'Murica! (242 Viewers)

[lgorTudor]

Lol great reference.


Man I miss Rome the series. Reading historical fiction series about Cicero currently, and man that little feeble man was brave orator.

Skickat från min SM-G930F via Tapatalk

Purefoy is brillant in that role. Him and Michael K Williams are amongst my favourite TV show actors.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Osman]

Yeah easily my top few favorites too. I seen everything else they done basically after Rome and the wire. Imagine our luck when both of those became co leads on Hap and Leonard.

Skickat från min SM-G930F via Tapatalk

 

[Enron]

Trumps business order:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-regulations-idUSKBN15E1QU

I'm kind of feeling a lot of this stuff ought to go before Congress. The whole take away 2 regulations for every new regulation doesn't make a lot of sense. As leader of the executive branch he can decide policy toward regulation making. Don't think he needs an Exec. Order to do it.

 

[Post Ironic]

It was pretty clear with Obama that he wasn't going to do what he campaigned on, simply by whom he appointed and observing his first few months. He campaigned on bringing jobs back to the middle class, prosecuting criminals on Wall Street, and having the most transparent administration in history. Lo and behold, he accomplished none of that. So why am I at fault for turning on him? Wouldn't it make less sense to support him now just because I voted for him initially? There is a big issue in this country with blindly supporting politicians, especially under Obama. I'm sure the same will happen under Trump if he's a complete disaster.




The problem we face is that everyone has an agenda. Whether the opinions come the left, right, or center, there is inherent bias. I'm all for listening to the concerns of African American or Muslim communities, but please remember Al Sharpton does not speak for all of the black community, just like BLM. At the end of the day, the most important concern of mine is economics, which naturally tends to shape our futures. I'm not a fan of perpetually throwing money into a system that doesn't work -- even 8 years after having a black President and tons of money thrown at urban problems, the majority of the problems still exist (i.e. poverty, crime, et cetera). At some point, the burden of changing your future must come from within.

I agree with all of this.

I've said it many times, the problem in America, and to a lesser extent, Canada (because we aren't a 2-party system... yet...), is blind partisanship and inherent bias. Add confirmation bias to the mix and it gets even worse. People will follow the most ineffectual leaders like pigs to the slaughter, as long as they see that leader as "on their side".

I've also said basically the same things about Obama. And I also supported him only to see how utterly ineffectual he was... I actually believe he shares a lot in common with Jimmy Carter as far as presidencies go, in terms of being a well-spoken idealist, completely inept at realizing the changes he campaigned for. Whether partisanship is in part to blame for this, for both of these presidents, is an entirely different thing, and something they both should have accounted for.

It's interesting to see that Obama is in part responsible for creating the political climate wherein a man like Trump could come to power, the same way Carter did for Reagan.... Obvious difference is 1 and 2 term presidencies, but that's in large part due to Obama's wild popularity with minorities, which allowed him a bit of a free pass.

This doesn't mean I agree with Trump, or support any of his nonsense. You and others said many of his outrageous campaign "promises" were just campaign rhetoric, but it's sure not looking that way now, and imo he's taking America down a very dangerous road...

 

[Enron]

Also, I really hope we don't sell off our public lands. Hopefully, that's the one issue all Americans can rally round.

 

[Post Ironic]

Another good article in the Atlantic, even if I don't entirely agree with it:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...-as-stupid-as-it-is-counterproductive/514847/

The Orlando nightclub shooter, the worst mass-casualty gunman in US history, was the son of immigrants from Afghanistan. The San Bernardino shooters were first and second generation immigrants from Pakistan. Nidal Hassan, the Fort Hood killer, was the son of Palestinian immigrants. The Tsarnaev brothers who detonated bombs at the 2013 Boston marathon held Kyrgyz nationality. The would-be 2010 Times Square car bomber was a naturalized immigrant from Pakistan. The ringleader of the Paris attacks of November 2015, about which Donald Trump spoke so much on the campaign trail, was a Belgian national of Moroccan origins. President Trump’s version of a Muslim ban would have protected the United States from none of the above.

If the goal is to exclude radical Muslims from the United States, the executive order Trump announced on Friday seems a highly ineffective way to achieve it. The Trump White House has incurred all the odium of an anti-Muslim religious test, without any attendant real-world benefit. The measure amounts to symbolic politics at its most stupid and counterproductive. Its most likely practical effect will be to aggravate the political difficulty of dealing directly and speaking without euphemisms about Islamic terrorism. As ridiculous as was the former Obama position that Islamic terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, the new Trump position that all Muslims are potential terrorists is vastly worse....

