Tyrphanax

Familiarity breeds contempt.

Jay said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

I don’t believe I ever really thought about it one way or the other.

TV’s Frink said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

I don’t believe I ever really thought about it one way or the other.

This.

And you call yourselves fans.

No true Star Wars fan hasn’t considered the Death Star Trench Run Quandary.

Jetrell Fo said:

^That’s not a very nice thing to say even if you’re joking.

Tell that to the President.

DominicCobb said:

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

Hahahahaha.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-emails-rnc-reince-priebus-white-house-server-548191

Senior Trump administration staffers including Kellyanne Conway, Jared Kushner, Sean Spicer and Steve Bannon have active accounts on a Republican National Committee email system, Newsweek has learned.

The system (rnchq.org) is the same one the George W. Bush administration was accused of using to evade transparency rules after claiming to have “lost” 22 million emails.

Making use of separate political email accounts at the White House is not illegal. In fact, they serve a purpose by allowing staff to divide political conversations (say, arranging for the president to support a congressional re-election campaign) from actual White House work. Commingling politics and state business violates the Hatch Act, which restricts many executive branch employees from engaging in political activity on government time.

But after then-candidate Donald Trump and the Republicans repeatedly called for “locking up” Hillary Clinton for handling government work with a private server while secretary of state, the new White House staff risks repeating the same mistake that dogged the Democrat’s presidential campaign. They also face a security challenge: The RNC email system, according to U.S. intelligence, was hacked during the 2016 race. “They better be careful after making such a huge ruckus over the private email over at the State Department,” says former Bush administration lawyer Richard Painter.

Is this not the exact reason many people claimed to not be voting for Hillary? Am I wrong?

Donald Trump, the man who ran an entire campaign on how Hillary shouldn’t be president because of her private email server now has his very own private email server. But now it’s suddenly okay? Can anyone defend this?

Why am I not even a tiny bit surprised?

How can anyone be happy with how this presidency has been so far? It’s not even about policy anymore, this dickwad has been objectively bad in so many ways. The fact that those on the right will still defend shows how blindly partisan some are.

I’m sure it’s okay because he’s got a crowd of kids these days on some bigly security for the cyber.

TV’s Frink said:

Hahahahaha.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-emails-rnc-reince-priebus-white-house-server-548191

Senior Trump administration staffers including Kellyanne Conway, Jared Kushner, Sean Spicer and Steve Bannon have active accounts on a Republican National Committee email system, Newsweek has learned.

The system (rnchq.org) is the same one the George W. Bush administration was accused of using to evade transparency rules after claiming to have “lost” 22 million emails.

Making use of separate political email accounts at the White House is not illegal. In fact, they serve a purpose by allowing staff to divide political conversations (say, arranging for the president to support a congressional re-election campaign) from actual White House work. Commingling politics and state business violates the Hatch Act, which restricts many executive branch employees from engaging in political activity on government time.

But after then-candidate Donald Trump and the Republicans repeatedly called for “locking up” Hillary Clinton for handling government work with a private server while secretary of state, the new White House staff risks repeating the same mistake that dogged the Democrat’s presidential campaign. They also face a security challenge: The RNC email system, according to U.S. intelligence, was hacked during the 2016 race. “They better be careful after making such a huge ruckus over the private email over at the State Department,” says former Bush administration lawyer Richard Painter.

Is this not the exact reason many people claimed to not be voting for Hillary? Am I wrong?

Donald Trump, the man who ran an entire campaign on how Hillary shouldn’t be president because of her private email server now has his very own private email server. But now it’s suddenly okay? Can anyone defend this?

Moth3r said:

LexX said:

Yeah, I never thought it would be the equator. It’s way bigger than the trench. So no news here.

Agreed, I thought this has always been obvious.

When I was younger I thought it was the equatorial trench, but as I grew up I realized it was a polar trench.

darth_ender said:

I avoid posting in this thread anymore because I’ve cut down drastically on my interaction on this forum in recent months due to an ever busier schedule. Plus, less emotional involvement here gets me less upset when someone does something rude or disagrees profoundly. I probably will get sucked into a conversation I shouldn’t take my time on, but I do wish to leave my thoughts on the reinstating of the global gag rule.

I figured the best way to address this was to reply to my favorite post from the opposition on this site, the post I most agree with in fact:

Tyrphanax said:

In this modern world of progress, education is the key to all things and yet we continue to defund it every chance we get, then wonder why things go wrong.

