If all it takes is a smooth-talking lobbyist or Republican war-hawk to get Trump to completely change his mind about promises he’s made, then we’re in for a hell of a ride.
You don’t say
Damn, Glenn Greenwald is the greatest journalist of our time.
Ok
This article’s making the rounds, and making Democrats nervous:
To break with tradition around here, I’ll announce that I’m mostly in agreement with this article. You can’t hope to win if you don’t understand why you lost. Not that talking about why you lost is politically easy either, but that’s another issue.
I pretty much agree, and I think I said as much back in November. Of course, it’s a complicated issue. The racism and the economics are intertwined - people losing their jobs are blaming immigrants and people who don’t like paying taxes are blaming minorities on welfare. So I think it makes sense to talk economics and try to shift the blame to where it really lies.
The problem with facing the racism head on, as Clinton found out, is people don’t really like being called deplorable. If Dems don’t want to keep being labeled elitist, it won’t really help to criticize the populace. That’s why Warren and Sanders went at it the way they did - if the Dems have any hope in winning back the votes they lost, they can’t afford to be calling those people bigots.
Agree it’s hard to talk about head-on, but disagree about Sanders really understanding. Warren maybe. But Sanders has had this particular blind spot for the twenty-odd years I’ve been following him. It’s just the way he views the world, and it’s really not that unusual.
Whether or not they understand the issue I’m sure they understand that it hurt Clinton’s campaign.
Honestly the only way I can figure they can attack the racism issue without alienating people is if they only focus on the bigotry of those in charge (Trump, Bannon, etc.). I feel like if Clinton’s deplorable comment was about those running Trump’s campaign and not those supporting it it wouldn’t have garnered so much controversy. Either way they can’t just ignore the issue entirely.
This article’s making the rounds, and making Democrats nervous:
To break with tradition around here, I’ll announce that I’m mostly in agreement with this article. You can’t hope to win if you don’t understand why you lost. Not that talking about why you lost is politically easy either, but that’s another issue.
I pretty much agree, and I think I said as much back in November. Of course, it’s a complicated issue. The racism and the economics are intertwined - people losing their jobs are blaming immigrants and people who don’t like paying taxes are blaming minorities on welfare. So I think it makes sense to talk economics and try to shift the blame to where it really lies.
The problem with facing the racism head on, as Clinton found out, is people don’t really like being called deplorable. If Dems don’t want to keep being labeled elitist, it won’t really help to criticize the populace. That’s why Warren and Sanders went at it the way they did - if the Dems have any hope in winning back the votes they lost, they can’t afford to be calling those people bigots.
The fact that Anakin and Padme swap droids should have made people suspicious.
R2 looks like shit for almost the entirety of his screentime in that film.
My favorite take has been from Mark Harris:
It is possible to disagree about what to do in Syria, or even not to know how you feel. It is not possible to believe we’re in good hands.
Saying this proves your vote doesn’t matter is pretty dang silly. First of all, Trump lies. No one should expect to believe literally anything he says. Second of all, you’re really telling me that in this scenario it doesn’t matter if Trump or Clinton is in charge? There’s a lot more to governing than policy (and that’s to say nothing of the fact that this is just one policy element).
As for the “No puppet!” stuff, I think most don’t literally believe that Trump is Putin’s puppet (having his ear at all times like how SNL portrays him). It’s obviously not as simple as that. The signs that Trump is too cozy with Putin are pretty evident, and he doesn’t have to literally be Putin’s puppet for that to be a problem. And I can’t for the life of me understand why people are okay with it and denying it (well, blindly loyal Republicans I get, but everyone else should have no issue seeing what’s going on). As for where Putin fits into this particular mess? I’m certain it is far too early to tell.
As for the whole power vacuum situation? God knows. It’s a scary path we’re going down for sure. I’m faaaar from anything resembling a hawk, but I have to say those Geneva conventions are there for a reason. Something has to be done. Is this the right way to do it? I really doubt it, but for the sake of the world, let’s hope.
Did they even finish those 3D conversions?
More importantly, is there anyone who even cares at this point?
Or a thread about “I Want a New Drug” by Huey Lewis & The News.
Approved
I found it myself while editing awhile back.
It looks like that shit for a little under a second so they probably figured people wouldn’t notice. There a bunch of these wonky stuff in those films. Who can forget that classic pic of Dooku escaping in AOTC (wish I had it handy).
Well to me it’s the cheapest looking SW of the entire series
Actual movie still.No it’s not. You’re not even trying.
Are you joking or?
Beristain’s wife voted for President Trump in November and previously said she believed in the Republican’s immigration policies. In February, he ordered officials to be more aggressive in arresting and deporting those living in the U.S. illegally.
“I think our President is going to keep all the good people here,” she said in a March interview with WSBT. “He is not going to tear up families. I don’t think he wants to do that. He just wants to keep us safe."
Here is why this man was deported. The article says it but the op does not.
