Red Mosquito

4/5 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:I don't really like apocryphal stories as a means of investigating where people stand, but I was struck in reading that article how much it sounded like the things I'm hearing from back home. It still comes down to "all government spending is unnecessary and wasteful....except for the program(s) I directly benefit from."

That's the same thing that struck me. I suppose this is where liberals would use that as evidence of, "see people benefit from these programs, so don't take them away!" but I think this is better evidence for the economically conservative arguments against having a legion of governmental programs attempting to solve every problem under the sun. People get accustomed to that stream of government benefits and it is very, very difficult to turn off the spigot.

It also subjects those programs to the will of the electorate, who are not particularly qualified to make any decisions about their own lives.

McParadigm wrote:

4/5 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:I don't really like apocryphal stories as a means of investigating where people stand, but I was struck in reading that article how much it sounded like the things I'm hearing from back home. It still comes down to "all government spending is unnecessary and wasteful....except for the program(s) I directly benefit from."

That's the same thing that struck me. I suppose this is where liberals would use that as evidence of, "see people benefit from these programs, so don't take them away!" but I think this is better evidence for the economically conservative arguments against having a legion of governmental programs attempting to solve every problem under the sun. People get accustomed to that stream of government benefits and it is very, very difficult to turn off the spigot.

It also subjects those programs to the will of the electorate, who are not particularly qualified to make any decisions about their own lives.

Sure. The cognitive dissonance on display is a sight to see. "Wasteful spending" equals "spending on stuff that I don't personally support or benefit from" as opposed to an actual ideological stance on fiscal responsibility.

If only Democrats were able to articulate to each group that they will be the protector of their group's preferred pet spending and it only comes at the cost of paying for the pet spending projects of all the other groups...or at least enough groups to get 270 electoral votes and majorities in Congress.

4/5 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

4/5 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:I don't really like apocryphal stories as a means of investigating where people stand, but I was struck in reading that article how much it sounded like the things I'm hearing from back home. It still comes down to "all government spending is unnecessary and wasteful....except for the program(s) I directly benefit from."

That's the same thing that struck me. I suppose this is where liberals would use that as evidence of, "see people benefit from these programs, so don't take them away!" but I think this is better evidence for the economically conservative arguments against having a legion of governmental programs attempting to solve every problem under the sun. People get accustomed to that stream of government benefits and it is very, very difficult to turn off the spigot.

It also subjects those programs to the will of the electorate, who are not particularly qualified to make any decisions about their own lives.

Sure. The cognitive dissonance on display is a sight to see. "Wasteful spending" equals "spending on stuff that I don't personally support or benefit from" as opposed to an actual ideological stance on fiscal responsibility.

If only Democrats were able to articulate to each group that they will be the protector of their group's preferred pet spending and it only comes at the cost of paying for the pet spending projects of all the other groups...or at least enough groups to get 270 electoral votes and majorities in Congress.

"All we ask is all your money" 2020

4/5 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

4/5 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:I don't really like apocryphal stories as a means of investigating where people stand, but I was struck in reading that article how much it sounded like the things I'm hearing from back home. It still comes down to "all government spending is unnecessary and wasteful....except for the program(s) I directly benefit from."

That's the same thing that struck me. I suppose this is where liberals would use that as evidence of, "see people benefit from these programs, so don't take them away!" but I think this is better evidence for the economically conservative arguments against having a legion of governmental programs attempting to solve every problem under the sun. People get accustomed to that stream of government benefits and it is very, very difficult to turn off the spigot.

It also subjects those programs to the will of the electorate, who are not particularly qualified to make any decisions about their own lives.

Sure. The cognitive dissonance on display is a sight to see. "Wasteful spending" equals "spending on stuff that I don't personally support or benefit from" as opposed to an actual ideological stance on fiscal responsibility.

If only Democrats were able to articulate to each group that they will be the protector of their group's preferred pet spending and it only comes at the cost of paying for the pet spending projects of all the other groups...or at least enough groups to get 270 electoral votes and majorities in Congress.

Wasteful Spending = The Wall and in general military spending for weapons and weapon systems because it's made in someones district... or keeping a base open because an entire town exists because of it.

There are always going to be losers when decisions are made, perhaps there's more justification for a guaranteed wage now that most of the population are going to lose jobs to technology anyway.

BREAKING: Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... ge%2Fstory

tragabigzanda wrote:BREAKING: Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... ge%2Fstory

*Blackwater founder and brother of Betsy Devos

McParadigm wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:BREAKING: Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... ge%2Fstory

*Blackwater founder and brother of Betsy Devos

WHOA!

Fuck me in the brain.

Days before the November election, Prince appeared on Bannon’s program again, saying that he had “well-placed sources” in the New York City Police Department telling him they were preparing to make arrests in the investigation of former congressman Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) over allegations he exchanged sexually explicit texts with a minor. Flynn tweeted a link to the Breitbart report on the claim. No arrests occurred.

Prince went on to make unfounded assertions that damaging material recovered from Weiner’s computers would implicate Hillary Clinton and her close adviser, Huma Abedin, who was married to Weiner. He also called Abedin an “agent of influence very sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood.”

tragabigzanda wrote:BREAKING: Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... ge%2Fstory

So what?

Buzzfeed: A Former Trump Adviser Met With A Russian Spy

NEW YORK — A former campaign adviser for Donald Trump met with and passed documents to a Russian intelligence operative in New York City in 2013.

