Jump to content

Donald Trump 2018


TheFlyingBoat

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The approach to the college situation should be similar to the approach to healthcare.  Significant cost reduction for the buyer should be the top priority.  People shouldn’t be shackled to 200k+ in student loans or medical bills in this country.  It’s absurd.  

How costs are reduced is open for debate but significant cost reduction and limiting the financial burden to citizens should be the ultimate goal.

also, reign in the outrageous costs imposed by a terrible insurance system. no one should pay $30 for a fucking maxi pad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

College should be affordable. I'm not convinced it should be free. I think you probably have to charge something to discourage the attendance of people who won't take it seriously. Obviously you can't eliminate that completely because there will always be parents willing to pay for their kids who aren't committed to the task even if they're qualified. But free? That just sounds reckless and it makes it hard for me to take its proponents seriously.

This. A lot of students attending college, especially junior college, can't pass a 7th grade math test so they have to take several semesters of developmental math which don't count toward a degree. Most of them are getting grant money and almost 70% never take a college credit math class. They use the grant money for a few semesters and then drop out because they failed so many classes the grant stops funding. The small percentage who are paying for their tuition have a much higher passing rate than the ones getting grants. 

I wish getting a high school diploma meant something like it used to. How so many can graduate from high school with Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II and don't know how to solve 2x + 5 =35 is is unreal. Many can't give the correct answer to -8 + 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Textbooks are ridiculous. I'm surprised people still buy them when it's been possible to "find" most of them elsewhere for at least 15 years now. 

Room and board should be covered under basic income

I used to search public libraries for textbooks and photocopy the parts I needed.  Turned out to be a lot cheaper. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

He came out?  When did that happen?  Totally missed that.  (NTTAWWT.)

Just went and Googled it.  He did it at a speech at Ole Miss.  I'll be damned.

Yeah, took balls to come out at a place like Ole Miss.  

A lot  of people suspected it for years, but I always thought they were just taking potshots at him because he would occasionally take a very contrarian viewpoint compared to his FNC colleagues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I used to search public libraries for textbooks and photocopy the parts I needed.  Turned out to be a lot cheaper. 

In law school, I figured out that our library had multiple copies of all the required textbooks.  I lived across the street.  When I needed to do my reading, I just went to the library and read their copy.

Saved a lot of money.

Which I blew on beer at the Posse.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Trump Proposes Gutting Fuel Economy Rules In ‘Giant Giveaway’ To Big Oil, Automakers"

The White House proposed dramatically weakening fuel economy standards on Thursday, reversing the only major federal policy to reduce planet-warming emissions from the nation’s top source of greenhouse gas pollution.

The move would clear the way for vehicles to, by 2030, spew an addition 600 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere ― equivalent to the entire annual emissions of Canada.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-fuel-economy-standards_us_5b106b1ae4b010565aaa80e4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mapache said:

"Trump Proposes Gutting Fuel Economy Rules In ‘Giant Giveaway’ To Big Oil, Automakers"

The White House proposed dramatically weakening fuel economy standards on Thursday, reversing the only major federal policy to reduce planet-warming emissions from the nation’s top source of greenhouse gas pollution.

The move would clear the way for vehicles to, by 2030, spew an addition 600 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere ― equivalent to the entire annual emissions of Canada.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-fuel-economy-standards_us_5b106b1ae4b010565aaa80e4

This shit pisses me off more than all the rest combined. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

College should be affordable. I'm not convinced it should be free. I think you probably have to charge something to discourage the attendance of people who won't take it seriously. Obviously you can't eliminate that completely because there will always be parents willing to pay for their kids who aren't committed to the task even if they're qualified. But free? That just sounds reckless and it makes it hard for me to take its proponents seriously.