I agree with the need for more education. While I would love to live in a world where personal responsibility was the ruling factor in people’s decision-making, I know it is not, nor will it ever be. People make mistakes, and often we look for a way to give a reprieve for those mistakes. Based on that understanding, we must prevent unwanted pregnancy in order to prevent abortion.

I’ll give an example: I believe Rick Perry signed a Texas law disallowing the morning-after pill for minors without parental permission. I find this to be foolish. The morning after pill prevents fertilization, does no harm to a living, genetically unique human, and prevents pregnancy. If I want to reduce abortions, this will actually do exactly that. Women will not get pregnant, and no child will be aborted. Win-win!

People don’t have babies willy-nilly because it’s fun to have a kid.

It can be. It is hard, but many people want children, and many women love being pregnant.

People don’t have abortions willy-nilly because it’s fun to have an abortion. They do it because they don’t know better, or don’t have access to contraception, or because of accidental pregnancy/pregnancy through malicious intent.

This is true. However, the first two do not justify an abortion to me.

I once got pulled over for going 35 mph in a 25 mph zone. I could not find a sign for a long distance before, and the sign was obscured by a tree. To me, everything else on the road indicated it was likely a 35 mph zone, with a painted yellow line, sparse housing, and a nearby 35 mph zone that was similarly painted and housed. I went to fight this ticket in court, and the judge ruled against me saying, “Ignorance of the law does not justify breaking the law.” I still had to face a consequence of my decision to speed, even though I didn’t know I was speeding.

Now how many post-pubescent individuals do not know that sex leads to babies? I’m guessing a very small percentage. And even if they are ignorant of the fact or the likelihood, I don’t see a “Get out of parenthood free” card as a fair answer to the child.

For the record, I do believe rape is a justifiable reason, though not necessarily the default answer. It should be well thought out, but I do believe it should be the woman’s choice in that case.

Why we feel the need to punish people for the above and then propagate the problem by continuing to cut funding is not logical or intelligent.

The funding is the problem. I don’t like abortion, and I don’t like spending my money on it. How many people complain about American dollars going to fight wars they don’t believe in? I know it’s far more expensive to fight a war than to financially support these NGOs. I know that there is a high cost of innocent and guilty human life. I personally hate war. And I understand that at times, war is a necessary evil that hopefully will save more life in the long run than it destroys. But protesters will protest war, and they have that right. President Obama pulled out of Iraq, and in retrospect it was premature, but it was an effort to avoid spending American money on something he did not believe in. Americans who don’t believe in abortion should have the freedom to oppose it, and the president should have the right to curb abortion as much as possible.

You wanna see fewer people on welfare funded by your tax dollar having a million kids? Prevent it by education (and not abstinence-only because that’s a farce and will never work), providing contraception,…

Agreed. This saves us from spending unnecessarily on those who are most likely to get pregnant unintentionally and are least financially capable of raising a family.

…and allowing abortion.

I disagree. Killing a person while it’s legal is still killing a person in my mind. I don’t feel an inclination to round up all the welfare recipients and euthenize them. I don’t believe it is any better just because they are future welfare recipients who haven’t developed a complete nervous system yet.

Funny thing is that when you do the first two (educate and provide contraceptives), I guarantee that the third option (abortion) will fall rapidly. You wanna solve abortion with me? Then lean on the first two.

This is where you and I agree the most. How can we promote these two more? Serious question. How can I reduce elective abortions in unnecessary cases while still promoting education and contraception? I believe that there are options, but I don’t know the answers. Perhaps educating women that there truly are more options than abortion for unwanted pregnancies. There are so many families who want to adopt. There are resources for those unprepared to have children to facilitate responsible parenting. There are ways to educate the public at large and reduced social ostracism. Perhaps more education, reducing obstacles from these routes, and preventing pregnancy in the first place will save women’s and children’s lives.

Don’t just defund the whole thing and shove it under the rug and pretend it doesn’t exist for inane puritanical ideological reasons. I don’t like the idea of abortion as much as anybody, but you damn well better believe that I want them available and happening in a well-funded controlled and clinical environment, and not some back alley with a rusty coathanger.

I agree, I would want them done in the safest way possible. Abortions should be available, but in my mind, only in exceptional circumstances. It is far too common, often unnecessary.

