But I guess it was OK for these same kids and young people to see the vulgar things that were displayed at the march...
Only you have said that. And what was so vulgar? Any links?
Not to mention that women who are pro-life were not allowed to partner with the march. So much for women being united, and all that diversity and inclusiveness BS...
What do you mean? My pro-life co-worker went to the D.C. one and had a great time. Where do you get your info?
It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.
The exclusion of the pro-life group was also reported on the news. They interviewed someone from the pro-life group. Later I saw another interview with someone from one of the pro-choice groups, and the reporter was somewhat calling her out for it...you know, asking her why the pro-life women were excluded if it was supposed to be about all women, solidarity, etc.
Sorry...I don't recall specific names, or have links, etc...and I was switching around between CNN, Fox and others...so I don't even recall which news show/channel it was on. If you're really interested in the details, then just google it.
And I didn't mean that no pro-life women attended the march. Anyone who wanted to attend could go. Heck, there were even some Trump supporters there. Imagine that...women who voted for Trump.
But apparently there was a large, well organized and coordinated march that groups had to apply for if they wanted to partner with it. This pro-life group was initially accepted and had planned to be a part of that specific march. But then when the organizers of the march found out that they were a pro-life group, they changed their mind and told them they weren't welcome. Gotta love that inclusiveness.
These threads all go so many different directions of off topic
What the heck does this have to do with the topic? If you want to talk about people posting off-topic, start another thread!
An observation that in a thread about impeaching Trump the discussion moved to ACA. Sorry such a comment has appeared to offend you so much.
I disagree with Bhawk in one sense. Trolls know what they are doing. I just think you don't have the capacity to know any better.
Well...that's not fair, really. Redfish7 hasn't been posting in the WP long enough to make a conclusion like that. Benefit of the doubt still in clear play from my chair.
Haha...I missed this earlier. So...what kind of time frame are we looking at here?...just so I will know when my "benefit of the doubt" trial period runs out? And what metric are we using...calendar days or number of posts? 😉
So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.
Just wait, it gets a whole lot better.
Contempt is equally returned when given.
Equally? Contempt is "returned" whether it's given or not.
Snowflake need a safe space?
Oh, that's right. You don't hate liberals and Democrats, don't wish to eradicate entire belief systems. Musta forgot. Uh-huh.
Lines are drawn. Everyone involved drew them. Here we are.
I'm pretty sure both Democrats and Republicans agreed that taxes would pay for those things.
And I suppose the belief/presupposition that involuntary taxation should be used to pay for those things is not a political ideology? Anarcho-capitalists, voluntaryists, some schools of libertarianism, and many others would heartily disagree.
So even your most basic assumption about how society should operate is based on a political ideology.
So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.
Just wait, it gets a whole lot better.
Contempt is equally returned when given.
Equally? Contempt is "returned" whether it's given or not.
Lines are drawn. Everyone involved drew them. Here we are.
That's right, and as of five minutes ago I decided to cross the line and post as a Liberal.
How's that sound, moron? 
I'm pretty sure both Democrats and Republicans agreed that taxes would pay for those things.
And I suppose the belief/presupposition that involuntary taxation should be used to pay for those things is not a political ideology? Anarcho-capitalists, voluntaryists, some schools of libertarianism, and many others would heartily disagree.
So even your most basic assumption about how society should operate is based on a political ideology.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States
Which ideology is that, label-wise, do you think? What should we call it?
Bhawk - just to be clear...the point being discussed/debated was whether or not political ideology impacts our lives, either for good or bad. Are you actually siding with BoyntonBrother in trying to claim that it does not impact our lives?
I don't care to debate the pros/cons of OC, or how we fix it, or what we do after Trump dismantles it, etc. The only reason that it came up was as an example of how political ideology impacts our lives.
