucking clue about economic policy. And I mean that literally; Republicans and Democrats, in aggregate, agree with each other more than they agree with economists. It's a function of people not having the time or the inclination to study a pretty complex subject, not a function of ideology. Now, I'll grant you that elements of the American Right have some pretty horrible ideas: non-revenue neutral tax cuts, auditing the Fed, returning to the gold standard etc. But I'm pretty sure you'd agree Turkey isn't a moron, and probably doesn't belong to these more fringe elements of the Right; he's actually pretty centrist on economic issues. All of this being said, simply being told that a conservative is peddling a myth is not a good enough reason to assume that they are. From your response to Turkey, you clearly don't know a terrible amount about the causes of the Great Depression. There's nothing wrong with this, of course, but there is something wrong with having such a low standard of credibility when you form opinions on important policy issues. All you had to do was say "Do either of you have any evidence?", and even if neither of them did I would still be able to direct you to relevant research. Come on man, you were being lazy.
637
« on: November 14, 2016, 10:12:32 AM »
Mars on the other hand is great.
And already firmly in the sights of firms like SpaceX. Government is good for both basic science research and pushing the fringes of technology; investment in exploratory technology will be more broadly beneficial than simply gathering information about Europa.
638
« on: November 14, 2016, 10:10:47 AM »
Eugh. I hope this doesn't mean yet another change of directive for NASA. This business of changing policies every four years just slows development.
Hopefully NASA are able to concentrate on Mars still.
Well if we could just fucking find a way to travel longer distances in space Europa is actually a much better destination.
It's a shame he apparently wants to discontinue work on SLS; hopefully private companies will fill the gap for exploratory hardware. A couple of firms are already developing methods of long-range propulsion.
639
« on: November 14, 2016, 06:58:02 AM »
Pretty interesting. Neither candidate spoke much about space during the 2016 election, but just before Trump was elected president, he outlined a plan for NASA to move from an Earth-monitoring agency to one devoted to exploration.
When Obama took office, he told NASA to ditch the plan to revisit the moon and concentrate on sending humans to Mars in the 2030s, but Trump has set the space agency only one goal.
The president-elect wants NASA to explore the furthest reaches of the solar system by the end of the century, according to Space Policy Online.
“I will free NASA from the restriction of serving primarily as a logistics agency for low Earth orbit activity… Instead we will refocus its mission on space exploration.”
Trump’s new space plan, still a little short on details, focuses on eliminating bureaucratic waste, promoting a private-public partnership, and setting ambitious goals for NASA that will force the agency to stretch itself.
It’s the same kind of goal Kennedy gave NASA in 1961 when he instructed the agency to catch up and overtake the Soviet Union to win the space race.
In the weeks and months leading up to the election, neither candidate had much to say about space and the presidential debates didn’t even mention NASA.
After the second debate, SpaceNews sent both Clinton and Trump a series of questions asking about their plans for NASA, which was followed up by a questionnaire from Scientific American a few weeks later. Clinton praised NASA and dropped the names of space super stars like a pro while Trump gave short vaguely worded answers devoid of any specifics.
Then, shortly before Election Day, the new president-elect recruited former Republican congressman Robert Walker, who chaired the Science, Space, and Technology Committee in the 1990s, to help draft a plan for NASA.
Trump’s new space policy, heavily influenced by Walker, is designed to coordinate public and private efforts to maximize American efforts to explore the entire solar system. That includes mining valuable minerals from the asteroid belt and visiting Jupiter’s moon Europa, perhaps the best place to find alien life near Earth.
Trump plans to bring back the National Space Council, last in operation under George H.W. Bush, explore deep space, and encourage commercial partners to build a new economy in low Earth orbit, Walker told Mother Jones.
“If you’re looking at technology that looks for the solar system, you are then likely to move toward plasma rockets, toward nuclear-powered rockets, certainly toward solar sails.”
The space council, headed by the vice president, would be charged with making sure each partner, NASA, the military, and commercial partners, are all playing their proper role.
The new president-elect also has plans to abandon climate research, transfer Earth monitoring funding from NASA to NOAA, and strengthen the U.S. military’s stance in orbit.
Trump’s administration plans to eliminate many of the redundancies facing the American space program today. NASA is currently building a massive rocket known as the Space Launch System (SLS), but there are private companies also working on heavy rockets capable of deep space travel.