I dunno about anyone else here, but I’d rather my tax dollars go to paying for a box of condoms and an IUD for a teenage couple than go to paying them and their five kids to stay on welfare for the next fifty years. And then pay for those five kids’ twenty-five kids to stay on welfare for another fifty years. And so on. You wanna treat the disease? Treat the cause, not the symptoms.

Agreed, but again, not at the cost of life. That’s where I draw the line.

It’s the same thing in “underdeveloped” countries, too, you wanna stop spending billions in aid on these countries? Teach them to fish, so to speak. Don’t cut the “learn fishing” programs and then complain about refugees. Christ almighty the disconnect in that “logic,” and yet it prevails nation- and world-wide.

But it’s not about actually saving lives or preventing abortions, it’s about punishing people for being people.

That is not my intent, nor that of most pro-lifers’. One could use the same rhetoric for the embryo or fetus: It’s about punishing people for being underdeveloped and unwanted people. Just like people have sex and we don’t expect them to stop just because it’s not done responsibly, we don’t expect unborn infants to stop growing just because their parents don’t want them.

To pre-empt a couple of arguments, I have a couple of more items to say:

I hate argument about personal morality. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve heard people say, “I personally am against abortion, but I cannot impose my morals on someone else.” Look, all our laws are based on morals. Removing the idea of an absolute Giver of Law and Morality, there is technically nothing that is absolutely wrong, unless we as a society define it as such. Without God, there is no commandment of “Thou shalt not kill.” We humans simply have come to believe it is wrong, and therefore legislate against it. We develop our morals based on the idea of promoting life and happiness for as many individuals as possible, and of course, I agree with this notion, but just remember that our laws are in fact based on morals that not everyone agrees with. I’m sure there are individuals who believe black slavery should be reinstituted, that Jews should be exterminated, etc. Should I say to them, “I’m pro-slavery-choice,” or “I’m pro-Holocaust-choice because though I personally am opposed to it doesn’t mean I should tell someone else how to live his or her life?” Of course not. I have the right to advocate for legislation against abortion, even if many others disagree with me. I believe it is wrong, and I believe that just because someone else doesn’t feel it is wrong, I still have the right to sway the nation to uphold what I believe is correct. How long did abolitionists fight slavery when half the nation disagreed with them on its morality? I have the right to fight abortion, even if half the nation disagrees with me.

And before anyone calls me out for being male, and therefore unqualified to make a judgment on the issue, let me then say that if you are male, you have no more right to reply. You may say, “Well, women oppose abortion, and I’m just advocating for women’s rights.” Well, while numbers tend to remain fair split, I think it a fair statement to point out that nearly as many U.S. women are pro-life as are pro-choice (I suspect if it were broken down by the “personally pro-life” vs. generally pro-choice, it would be even highter who are pro-life to some degree), and more than half of pro-life activists are women. Even when in the minority, it is still a very sizeable minority of women who oppose abortion, so calling me sexist for opposing it will do no good. Per the below Gallup link, I support 41% of American women, and the Town Hall link is even more revealing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pro-life_movement#Demographics
http://www.gallup.com/poll/170249/split-abortion-pro-choice-pro-life.aspx
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/01/23/marist-abortion-poll-n2275329

Final pre-emptive point: I still don’t like Donald Trump. But I agreed with Obama on many things, even though I didn’t like him (though I’d take a third Obama term over our current loser). I just happen to agree with the idea of not using American dollars to support elected, unneeded abortions, at home or abroad.

We mostly agree (as you said) so even on the parts we disagree on, I see nothing to argue.

Good post!

doubleofive said:

Look, my state is shitty even without Pence!

https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2017/bills/senate/285#document-79282dd2

A responsible public official shall, not later than fifteen
(15) minutes after first learning that a mass traffic obstruction
exists in the official’s jurisdiction, dispatch all available law
enforcement officers to the mass traffic obstruction with directions
to use any means necessary to clear the roads of the persons
unlawfully obstructing vehicular traffic

Yeah, that’s a bill to let local law enforcement have free reign over protesters that may be blocking traffic! It literally uses the phrase “by any means necessary”!

Surely that won’t be used if traffic slows down near protesters or a rally near a road to violently disperse them. Surely not!

That’s a scary one.