I support "free" college, but not for ALL.  Many going to college today are wasting their time.  What I think we should be doing is ensuring that every brilliant person with limitless potential gets to college if they so choose.  And that means some wonder kid from Watts, NO's 9th Ward or wherever gets a free ride.  College should be free for them.  We'll all benefit in the long run from them succeeding.  Stupid shits from upper middle class looking for 4 years (5+?) of partying can find a way to pay for themselves, or get a job right off the bat, or get Mommy and Daddy to pay for it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Textbooks are ridiculous. I'm surprised people still buy them when it's been possible to "find" most of them elsewhere for at least 15 years now. 

Room and board should be covered under basic income

Which is why you’re seeing higher ed start to increase OERs and online/digital texts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mapache said:

"Trump Proposes Gutting Fuel Economy Rules In ‘Giant Giveaway’ To Big Oil, Automakers"

The White House proposed dramatically weakening fuel economy standards on Thursday, reversing the only major federal policy to reduce planet-warming emissions from the nation’s top source of greenhouse gas pollution.

The move would clear the way for vehicles to, by 2030, spew an addition 600 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere ― equivalent to the entire annual emissions of Canada.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-fuel-economy-standards_us_5b106b1ae4b010565aaa80e4

Add it to the pile of "be a dick" moves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 27-25 said:

I support "free" college, but not for ALL.  Many going to college today are wasting their time.  What I think we should be doing is ensuring that every brilliant person with limitless potential gets to college if they so choose.  And that means some wonder kid from Watts, NO's 9th Ward or wherever gets a free ride.  College should be free for them.  We'll all benefit in the long run from them succeeding.  Stupid shits from upper middle class looking for 4 years (5+?) of partying can find a way to pay for themselves, or get a job right off the bat, or get Mommy and Daddy to pay for it.

What about stupid shits from the 5th ward in Houston?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the cost of the average textbook is tantamount to robbery, but let's not just completely ignore copyright law either.

It's one thing to go to the library and read your assigned text.  It's another thing to photocopy it, or make digital copies of digital texts that you share (if that's possible, I imagine they try to prevent that, but I suspect you could easily just print it out and distribute it that way).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I think the cost of the average textbook is tantamount to robbery, but let's not just completely ignore copyright law either.

It's one thing to go to the library and read your assigned text.  It's another thing to photocopy it, or make digital copies of digital texts that you share (if that's possible, I imagine they try to prevent that, but I suspect you could easily just print it out and distribute it that way).

Hi, welcome to Intro to College Intro 101.  You need to buy this book, but only the edition that came out 6 months ago.  I changed 5 words in the book and now this is the only one the Co-Op will sell you.  I also get a cut of it as a contributor.  Don't bother trying to sell the new edition of the book at the end of the semester, there's another version coming out in December and required for next semester.  We changed 7 more words!  Oh and go ahead and buy the 5 books I wrote for the class as well. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

In law school, I figured out that our library had multiple copies of all the required textbooks.  I lived across the street.  When I needed to do my reading, I just went to the library and read their copy.

Saved a lot of money.

Which I blew on beer at the Posse.

Dammit, now I'm wanting some Posse nachos and a cold pitcher of Shiner.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, F250 said:

What about stupid shits from the 5th ward in Houston?

So, I think the one flaw in the "free college" argument is that it doesn't - at least explicitly - acknowledge the fact that many, if not most, people shouldn't go to college. We need to put the same emphasis on job training and skilled labor programs. If those forms of education and training are part of the deal, then yes, make it as free as you can. There are WAY worse things to spend our tax money on. And hey, news flash, if you have an educated and skilled workforce, you have a stronger economy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Offer grants that pay out like corporate tuition reimbursement.

Pay them out in arrears

School bills you up front, due in 120 days

Get an A or B in class, grant pays out 100%

Get a C, grant pays out at 75%

Flunk or quit, you're on the hook for the tuition and fees. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this is awkward 

THIRTEEN HOURS BEFORE Secretary of State Rex Tillerson learned from the presidential Twitter feed that he was being fired, he did something that President Donald Trump had been unwilling to do. Following a phone call with his British counterpart, Tillerson condemned a deadly nerve agent attack in the U.K., saying that he had “full confidence in the U.K.’s investigation and its assessment that Russia was likely responsible.”