Beristain had a work permit, driver’s license, social security information, paid his taxes and was in the process of obtaining an immigrant visa, one of his attorneys, Jason Flora, told the news station. He had no criminal record.
Beristain during a family vacation in 2000 took a wrong turn to Niagara falls that put him past the Canadian border. When he tried to return to the country, officials denied him entrance and placed a deportation order on him, his 14-year-old daughter, Jasmine previously told the Daily News.
His wife was pregnant at the time, so he ignored the order. Beristain didn’t want to leave her alone, Helen said in a March interview.
Beristain’s deportation came on the same day attorneys filed a court document aimed at keeping Beristain in the country. The document claims he wasn’t given due process when he first received his deportation order in 2000. Beristain was deported before a judge had time to issue a ruling.
He wasn’t just targeted and returned for no good reason.
Hey, this responding directly to but removing Frink’s name got old instantly.
Hey, guess what, no-one cares but you.
😃
Nah, I bet the whole bandwagon posse agrees, too.
Well to me it’s the cheapest looking SW of the entire series
Actual movie still.No. Really? No.
Yes. Really.
It’s the first shot of Kashyyyyyk during the Order 66 sequence.
Well to me it’s the cheapest looking SW of the entire series
Actual movie still.
I’m pretty sure Gen Y covers everyone born from the 1980’s to 2000.
That’s pretty generous. The differences between someone born in 1980 and 2000 are vast. I’d say someone born in 2000 has a lot more in common with someone born in 2005 than 1995.
There has to be a cutoff point somewhere, and 2000 doesn’t sound too wrong. I mean, one of my brothers was born in '95, and we aren’t really in different generations.
I’m kinda with DE on this, if you don’t remember the 90s, then you’re not quite a millennial (so cutoff around 95 I think). Lot of things changed in the new millennium with the inter webs and pocket computers.
Obviously it depends, and in many ways it’s pretty fluid. New technology has affected everyone. Back to the “post-millennial” label, I actually think a more suitable label would probably be something like “extra-millennial.”
I’m not “angling” for anything. I typed what came into my head.
Come on, you hang out in off topic. You know what the Lurker Thread is. Think it through. Or even easier, go check out the Lurker Thread.
I never said that I didn’t know what the Luker Thread is. I know what he was referring to, and I responded accordingly. When I was typing goofy names for all the characters, I wasn’t doing it to get recognition in the Lurker Thread. I typed what came into my head because I felt like it. And yes, I know Gin Erso was posted in the Lurker Thread.
You’re missing the point that it was a joke. Whether or not you were actually “angling” for it doesn’t matter.
I guess I’m not getting a joke anywhere. You responded to my post with a remark that I was angling for the Lurker Thread. If this wasn’t meant to be taken too seriously, I guess I missed it, so I responded to you by saying that I wasn’t angling for anything, because I wasn’t. Sorry.
Yeah, it was just a completely non-serious remark, nothing to worry about.
According to whatever the hell investopedia is, you aren’t a Z until 2005.
Well I think generational labeling is kinda bullshit anyway because there’s definitely overlap and it’s hard to determine where the boundaries are.
But to the initial point of saying blank generation is in to the Youtubes, I think if you can replace the blank generation with kids these days, then you know you’re dealing with Gen Z.
I’m pretty sure Gen Y covers everyone born from the 1980’s to 2000.
That’s pretty generous. The differences between someone born in 1980 and 2000 are vast. I’d say someone born in 2000 has a lot more in common with someone born in 2005 than 1995.
I’m not “angling” for anything. I typed what came into my head.
Come on, you hang out in off topic. You know what the Lurker Thread is. Think it through. Or even easier, go check out the Lurker Thread.
I never said that I didn’t know what the Luker Thread is. I know what he was referring to, and I responded accordingly. When I was typing goofy names for all the characters, I wasn’t doing it to get recognition in the Lurker Thread. I typed what came into my head because I felt like it. And yes, I know Gin Erso was posted in the Lurker Thread.
You’re missing the point that it was a joke. Whether or not you were actually “angling” for it doesn’t matter.
Why do people keep referencing YouTube reviews? Who cares?
Must be some Millennial thing.
More like Gen Z (which I’ve heard referred to as “Post-Millenial”…yeah…)
I’m Gen Y (millenial). Born in 1999.
Nah that’s Gen Z.
Why do people keep referencing YouTube reviews? Who cares?
Must be some Millennial thing.
More like Gen Z (which I’ve heard referred to as “Post-Millenial”…yeah…)
You didn’t need the links, everyone knows your opinions hang entirely on RLM’s every word.
^Someone’s angling for a mention in the lurker thread.
There’s a difference between thinking a character is “cool” as a person, and thinking a character is interesting because of a characterization.
The key difference isn’t attacking/defending, it’s that you were explicitly told not to stir shit with Frink up again.
^And here comes the posse, right on cue.
Which part of THIS did you NOT read?
Play nice, kids.
I’m sorry, which is less nice, a lie? Or calling someone out on a lie? I’d say the first but maybe that’s just me.
JEDIT: Sorry Wook