The adviser, Carter Page, met with a Russian intelligence operative named Victor Podobnyy, who was later charged by the US government alongside two others for acting as unregistered agents of a foreign government. The charges, filed in January 2015, came after federal investigators busted a Russian spy ring that was seeking information on US sanctions as well as efforts to develop alternative energy. Page is an energy consultant.

A court filing by the US government contains a transcript of a recorded conversation in which Podobnyy speaks with one of the other men busted in the spy ring, Igor Sporyshev, about trying to recruit someone identified as “Male-1.” BuzzFeed News has confirmed that “Male-1” is Page.

Bi_3 wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:BREAKING: Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... ge%2Fstory

So what?

Unrelated glance back at an article from January:

ERIK PRINCE, AMERICA’S most notorious mercenary, is lurking in the shadows of the incoming Trump administration. A former senior U.S. official who has advised the Trump transition told The Intercept that Prince has been advising the team on matters related to intelligence and defense, including weighing in on candidates for the Defense and State departments. The official asked not to be identified because of a transition policy prohibiting discussion of confidential deliberations.

The Blackwater founder has also endorsed some of Trump’s overtures to Russia, saying: “Think about it: If FDR, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, can deal with Stalin to defeat German fascism in World War II, certainly the United States of America could work with Putin to defeat Islamic fascism. We don’t have to agree with the Russians on everything, or even on a lot, but we can at least agree that crushing ISIS in the Middle East is a very good idea.” Prince described Democrats as “anti-Catholic, anti-Evangelical,” saying the DNC hacks and leaks revealed “the disregard, the disdain they have for the average American voter and citizen.”

Who cares

BurtReynolds wrote:Who cares

McParadigm wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:BREAKING: Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... ge%2Fstory

So what?

Unrelated glance back at an article from January:

ERIK PRINCE, AMERICA’S most notorious mercenary, is lurking in the shadows of the incoming Trump administration. A former senior U.S. official who has advised the Trump transition told The Intercept that Prince has been advising the team on matters related to intelligence and defense, including weighing in on candidates for the Defense and State departments. The official asked not to be identified because of a transition policy prohibiting discussion of confidential deliberations.

The Blackwater founder has also endorsed some of Trump’s overtures to Russia, saying: “Think about it: If FDR, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, can deal with Stalin to defeat German fascism in World War II, certainly the United States of America could work with Putin to defeat Islamic fascism. We don’t have to agree with the Russians on everything, or even on a lot, but we can at least agree that crushing ISIS in the Middle East is a very good idea.” Prince described Democrats as “anti-Catholic, anti-Evangelical,” saying the DNC hacks and leaks revealed “the disregard, the disdain they have for the average American voter and citizen.”

I guess I find it hard to understand why Trump would need Prince to do what is alleged in that article, especially if he's already in bed with Putin (presumably a pissed soaked one). It seems far more likely that Prince was trying to cash in on the election and implied special access to Trump to sell more of his 'services'. Russia's economy relies heavily on gas imports to the EU, thus Putins support for Syria and other nations that block pipelines from the Saudi peninsula, so the odds of him flipping on Iran (the Saudis nemesis) are basically zero as Prince understands this.

Bi_3 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:BREAKING: Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... ge%2Fstory

So what?

Unrelated glance back at an article from January:

ERIK PRINCE, AMERICA’S most notorious mercenary, is lurking in the shadows of the incoming Trump administration. A former senior U.S. official who has advised the Trump transition told The Intercept that Prince has been advising the team on matters related to intelligence and defense, including weighing in on candidates for the Defense and State departments. The official asked not to be identified because of a transition policy prohibiting discussion of confidential deliberations.

The Blackwater founder has also endorsed some of Trump’s overtures to Russia, saying: “Think about it: If FDR, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, can deal with Stalin to defeat German fascism in World War II, certainly the United States of America could work with Putin to defeat Islamic fascism. We don’t have to agree with the Russians on everything, or even on a lot, but we can at least agree that crushing ISIS in the Middle East is a very good idea.” Prince described Democrats as “anti-Catholic, anti-Evangelical,” saying the DNC hacks and leaks revealed “the disregard, the disdain they have for the average American voter and citizen.”

I guess I find it hard to understand why Trump would need Prince to do what is alleged in that article, especially if he's already in bed with Putin (presumably a pissed soaked one). It seems far more likely that Prince was trying to cash in on the election and implied special access to Trump to sell more of his 'services'. Russia's economy relies heavily on gas imports to the EU, thus Putins support for Syria and other nations that block pipelines from the Saudi peninsula, so the odds of him flipping on Iran (the Saudis nemesis) are basically zero as Prince understands this.

Damn, no one told me we were living in Assumption City!

Strat wrote:https://www.someecards.com/news/politics/white-supremacist-muslim-history/

There are some factual problems there, but more people need to get educated on the vicious history of Christianity. Why is this in this thread?

He didn't seem to understand the question.

The red team needs to let this whole "Susan Rice spied on Trump" thing drop. What a load of wag-the-dog bullshit that is, and if there were targets worthy of surveillance talking to the Trump team, that just makes them look worse... even if the conversations were innocent.

Coming out and blaming Obama for the chemical attack in Syria is yet another new low for these pieces of shit.