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders had called the attack “reckless, indiscriminate, and irresponsible,” but stopped short of blaming Russia, leading numerous media outlets to speculate that Tillerson was fired for criticizing Russia.

But in the months that followed his departure, press reports strongly suggested that the countries lobbying hardest for Tillerson’s removal were Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, both of which were frustrated by Tillerson’s attempts to mediate and end their blockade of Qatar. One report in the New York Times even suggested that the UAE ambassador to Washington knew that Tillerson would be forced out three months before he was fired in March.

The Intercept has learned of a previously unreported episode that stoked the UAE and Saudi Arabia’s anger at Tillerson and that may have played a key role in his removal. In the summer of 2017, several months before the Gulf allies started pushing for his ouster, Tillerson intervened to stop a secret Saudi-led, UAE-backed plan to invade and essentially conquer Qatar, according to one current member of the U.S. intelligence community and two former State Department officials, all of whom declined to be named, citing the sensitivity of the matter.

In the days and weeks after Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt, and Bahrain cut diplomatic ties with Qatar and closed down their land, sea, and air borders with the country, Tillerson made a series of phone calls urging Saudi officials not to take military action against the country. The flurry of calls in June 2017 has been reported, but State Department and press accounts at the time described them as part of a broad-strokes effort to resolve tensions in the Gulf, not as an attempt by Tillerson to avert a Saudi-led military operation.

Tillerson made a series of phone calls urging Saudi officials not to take military action against Qatar. 

In the calls, Tillerson, who dealt extensively with the Qatari government as the CEO of Exxon Mobil, urged Saudi King Salman, then-Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir not to attack Qatar or otherwise escalate hostilities, the sources told The Intercept. Tillerson also encouraged Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to call his counterparts in Saudi Arabia to explain the dangers of such an invasion. Al Udeid Air Base near Doha, Qatar’s capital city, is the forward headquarters of U.S. Central Command and home to some 10,000 American troops.

Pressure from Tillerson caused Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto ruler of the country, to back down, concerned that the invasion would damage Saudi Arabia’s long-term relationship with the U.S. But Tillerson’s intervention enraged Mohammed bin Zayed, the crown prince of Abu Dhabi and effective ruler of that country, according to the U.S. intelligence official and a source close to the Emirati royal family, who declined to be identified, citing concerns about his safety.

Later that June, Mohammed bin Salman would be named crown prince, leapfrogging over his cousin to become next in line for the throne after his elderly father. His ascension signaled his growing influence over the kingdom’s affairs.

Qatari intelligence agents working inside Saudi Arabia discovered the plan in the early summer of 2017, according to the U.S. intelligence official. Tillerson acted after the Qatari government notified him and the U.S. embassy in Doha. Several months later, intelligence reporting by the U.S. and U.K. confirmed the existence of the plan.

The plan, which was largely devised by the Saudi and UAE crown princes and was likely some weeks away from being implemented, involved Saudi ground troops crossing the land border into Qatar, and, with military support from the UAE, advancing roughly 70 miles toward Doha. Circumventing the U.S. air base, Saudi forces would then seize the capital.

On June 20, State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert told reporters that Tillerson had “more than 20 calls and meetings with Gulf and other regional and intermediate actors,” including three phone calls and two meetings with Jubeir. “The more time goes by, the more doubt is raised about the actions taken by Saudi Arabia and the UAE,” she said.

A spokesperson for the State Department told The Intercept last week that “throughout the dispute, all parties have explicitly committed to not resort to violence or military action.” Tillerson, reached through a personal assistant, did not respond to interview requests.

Pentagon spokesperson Lt. Cmdr. Rebecca Rebarich told The Intercept that although Mattis meets regularly with the secretary of state, the “details and frequency of those meetings are confidential.”

“The Department of Defense has made clear that the persistent Gulf rift puts at risk mutual regional security priorities and has encouraged all parties seek resolution,” Rebarich said. “It is critical that the [Gulf Cooperation Council] recovers its cohesion as the proud Gulf nations return to mutual support through a peaceful resolution that provides for enhanced regional stability and prosperity.”