Ditching the NASA launch vehicle and relying on private spaceships would free up federal funds for other space-related projects, which would reduce costs, create jobs, and promote growth.
With better cooperation between the government and private companies, federal funds could be better utilized to help America explore the solar system, U.S. Rep. Jim Bridenstine, who is on the short list to head NASA, told SpaceNews.
“The United States of America is the only nation that can protect space for the free world and for responsible entities, and preserves space for generations to come. America must forever be the preeminent spacefaring nation.”
And this is the GOP congressman--a former Navy pilot and enthusiastic space exploration advocate--apparently being considered for the role of NASA Administrator. Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.), a former Navy pilot who is one of Congress’s leading space exploration advocates, has had informal conversations with the Trump campaign about serving as NASA administrator or secretary of the Air Force, according to an official close to the congressman who is not authorized to speak publicly.
“He’s made it clear to the campaign that if asked to serve as NASA Administrator or Air Force secretary, he would be willing,” the official said. The person added that there would likely be “a clearer path to NASA” than the Air Force.
Bridenstine is a member of the hardline House Freedom Caucus that has often clashed with House Republican leaders. He was a strong backer of Trump during the election — so much so, he threatened to withdraw his support from House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) after Ryan said he would no longer campaign for or defend Trump.
Other names that have been floated in space circles include Mike Griffin, who served as NASA administrator under George W. Bush, and Eileen Collins, the first female commander of a space shuttle mission who spoke at the Republican National Convention.
Earlier this year, Bridenstine, who endorsed Trump, introduced the American Space Renaissance Act, which touches virtually every aspect of space, including national security, NASA, how to manage space debris and regulate the commercial space industry.
640
« on: November 14, 2016, 06:12:22 AM »
What happens when you have a full decade dominated by right-wing policy? The Great Depression, apparently.
The Great Depression was caused almost exclusively by poor management by the Fed, established only 17 years before the stock market crash by a democratic Congress and president, and was worsened by terrible protectionist policy by the reactionary democratic Congress of the 1930s and FDR's New Deal.
Is that the historic, commonly agreed-upon conclusion, or is that your conclusion? I appreciate you chiming in, because I'm not a history buff, but I just wanna make sure I'm not being fed bullshit.
That's the conclusion from the right wing that's been pushed over the last few years.
The New Deal is commonly agreed to be one of the big things that brought the US out of the Great Depression.
Yeah, that's what I thought.
Shameful. You've done no independent verification of either side, and all you needed to disagree with Turkey was somebody else telling you it's a right-wing myth. Echo-esque, indeed.
641
« on: November 14, 2016, 06:10:46 AM »
That's the conclusion from the right wing that's been pushed over the last few years. No, it isn't. The standard explanation is passive Federal Reserve policy, combined with smaller issues like protectionism, gold flows and--yes--the New Deal as well. Wage-setting policy via NIRA significantly slowed the recovery, and the level of fiscal stimulus actually seen during the FDR years was pretty paltry. Monetary policy was almost solely responsible for ending the Great Depression. The New Deal is commonly agreed to be one of the big things that brought the US out of the Great Depression.
If by "commonly agreed" you mean "shit we teach kids pre-college because we're too lazy to explain it properly" then yeah the New Deal was pretty important. If we're talking about actual empirical work, instead of what our teachers tell us, it becomes far less important.
642
« on: November 14, 2016, 06:02:08 AM »
What happens when you have a full decade dominated by right-wing policy? The Great Depression, apparently.
No. The Gre- Oh. Turkey already replied.
643
« on: November 13, 2016, 03:10:08 PM »
It was never great.
Alright let's calm down a little
When, then? I'll give you the '20s, that's it.
You think America was at its greatest during a period of constant Republican government, national debt reductions, tax cuts, harsher laws on immigration and a decline in the power of the labour movement? 2016 really is fucked up.
644
« on: November 13, 2016, 02:59:17 PM »
That being said, if Trump does work towards his promises of infrastructure reform, doesn't dismantle all of the ACA, and doesn't override the progress done this past 8 years, then fine. I won't unequivocally hate him.
Saw this on r/ukpolitics: Fuck it.
I was convinced he wasn't going to run for President, and he did it. I was convinced he'd never get within reach of the nomination, and he did it. I was absolutely positively 100% certain he could never win an election, and he did it. I also thought he wouldn't make a good President.
