Flynnghazi: Justice Dept. warned WH that advisor vunlnerable to blackmail.

[Paranoid Android]

Oh yes, Skroe is well informed and has a different opinion than mine.
But you are clearly uninformed.

Preach brother!

[Extremity]

Why does Donald Trump's scandal-tainted national security adviser still have a job?

The Washington Post reported last week that the retired general apparently lied about his contacts with Russian officials, the argument for firing Flynn is looking pretty strong.

Pence’s team is leaking to Politico that Flynn deceived the vice president. That mostly means that only one person in the administration is backing Flynn.

Does this mean Flynn is first, America is second now?

Let's be honest here - when it comes to Trump, how many people can you NOT look at and say "how does this person have this job?"

I think it would be easier to make a list of people that should still have their current position (let alone have been appointed in the first place) than it would be to list those that shouldn't.

words

Is your avatar from that kids show with the girl with pink hair, the one I can never remember the name of?

[Dug]

I'm very well informed. I just don't view the facts through the lens of ultra liberalism and hating the current President. You understand that people well-informed can have differing opinions?

The problem with you "I have no side" types (which is bullshit) is you constantly trivialize everything. Much like the world isn't black and white, neither is politics. No we're not all "literally gonna die" and Trump isn't "literally hitler" but just going "Oh this isn't that bad! It's fine everyone!" is just excusing shitty behavior and potential consequences down the road if we don't address these problems now.

[Ahovv]

Good watch.

[Narwal]

Except I am not looking at it from a liberal lense, but a Libertarian one. And someone that cares about the institutions that Bannon (and Trump) is trying to destroy.

Which institutions is he destroying that you like? Maybe the DoE, or EPA?

[Edge-]

Haha, so now they're talking about adding Christie to the administration to "keep Trump on track"?


Holy hell it's the gift no one wants that keeps on giving...

Are they...serious? I'd have figured Bridgegate would have sunk his political career forever, but I guess Trump has already established that he has no issues with political lepers.

I mean hell, Flynn was a political leper and he brought him on. He even had Trumps full confidence! Up until about 5 hours before he resigned in disgrace : 3

[Machismo]

He is one of the AWOKE! The "Independent". I love people who claim they do not belong to a party makes them non-partisan. I am not registered to a party. I have voted for candidates in many political parties. I guess I am "AWOKE!"

Everyone is biased, and honestly just about everyone is partisan. As it currently stands, I'm more annoyed with the GOP than I am Democrats, mainly because they are in power.

Most people who claim to be independent are liars.

[Edge-]

Is your avatar from that kids show with the girl with pink hair, the one I can never remember the name of?

Edit: Shit, I thought I posted quick enough for this to get edited onto the end of my last reply, derp, sorry.

Lazy Town? No, it's Sooyoung from Girls Generation (kpoop group). She's my IRL waifu.

[Machismo]

Which institutions is he destroying that you like? Maybe the DoE, or EPA?

I'm a big fan of freedom and the free markets. Trump seems to despise both of those things. Start with those.

[NYC17]

Yea, I described it wrong. I'm not involved in the political process, is what I meant to say. I stay up to date in the political world simply because it's a fascinating area that creates a lot of conversation. I am liberal in the social sphere, but not in the economical sense. I want business regulation, but I think the left takes it way too far. I want a nice clean planet, but I think the left takes it way too far. I want people to live their life how they see fit, I think the right takes it way too far. I want people to have a choice if they want their own financial gain to help others. I want there to be a social safety net, but I want it to be enforced seriously that you are looking for work while on it.

If you are concerned about those things than you should be concerned about an intellectually dishonest and disinterested president and staff whose amateurism is beyond anything this country has seen. You may disagree with "ultra liberalism", whatever the hell that may be or as if it's actually represented to any great degree in this country, but you should certainly disagree with the idea that a woefully unqualified president should be given a pass.

"Because liberals" is not a compelling counterargument.

[Extremity]

Lazy Town? No, it's Sooyoung from Girls Generation (kpoop group). She's my IRL waifu.

oh god you replied faster than I could delete and edit my other reply D:

And yeah, Lazy Town, that's the one. I can *never* remember that. I just looked up the name you gave, I can't believe she's 27. She's pretty cute for sure. Is she entirely Asian? I hate saying "Asian" but I don't know her actual ethnicity. She looks as if she's not 100%. I kind of like girls that've got a hint of it in there. Olivia Wilde is an example I guess, I believe she's got a small part in her (insert pun), but I suppose that's not the best example outside of technicality since it's hardly visible.

And whoooooosh, boy did I go off topic quick.

[Yvaelle]

I actually like that the moderation here is taking a stance against the "fake news" groupthink. Does it happen? Yes. But outside commonly acknowledged yellow press (e.g. the UK Daily Mail) establishing a list of sources to not trust without any consideration why is the death of democracy and one of the most alarming events of the past few years (and it is not just on Trump)

- - - Updated - - -



The people who defend everything Trump does are people who at the very least in a subconscious level, want to watch the world burn out of spite. They are many. And the reason is that conservative politicians failed them.

Conservativism is imperative to exist in any society. We need people who when confronted with any new paradigm react by asking everyone to stop and think if we need this to go forward; that is why conservatives exist in societies for. Yet instead of fostering discussions about globalization (and the possibility that it will lionize cultures inimical to ours), automation and artifical intelligence (with the very threat that they will annul the social contract when we have nothing yet ready to replace it with) they doubled down on identity.