The belief that the right to health care is a basic human right, or that money should be taken out of Joe's pocket to pay for Bill's health insurance, or that the government should be involved in regulating/mandating health care in any way whatsoever, etc....those basic presuppositions are part of a political ideology whether you care to admit it or not. Is there a fiscal aspect also. Sure, OK...but that doesn't negate the political ideology behind it.
The original tenets of what became the Affordable Care Act was concepted by a conservative think tank and was on the platform of a Republican presidential candidate. So, the question is, whose ideology drove what?
If you are going to claim effects of political ideology, where does it apply in matters of consensus? In this case, ideology defined the opposition to an act of government because a tenet of that ideology dictates that the opponent, the enemy, is not allowed a "victory," regardless of if it a positive or negative for the citizenry.
The Republicans could have sold this exact same plan if they had framed it using the "everyone must pay something, no freeloaders" approach. Now, that's an example of using ideology.
It also looks like you tend to start with the extremes of an ideology. Why?
Yep, if I recall correctly…I believe Mitt Romney came up with the model/prototype for what later became the ACA. Obama stole it from Mitt, and we have Republicans and Democrats both to blame for it.
Again…the debate was simply over whether or not political ideology impacts our lives. It wasn’t about whose political ideology impacts our lives. Both liberal/conservative ideology have impacts…some negative and some positive. In fact, I even used US foreign policy/the Bush Doctrine as another example, and showed how that particular ideology resulted in the unnecessary deaths/displacement of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.
By the way, I know you will find this hard to believe (due to the conclusions that you have drawn about me), but if I had been active on this forum during the Bush regime, I would have been accused of being a liberal…trust me on that…I was just as critical of Bush, probably more so, as I am of Obama. Bush was a real tool also.
What do you mean that I start with the extremes of an ideology?
So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.
Just wait, it gets a whole lot better.
Contempt is equally returned when given.
Equally? Contempt is "returned" whether it's given or not.
Lines are drawn. Everyone involved drew them. Here we are.
That's right, and as of five minutes ago I decided to cross the line and post as a Liberal.
How's that sound, moron?
Yes, only liberals insult people. Yawn. The alloak manifesto of conservative perfection. Well established.
I disagree with Bhawk in one sense. Trolls know what they are doing. I just think you don't have the capacity to know any better.
Well...that's not fair, really. Redfish7 hasn't been posting in the WP long enough to make a conclusion like that. Benefit of the doubt still in clear play from my chair.
Haha...I missed this earlier. So...what kind of time frame are we looking at here?...just so I will know when my "benefit of the doubt" trial period runs out? And what metric are we using...calendar days or number of posts? 😉
So far...I'm up to dishonest, troll, lazy and narrow minded.
I thought BB was getting too close to insulting you and said so. How you interpret that is up to you.
I was actually trying to mess with you...joke around a little...hence the smiley/wink face. I know we've taken some jabs at each other, but it's all good.
I'm pretty sure both Democrats and Republicans agreed that taxes would pay for those things.
And I suppose the belief/presupposition that involuntary taxation should be used to pay for those things is not a political ideology? Anarcho-capitalists, voluntaryists, some schools of libertarianism, and many others would heartily disagree.
So even your most basic assumption about how society should operate is based on a political ideology.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States
Which ideology is that, label-wise, do you think? What should we call it?
I have no idea. Republicanism, maybe? What difference does it matter what the label is?
It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.
"Reported on the news", I'll assume was some hack with an agenda, not an actual reporter, unless you have something. If those actions are so vulgar, why elect Trump as President who behaved the same way?
It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.
I have friends who marched in NYC, DC, LA, Chicago, and they all said it was peaceful. Many brought their kids, and it was a completely positive experience of activism. No one spitting or talking about attacking anything, it was a show of unity of a lot of people who aren't offended by women's body parts against a President they strongly disagree with.
Day 4....Suit filed against Trump for ethics violations....that didn't take long
Redfish after your "are they butt hurt" comment I clearly understand how the disgusting things Trump says didn't bother you...and how you could possibly vote for him
That's the exact kind of talk that is disgusting....get it???