Spokespeople for the Saudi and UAE embassies did not respond to multiple requests for comment. A spokesperson for the Qatari embassy in D.C. also did not respond to interview requests from The Intercept. None of the information in this story was provided by Qatari government officials or the country’s paid public relations consultants.

THE INVASION PLAN raises questions about interventionist tendencies on the part of two of the U.S.’s closest allies and largest weapons clients. In recent years, both countries have demonstrated a willingness to use military force to reshape politics in the Gulf, intervening in Bahrain to suppress an Arab Spring uprising in 2011 and waging a three-year, U.S.-backed war that has devastated Yemen.

Robert Malley, president and CEO of Crisis Group and a former top Middle East adviser to President Barack Obama, said that since the summer of 2017, Qatari officials have consistently told him that their country had been threatened with invasion.

“There is little doubt that senior Qatari officials with whom I spoke were convinced — or at least acted as if they were convinced — that Saudi Arabia and the UAE had been planning a military attack on their country that was halted as a result of U.S. intervention,” Malley told The Intercept.

Tillerson’s attempts to de-escalate the conflict in the Gulf diverged from the signals sent by the White House. Trump offered a full-throated public endorsement of the blockade, tweeting that “perhaps this will be the beginning of the end to the horror of terrorism.” As Tillerson called on the Gulf countries to lift their embargo, Trump told reporters that “the nation of Qatar, unfortunately, has historically been a funder of terrorism at a very high level.”

According to one news report, Tillerson was frustrated with the White House for undercutting him, and his aides suspected that the line in Trump’s prepared Rose Garden remarks had been written by UAE Ambassador Yousef Al Otaiba, a powerful D.C. player who maintained “almost constant phone and email contact” with Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, according to Politico.

“Senior Qatari officials with whom I spoke were convinced — or at least acted as if they were convinced — that Saudi Arabia and the UAE had been planning a military attack on their country.”

At the time, Kushner was personally handling much of the administration’s diplomacy with the Gulf states, and the leaders of Saudi Arabia and the UAE were choosing to go through him instead of the U.S. defense or intelligence establishments. Kushner communicated directly with the crown princes of Saudi Arabia and the UAE using the encrypted messaging service WhatsApp.

Some Gulf watchers speculate that the incentive for the planned invasion may have been partly financial. Saudi Arabia’s “cradle to grave” welfare system relies on high oil prices, which plummeted in 2014 and have not fully recovered. Since the current king came to power in 2015, the country has spent more than a third of its $737 billion in reserves, and last year, the Saudi economy entered a painful recession. In response, the government has looked for ways to raise money, including by selling shares in the state-owned oil company, Saudi Aramco.

“It’s unsustainable,” said Bruce Riedel, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute and 30-year CIA officer, in a lecture last November. “In the three years since [King Salman] ascended to the throne, one third of Saudi Arabia’s reserves have already been spent. You don’t need to have an MBA from the Wharton school to figure out what that means six years from now.”

If the Saudis had succeeded in seizing Doha, they would potentially have been able to gain access to the country’s $320 billion sovereign wealth fund. In November of last year, months after the plan collapsed, the Saudi crown prince rounded up and detaineddozens of his relatives in the Ritz-Carlton Riyadh, forcing them to sign over billions in privately held assets. The government justified the detentions as a corruption crackdown, but it allowed the state to recoup billions in assets for government use.

Beginning in the fall of 2017, the crown princes in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi began lobbying the White House for Tillerson’s removal, according to the source close to the Emirati royal family and another source who is close to the Saudi royal family.

None of the current or former officials interviewed by The Intercept had direct insight into why Trump decided to fire Tillerson. But one source told The Intercept that the timing — a week before the Saudi crown prince arrived for a much-publicized visit to Washington — was significant. During that visit, MBS, as the crown prince is known, was set to discuss the Qatar crisis and future arms sales with the administration.