Mary Tyler Moore - 80

Man, even I knew who she was and she was off TV long before I was conscious.

It sucks. It’s been made basically impossible to lean left in any way and be pro-gun because every time I vote for something, it’s basically a vote for someone who wants to trample one of my constitutional rights.

Jeebus said:

https://justicedemocrats.com/platform/

It’s time to face the facts: the Democratic Party is broken and the corporate, establishment wing of the party is responsible. Republicans now hold most state legislatures, most governorships, the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the presidency. So in 2018, hundreds of Justice Democrats will run a unified campaign to replace every corporate-backed member of Congress and rebuild the party from scratch.

I’d say I agree with about 90% of the platform. If you’re interested, please do check it out.

Seemed cool until I got to the anti-gun bit. Even then I was cool with it until I got to the assault weapon part.

*sigh*

An anti-consumer protection lawyer now heads the FCC.

CDC cancels the Climate and Health Summit as a “strategic retreat”.

TV’s Frink said:

Possessed said:

Maybe he thinks it’s something bad with this site and this can’t use the other thread.

[Ding ding ding]

MY OTHER CASSEROLES!

Hardcore Legend said:

Perhaps if you wanted to start your film with Rey meeting Luke, you could have not put it at the end of your last film.

But that’s none of my business.

Hah!

TV’s Frink said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

The needless resurrection of this thread?

[Ding]

MY CASSEROLE!

Lie > Lie about lying > Convince people to doubt evidence > Arrest the media > Censor the facts > ??? But it doesn’t lead anywhere good.

Still not impressed. Love to hear from someone who is.

You got that reference.

TV’s Frink said:

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/24/trump-hiring-freeze-includes-veterans-affairs/96999464/

Wait, wasn’t he supposed to be creating jobs?

No, he said he could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and kill jobs and he wouldn’t lose votes.

Oh right.

TV’s Frink said:

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

oojason said:

(It has been a bone of contention in the UK recently with some people - in the main politicians and the hate-media - seemingly not able to separate that others can have sympathy for Palestinians and not be anti-Semitic too - it was certainly an easy target for a time).

This can be a problem here as well. It’s the usual “no compromise” polarization of every issue these days.

Yep, it’s a pathetic all-or-nothing race to the bottom where everyone loses.

You’re wrong and pathetic.

Oh right.

TV’s Frink said:

oojason said:

(It has been a bone of contention in the UK recently with some people - in the main politicians and the hate-media - seemingly not able to separate that others can have sympathy for Palestinians and not be anti-Semitic too - it was certainly an easy target for a time).

This can be a problem here as well. It’s the usual “no compromise” polarization of every issue these days.

Yep, it’s a pathetic all-or-nothing race to the bottom where everyone loses.

TV’s Frink said:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/24/trump-hiring-freeze-includes-veterans-affairs/96999464/

Wait, wasn’t he supposed to be creating jobs?

TV’s Frink said:

doubleofive said:

TV’s Frink said:

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

Possessed said:

Well I think you’re a good guy and I think you are capable of living a much better life than you currently are.

Agreed!

Doubled up.

Respect to Possessed, as well.

Agreed!

Doubled up.

Respect to Tyrphanax, as well.

Eh.

Duck Fu.

Keith Ellison, who was recommended by folks like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, will in all likelihood take over as DNC chair, but things aren’t all a bed of roses yet.

Bernie might run again, but there’s no real democratic front-runner for the party to rally around yet (that I’ve heard of).

TV’s Frink said:

Possessed said:

Well I think you’re a good guy and I think you are capable of living a much better life than you currently are.

Agreed!

Doubled up.

Respect to Possessed, as well.

doubleofive said:

Tyrphanax said:

Warbler said:

Trump is again claiming widespread voter fraud. He’s nuts.

It was sad before, but it’s getting pathetic at this point. You won, dude, let it go!

I had to have someone point it out to me, but you’d think if Hillary was able to get 4-5 million people to commit voter fraud, you’d think she’d do it in states that she wouldn’t have won otherwise. What a waste of what is apparently the perfect scheme since there’s no evidence of it having ever happened!

You’d also think that if it actually happened, there’d be an investigation going on instead of just complaining.

Warbler said:

Trump is again claiming widespread voter fraud. He’s nuts.

It was sad before, but it’s getting pathetic at this point. You won, dude, let it go!