.....We need a new paradigm for a new time. The social trust and social cohesion that characterize an advanced society like the United States are slowly built and vulnerable to erosion. They are eroding. Trump is more the symptom of that erosion than the cause.

Trump’s executive order has unleashed chaos, harmed lawful U.S. residents, and alienated potential friends in the Islamic world. Yet without the dreamy liberal refusal to recognize the reality of nationhood, the meaning of citizenship, and the differences between cultures, Trump would never have gained the power to issue that order.

Liberalism and nationhood grew up together in the 19th century, mutually dependent. In the 21st century, they have grown apart—or more exactly, liberalism has recoiled from nationhood. The result has not been to abolish nationality, but to discredit liberalism.

When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders, then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won’t do. This weekend’s shameful chapter in the history of the United States is a reproach not only to Trump, although it is that too, but to the political culture that enabled him. Angela Merkel and Donald Trump may be temperamental opposites. They are also functional allies.

 

[Enron]

And we have a new AG.

 

[Trequartista]

And we have a new AG.

Welcome to the Apprentice.

 

[Seven]

Rumours about an executive order turning back gay rights..

I have serious doubts about it though. Can't see it be anymore than a rumour. Not even the Trump administration is going to do this at this point.

 

[icemaη]

Rumours about an executive order turning back gay rights..

I have serious doubts about it though. Can't see it be anymore than a rumour. Not even the Trump administration is going to do this at this point.

Wouldn't be surprised with a 'religious freedom' bill of some form or the other sometime in the future though. The Evangelicals will want their cut eventually.

 

[Maddy]

I have serious doubts about it though. Can't see it be anymore than a rumour. Not even the Trump administration is going to do this at this point.

Why not? It makes sense from a Trump-perspective.

 

[Seven]

Wouldn't be surprised with a 'religious freedom' bill of some form or the other sometime in the future though. The Evangelicals will want their cut eventually.

Why not? It makes sense from a Trump-perspective.

The US population is reaching a tipping point. And quickly too. Unless they're doing it to provoke violence, I don't see why they'd do it now.

Then again people do claim they might want to use that violence to install martial law and at this point it's sad to say it doesn't even seem that unlikely. The idea that is. They'd never get away with it.

 

[Maddy]

The US population is reaching a tipping point. And quickly too. Unless they're doing it to provoke violence, I don't see why they'd do it now.

It's identity politics from a conservative/right wing populist perspective. They do it because for many of their voters there is a sound belief in conservative family values.

And of course the "divide and conquer"-strategy of the Trump-administration, which btw. is working very well atm.

 

[Seven]

It's identity politics from a conservative/right wing populist perspective. They do it because for many of their voters there is a sound belief in conservative family values.

And of course the "divide and conquer"-strategy of the Trump-administration, which btw. is working very well atm.

You'd think that at some point everyone knows a muslim, a lesbian, a black guy..

But I guess you're right. It has been working.

It reminds me of 'First they came..' tbh.

 

[Zacheryah]

Rumours about an executive order turning back gay rights..

I have serious doubts about it though. Can't see it be anymore than a rumour. Not even the Trump administration is going to do this at this point.

Depends.


If he removes the obligation to marry anyone, and leave it up to the moral choise of the person, it would be something all the conservatives would back in great numbers.

Their main issue is that a person who weds a couple shouldnt be forced to do so.



but i dont know what rights you are talking about, the above is just what i know is a thing among the conservative and alot of reps

 

[IliveForJuve]

The Donald just wants to troll the US.

 

[Seven]

Depends.


If he removes the obligation to marry anyone, and leave it up to the moral choise of the person, it would be something all the conservatives would back in great numbers.

Their main issue is that a person who weds a couple shouldnt be forced to do so.

I'm not sure I get what you mean. Who is forced to marry in the us?

Verstuurd vanaf mijn A0001 met Tapatalk

 

[Zacheryah]

The Donald just wants to troll the US.

In fact, why not call him "the roland' it sounds funny.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not sure I get what you mean. Who is forced to marry in the us?

Verstuurd vanaf mijn A0001 met Tapatalk

The guy who concludes a wedding

 

[CrimsonianKing]

Rumours about an executive order turning back gay rights..

I have serious doubts about it though. Can't see it be anymore than a rumour. Not even the Trump administration is going to do this at this point.

Tbh that was the first thing that crossed my mind when he was elected. Gay marriage being once again denied to gay people. I wouldn't doubt it at all. We don't know how far he and his cronies can go. Man, the world is becoming a scary religious place, it's like we're going back hundreds of year ready to make the same mistakes again and people are buying it.

 

[JuveJay]

In fact, why not call him "the roland' it sounds funny.

This guy would do a better job.