Four of the sources interviewed by The Intercept also pointed to an ongoing campaign by the UAE to try to provoke Qatar into escalating the crisis. Qatar has continued to complain about violations of its airspace by UAE aircraft, detailing its accusations in a letter to the U.N. earlier this year.

The UAE’s harassment of Qatar also includes crude public insults lodged by UAE leadership against the Qatari royal family. The jibes frequently emanate from the verified Twitter account of Hamad al Mazrouei, a high-level Emirati intelligence official and righthand man to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed. Mazrouei’s account frequently tweets sexually suggestive content directed at Mozah bint Nasser, the mother of the emir of Qatar. Just last week, Mazrouei tweeted a video of a man and woman – with Mazrouei and Sheikha Mozah’s faces photoshopped onto their bodies – doing a raunchy bump-and-grind.

The content and audacity of Mazrouei’s tweets have led to speculation in Qatari media that the account is actually controlled by the crown prince of Abu Dhabi himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key elements of the legislation include:

  • A strong statement of support for NATO and a requirement for two-thirds of the United States Senate to vote to leave NATO
  • Provisions expediting the transfer of excess defense articles to NATO countries to reduce some NATO countries’ dependence on Russian military equipment.
  • The establishment of an Office of Cyberspace and the Digital Economy within the Department of State.  This office will lead diplomatic efforts relating to international cybersecurity, Internet access, Internet freedom, the digital economy, cybercrime, deterrence and responses to cyber threats.
  • Provisions aimed to pressure the Russian government to halt its obstruction of international efforts to investigate chemical weapons attacks as well as punish the Russian government for chemical weapons production and use.
  • Making interfering in our elections a ground of inadmissibility under immigration law
  • The International Cybercrime Prevention Act which would give prosecutors the ability to shut down botnets and other digital infrastructure that can be used for a wide range of illegal activity; create a new criminal violation for individuals who have knowingly targeted critical infrastructure, including dams, power plants, hospitals, and election infrastructure; and prohibit cybercriminals from selling access to botnets to carry out cyber-attacks
  • The Defending the Integrity of Voting Systems Act which would allow the Department of Justice to pursue federal charges for the hacking of any voting system that is used in a federal election
  • New sanctions on political figures, oligarchs, and family members and other persons that facilitate illicit and corrupt activities, directly or indirectly, on behalf of Vladimir Putin
  • Sanction on transactions related to investment in energy projects supported by Russia state-owned or parastatal entities
  • A prohibition on and sanctions with respect to transactions relating to new sovereign debt of the Russian Federation
  • Sectoral sanctions on any person in the Russian Federation that has the capacity or ability to support or facilitate malicious cyber activities
  • A requirement for the Secretary of State to submit a determination of whether the Russian Federation meets the criteria for designation as a state sponsor of terrorism.
  • A prohibition on licenses for United States persons to engage in activities relating to certain projects to produce oil in the Russian Federation
  • A requirement for domestic title insurance companies to report information on the beneficial owners of entities that purchase residential real estate in high-value transactions
  • An extension on the cap of Russian uranium imports
  • Reinforcement for the State Department  Office of Sanctions Coordination
  • A report on the net worth and assets of Vladimir Putin
  • The creation of a National Fusion Center to Respond to Hybrid Threats.  The aim of this center is to better prepare and respond to Russian disinformation and other emerging threats emanating from the Russian Federation.
  • A reauthorization of the Countering Russia Influence Fund

OIiLlex_zpsc42b781a.gif

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Orca of Peace said:

can those be downloaded and shared?  what is OER?

OER = Open Educational Resource

Yes, they can be downloaded and shared and they can be free or significantly lower than a traditional textbook. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Hi, welcome to Intro to College Intro 101.  You need to buy this book, but only the edition that came out 6 months ago.  I changed 5 words in the book and now this is the only one the Co-Op will sell you.  I also get a cut of it as a contributor.  Don't bother trying to sell the new edition of the book at the end of the semester, there's another version coming out in December and required for next semester.  We changed 7 more words!  Oh and go ahead and buy the 5 books I wrote for the class as well. 