That's my main consolation about him; he always manages to beat your expectations in the end. Maybe he will be a great President somehow.
645
« on: November 12, 2016, 10:59:26 PM »
What did Obama have against Churchill anyway?
His grandfather was tortured by the British during the Mau Mau Rebellion.
646
« on: November 12, 2016, 10:58:07 PM »
I don't see how a Supreme Court ruling is required to make a case for/against constitutionality.
It isn't, but it would be nice for your argument to have some kind of legal substance. All it is so far is "this policy is related to to a specific religion, therefore I think it violates my personal conception of the First Amendment." 1A prevents Congress from making any law elevating or prohibiting the practice of a given religion within the United States; I see no conflict here with the idea of preventing people of a certain religion from entering the country, especially not since this is already legal under federal law. You need something better than "because I say so".
647
« on: November 12, 2016, 10:43:42 PM »
banning Muslims from entering the country (First Amendment) Nope. Not unconstitutional. And here: (f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. As for the rest, has SCOTUS actually ruled on these issues or are you just superimposing your personal assessments over your republic's institutions, again?
648
« on: November 12, 2016, 10:31:24 PM »
flatly advocated the dismissal of most constitutional rights for a safer society
Where?
649
« on: November 12, 2016, 10:26:53 PM »
I'm not willing.
You're not willing to merely consider a possibility? That's all OP is asking; he isn't asking for contentment or agreement, just having the openness to not be utterly shut off to the idea that a Trump presidency won't be a total disaster. It's a meme at this point that U.S. primaries bring out the more extreme sides of candidates, and the races themselves are increasingly becoming about energising the base instead of appealing to floating voters. Already Trump is praising both Obama and Clinton, and saying he may not repeal Obamacare. Anybody who took Trump literally is either going to be greatly disappointed or pleasantly surprised.
650
« on: November 12, 2016, 10:10:28 PM »
But Door, Trump is the antithesis of important American values! How else can I point this out to people except by disrespecting democracy, public order and the rule of law?
651
« on: November 12, 2016, 09:42:04 PM »
What normalisation? His election is significant precisely because it is strikingly abnormal.
652
« on: November 12, 2016, 08:39:42 PM »
Hahaha, fuck you Obama.However Trump turns out domestically, so far the signs are positive for US-UK relations.
653
« on: November 11, 2016, 11:54:02 AM »
Is it literally just coppers stopping people to search them for drugs/weapons/whatever?
I know it was a thing brought up in the debates, but I never really considered what it entailed. If it literally is just coppers stopping people for a search, what's the problem? It happens pretty frequently here.
654
« on: November 11, 2016, 11:10:58 AM »
With proud thanksgiving, a mother for her children,
England mourns for her dead across the sea.
Flesh of her flesh they were, spirit of her spirit,
Fallen in the cause of the free.
Solemn the drums thrill: Death august and royal
Sings sorrow up into immortal spheres.
There is music in the midst of desolation
And a glory that shines upon our tears.
They went with songs to the battle, they were young,
Straight of limb, true of eye, steady and aglow.
They were staunch to the end against odds uncounted,
They fell with their faces to the foe.
They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.
They mingle not with their laughing comrades again;
They sit no more at familiar tables of home;
They have no lot in our labour of the day-time;
They sleep beyond England's foam.
But where our desires are and our hopes profound,
Felt as a well-spring that is hidden from sight,
To the innermost heart of their own land they are known
As the stars are known to the Night;
As the stars that shall be bright when we are dust,
Moving in marches upon the heavenly plain,
As the stars that are starry in the time of our darkness,
To the end, to the end, they remain.
655
« on: November 11, 2016, 11:09:31 AM »
Russell Brand confirmed for stealing jokes like the little degenerate toilet brush he is.
Nope, my memory has just been trashed by drugs. It was Boyle who I'm thinking of.
656
« on: November 11, 2016, 11:04:15 AM »
called it
Stealing a Russell Brand joke, there, you cheeky cunt.
657
« on: November 11, 2016, 10:57:31 AM »
Here is the petition. Now I get why people would sign this; I don't get why my British friends are signing it. It wasn't even their election to lose in the first place.
658
« on: November 11, 2016, 07:36:22 AM »
Neither can Trump 
659
« on: November 10, 2016, 01:03:31 PM »
660
« on: November 10, 2016, 01:00:36 PM »
Pages: 1 ... 202122 2324 ... 502
|
Show Posts