That protest was world wide not just here at home....Open your eyes
As far as the ACA....before the ACA my wife couldn't get insurance because she is type II diabetic....See before the only people who could get insurance had to have nothing wrong with them...
I guess that doesn't both you because you had to pay less....pretty phucking selfish...but that is the Republican way...if it doesn't directly effect me its not an issue
It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.
"Reported on the news", I'll assume was some hack with an agenda, not an actual reporter, unless you have something. If those actions are so vulgar, why elect Trump as President who behaved the same way?
No, it was actual reporters on the major networks…and not just one reporter, or one news show. Did these reporters have an agenda? Well, of course…don’t all reporters and news outlets have an agenda?
And your last sentence is exactly the point I was making…just using the reverse logic. If Trump behaved like that…and that’s supposedly why they are so offended…then it’s hypocritical for them to behave the same way.
It was reported on the news yesterday...lots of vulgar speech, lewd content and pictures on signs (some of it of a sexual nature), women dressed like vaginas, signs with "F**k Trump", people spitting on people, Madonna talking about blowing up the white house, etc...not a great environment for children or young people.
I have friends who marched in NYC, DC, LA, Chicago, and they all said it was peaceful. Many brought their kids, and it was a completely positive experience of activism. No one spitting or talking about attacking anything, it was a show of unity of a lot of people who aren't offended by women's body parts against a President they strongly disagree with.
It’s great that your friends had a positive experience, but the fact that your friends didn’t happen to see any of the stuff being reported on the news is hardly evidence that it didn’t happen. I’m sure not everyone at the inauguration witnessed a limo and trash cans being burned either? Does that mean it didn’t happen?
And no comments on the Ashley Judd meltdown?…Trump is Hitler, his cabinet is a bunch of Nazis, he has wet dreams about his daughter, blood on the sheets, the prison system is a form of slavery, etc.…what a raving lunatic (or poet in this case)…makes Bocephus look like a saint. And Madonna’s fantasies about blowing up the white house? Yep…that sure is some classy celebrity gals they got to be the face of the march. And they think Trump is vulgar and full of hate?
Day 4....Suit filed against Trump for ethics violations....that didn't take long
Redfish after your "are they butt hurt" comment I clearly understand how the disgusting things Trump says didn't bother you...and how you could possibly vote for him
That's the exact kind of talk that is disgusting....get it???
That protest was world wide not just here at home....Open your eyes
As far as the ACA....before the ACA my wife couldn't get insurance because she is type II diabetic....See before the only people who could get insurance had to have nothing wrong with them...
I guess that doesn't both you because you had to pay less....pretty phucking selfish...but that is the Republican way...if it doesn't directly effect me its not an issue
Didn’t vote for Trump. Not a Republican. Don’t consider myself a selfish person. My sister is an unemployed widow raising a daughter, and she could not even afford the ACA premiums…I thought it was supposed to be “affordable” for folks just like my sister...but then again, I also thought I could keep my policy if I liked my policy. And I never said that it didn’t help anyone. I was just sharing my personal experience with it. I guess it’s helped some folks, and hurt lots of others...and in some cases it's not even helped the people that you would think that it should help (like my sister).
Please sign this petition to impeach Trump
https://impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/thank-you/?key=42056317
The wheels are turning
I like the Dead Kennedys. I like views that are not the same as my own. It's all about presentation and the delivery of the argument for me. That is why I listen to different points of view on talk radio and that is why I enjoy engaging in these forums and why I like politically charged music that is artfully crafted.
I don't know who would be calling for "extermination" of Trump opponents. Again another pretty radical view you've posted. I'd like to think it is done with sarcasm, but maybe you really feel that way.
Surely there are people on the right who despise the left and those on the left who despise the right, but anyone from any side who might justify death of their political opponents, to the extent people like that exist we must be talking about a sliver of a percentage of people.