At the CC, no one gets a cut except the bookstore and that's minimal. 

The problem with some publishers is they they do this (change editions) and then tell the colleges they have to use the most updated edition and "they will not be printing anymore of the old editions" (which is bullshit.)  They even ship the bookstore the new editions without communicating to anyone what they've done. 

My department has gone to online textbooks as they are way cheaper so you just need an access code.  When we had actual textbooks, I would tell my classes that it's okay to get the older edition since it was cheaper and still make an A in the class. 

Anywho, trump is a racist and sucks ass. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:
 
  • A strong statement of support for NATO and a requirement for two-thirds of the United States Senate to vote to leave NATO
  •  

I can't see how that would be enforceable.  A majority of the Senate shouldn't be sufficient to establish something that takes 2/3 of the Senate to reverse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been even carded for alcohol at the grocery store in years, so that explanation is complete bullshit too. 

Then again, I'm obviously in my 40s, and no doubt he doesn't want to ID people who are obviously real Americans in his mind (white people), so maybe that really is what he meant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support "free" college, but not for ALL.  Many going to college today are wasting their time.  What I think we should be doing is ensuring that every brilliant person with limitless potential gets to college if they so choose.  And that means some wonder kid from Watts, NO's 9th Ward or wherever gets a free ride.  College should be free for them.  We'll all benefit in the long run from them succeeding.  Stupid shits from upper middle class looking for 4 years (5+?) of partying can find a way to pay for themselves, or get a job right off the bat, or get Mommy and Daddy to pay for it.


So besides being open to blackmail, every MFer on Surly is on their own (or would be on their own). Neg rep this Man!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

I haven't been even carded for alcohol at the grocery store in years, so that explanation is complete bullshit too. 

Then again, I'm obviously in my 40s, and no doubt he doesn't want to ID people who are obviously real Americans in his mind (white people), so maybe that really is what he meant. 

honestly, he's so out of touch, he probably was thinking about writing a check for groceries, and providing id for the check.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

honestly, he's so out of touch, he probably was thinking about writing a check for groceries, and providing id for the check.

I doubt it's even that much.  He lies every time he opens his mouth, even about things that anyone can see are lies.  And he gets away with it.  He probably thought what's a more basic need than voting?  Aha, food!  I'll talk about needing an ID to get food.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

I doubt it's even that much.  He lies every time he opens his mouth, even about things that anyone can see are lies.  And he gets away with it.  He probably thought what's a more basic need than voting?  Aha, food!  I'll talk about needing an ID to get food.  

This. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

what we are headed for in 2020 (somewhat in 2018) is an absolute mess. We of course will not magically come together as a society and work to harden the integrity of the election process, which is what of course we should do. Instead, we will just ignore, obfuscate and only care about our party - and hope for the best. Reminds me of school shootings. Good luck with America. The shitshow is gonna get real real.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, staboner said:

what we are headed for in 2020 (somewhat in 2018) is an absolute mess. We of course will not magically come together as a society and work to harden the integrity of the election process, which is what of course we should do. Instead, we will just ignore, obfuscate and only care about our party - and hope for the best. Reminds me of school shootings. Good luck with America. The shitshow is gonna get real real.

Welcome to Brisket’s ledge, have some whiskey, it’s going to be a shit show for the next 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Welcome to Brisket’s ledge, have some whiskey, it’s going to be a shit show for the next 10 years.

"Brisket's Ledge" - sounds like a good name for a bar.  Might get a little confusing if it doesn't serve BBQ. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Welcome to Brisket’s ledge, have some whiskey, it’s going to be a shit show for the next 10 years.

I don't see anything telling me any different. We will have three segments of our society all in complete disagreement, listening to completely different channels and we have no means to communicate with each other. The MAGAs, the Ds, and the rest of us looking on in horror. I pray the military has some balls and takes over, writes us a new constitution and everyone gets tiny flags to wave at each other

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...