You and I may not agree on a host of issues, but rest assured I would have you in my home or buy you a drink and allow you to express yourself as know you would of me. I just try to draw a very visible and distinct line between the very small group of people you speak of and other people, like myself and I suspect others here who voted for the President and support some of his agenda items, but do not wish his opponents any harm. I hope you do not wish me harm in return for feeling different than you on foreign policy, immigration, taxes, etc.
[Edited on 2/13/2017 by nebish]
What's with this "extreme view" thing you keep on about?
I think that wanting Mexico to become a state, to open the border, to reach a settlement in back pay and benefits for illegal workers...now Trump supporters would applaud open warfare, even extermination, of their opponents.
Sounds extreme to me.
I guess you not wanting to sign a petition to impeach the President for fear of putting your name out there is kind of like people not wanting a national gun registry with their name and location of listed guns for fear of the government coming to get them. In that, you have something in common, fear of the government, fear on one had that government would someday confiscate firearms and on the other hand fear the government might exterminate dissenters. I don't know, sounds extreme. But different perspectives lead to different feelings.
Goldtop - quite honestly I think that could be signing my own death warrant. Anyone who signs that will call the Nazgul upon themselves. It is entirely possible that they are gathering up voting records, ostensibly for popular vote recount, to compile a database of undesirables.
Hemp's Bannon thread pretty much nails it.
As Jello Biafra said so long ago: It is "Bedtime for Democracy".
I signed it and I don't care that they know...In fact I want Trump to fully understand that I think he is disgusting .....I'd have no problem telling Mr Trump exactly how I feel about him to his face...
I think we are getting very close to starting Impeachment hearings. Trump better slow down and figure out how the office of the Presidency works or he will be out the door by the end of the year.
I think we are getting very close to starting Impeachment hearings. Trump better slow down and figure out how the office of the Presidency works or he will be out the door by the end of the year.
On what charge? By the current GOP? Impeachment charges come from the House.
i just said "very close". they are walking right up to the line with their rhetoric but so far not with their actions. if they start ignoring court orders that would be one way. emoluments clause might be another. if proof of colusion with the russians is found, there is another. we'll just have to wait and see bhawk.
In that, you have something in common, fear of the government, fear on one had that government would someday confiscate firearms and on the other hand fear the government might exterminate dissenters. I don't know, sounds extreme. But different perspectives lead to different feelings.
The government is made up of people who occupy constant transitive jobs. If human history is a guide, there's a strong chance that someone would come along that oversteps the powers they have been given. Just because someone exhibiting those traits happens to be a guy on your team and therefore they get a longer benefit of the doubt, then that's the ultimate example of party before country, something that has always been around but seems to be getting worse.
I continue to find Trump's consistent attacks on the independent judiciary absolutely terrifying. The President personally attacking Federal judges by name IS EXTREME.
and yes the house is stacked with republicans and impeachment won't come today. but i don't believe he has as much support in the GOP as some think and it is slowly eroding. i believe alot of his support before the election had to do with hating clinton and party loyalty and tea party loyalty. i don't believe trump is a republican and that his support will fall away if he keeps throwing the constitution into the blender. like i said, we'll see.
Is this rhetoric not extreme?
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/-what-stephen-miller-said-should-worry-everyone-875968067895
and yes the house is stacked with republicans and impeachment won't come today. but i don't believe he has as much support in the GOP as some think and it is slowly eroding. i believe alot of his support before the election had to do with hating clinton and party loyalty and tea party loyalty. i don't believe trump is a republican and that his support will fall away if he keeps throwing the constitution into the blender. like i said, we'll see.
I largely agree...just cynical.
These weekend trips to Mar-A-Lago, profiteering? Who is joining? Who has access? All the employees there...do they all have a security clearance?
Is this rhetoric not extreme?
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/-what-stephen-miller-said-should-worry-everyone-875968067895
That's not what he meant. He was talking about the funny ha-ha kind of quelling dissent. 😛
Trump and is his supporters are the most insecure people in the history of our country.