The progressive-conservative relation is critical to evolution. Progressives devote their effort in imagining change and putting it into action, conservatives to critical thinking and ensuring that only changes that increase total utility come forward. THEY HAVEN'T DONE THEIR JOB. They just sit there petulantly denying any change.

And thus a good number of people are just left behind. The world is advancing and no one is helping them make any sense of it. You don't get a chance to assimilate to change, no one reassures you about it. For progressives not accepting change seems stupid and they will just tell you so to your face. This just makes people mad, and they will keep electing Trump in the US, fascists and pseudo-communists in the EU and anyone who can promise them to set everything on fire.

It's a good post

I think the breakdown traces back to the rising anti-intellectualism in Western societies. Intelligent conservatives are definitely a boon to society, but they are so rare now that most people probably regard the term as an oxymoron: making exception for the small handful that remain.

The result is that most of the intelligent conversation about societies future has been left in the hands of recklessly progressive futurists (like @Connal and myself) - who would happily eschew our mortal and even physical bodies to upload ourselves into some sort of techno-utopian husk-avatars, wherein we can practice our strange strain of neo-Buddhist atheism, by way of transcendental hallucination.

Apparently, not everyone is ready to join us on the far side

The problem is that virtually all rebuttal to our admittedly outlandish visions, are reactionary - people oppose the future we paint because it is not the same as the present: as though ceasing all entropy in the universe were a viable alternative option - as though the universe had a 'pause' button, to maintain the status quo.

So we tell the world that their children will all be pansexual, genderless, ultra-progressive, technological willow-wisps, existing within a Star Trek-inspired Neo-Communist society, in a post-scarcity interstellar civilization - where we are all one within the Iris. And they say, "fuck you, we'll vote for an orange orangutan then - because evolution is going the wrong direction!" #MakeSocietyStoneAgeAgain #MSSAA

Which is certainly a reaction to our West Coast technological-kookiness, but it's not a refutation of our claim: it's just an emotional opposition to the proposal. It's why I enjoy talking to people like @Theodarzna and @Skroe (and my RL best friend is of a similar ideology, we rarely agree, but enjoy debating) - because I know my views need a regulator - or I'd be cutting off my own limbs, as an early adopter for our technological ascension: and I need someone to tell me to hold on to my arms at least until we have a viable replacement on the market.

In the grand conversation though, we don't really have much of that intelligent conservative voice - instead the conservatives have particularly become anti-intellectual (overall), and so the progressives have become untethered. The Conservatives still feel they needs to regulate us, but without the right approach (explain to us why we're kooks, don't just keep shouting "Libtard cucks! #MAGA #MAGA #MAGA!") - all that remains is a conservative response that is 'full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'. So they become more reactionary, and we become even more progressive, and they become angrier, and we become more dismissive.

I see two possible outcomes (here we go again with the progressive futurism!).
1) We may find a way to bring the conversation back to a more rational discussion of issues, though I'm not sure how we achieve this without massive education reform and perhaps even generations for it to take effect.
2) We become increasingly ideologically polarized until we self-sort into distinct groups and refuse to work together anymore (my city-state predictions I've talked about a bunch, but I can link if anyone is unfamiliar).

[Narwal]

Everyone is biased, and honestly just about everyone is partisan. As it currently stands, I'm more annoyed with the GOP than I am Democrats, mainly because they are in power.

Most people who claim to be independent are liars.

I'd agree with that. Everyone is biased, it's called having an opinion. I don't blame people for being biased, but the reason I get so uppity sometimes is because some people try to claim they have no bias. Also I get uppity about the media because it is their job to not be biased. This means, understanding that they are biased, and working hard to provide the story of the opposing view. This is something they severely suck at. They like to end their story at the point that "it's factual" while not taking it as far as being "unbiased". They work hard to equate fact and bias as one.

[Dug]

Everyone is biased, and honestly just about everyone is partisan. As it currently stands, I'm more annoyed with the GOP than I am Democrats, mainly because they are in power.

Most people who claim to be independent are liars.

Generally how I feel. Just because you've voted R and D in your lifetime doesn't make you "independent". Everyone leans one way or another. Of course the self proclaimed "independents" of this forum love to write essays on how much they dislike liberals so it's not particularly hard to see through their BS.

[NYC17]

Generally how I feel. Just because you've voted R and D in your lifetime doesn't make you "independent". Everyone leans one way or another. Of course the self proclaimed "independents" of this forum love to write essays on how much they dislike liberals so it's not particularly hard to see through their BS.

People tend to confuse independent, moderate, and neutrality.

[Jeezy911]

So let's see the Ban was so poorly put together that it stopped legal US residents returning home, threw multiple US departments into confusion because they did not know what they were supposed to do, and was ultimately suspended by the Courts. Even if you fully supported the idea of ban, it was done piss poorly.

There is also question as to if he knew what he was actually signing as reports indicated he didn't realize he was putting Bannon on the security council with his executive order.

Trump has also put people in positions of power that do not know what they are doing, Carson in charge of HUD, DeVos in education ($200 million dollars baby), people with questionable ties, such as Tillerson and Flynn, though the Flynn one did actually fall apart in the end.

His advisers have been making idiotic statements repeatedly since he's been in office, and we aren't talking minor things we are talking false terrorist attacks, statements that include the terms alternative facts and so on.

So yeah there are a few things people are upset over.

And all of which could be attributed to being an inexperienced politician. We wanted an outsider, so obviously he's not going to know all the inner workings of being president in 3 weeks.

[Machismo]

I'd agree with that. Everyone is biased, it's called having an opinion. I don't blame people for being biased, but the reason I get so uppity sometimes is because some people try to claim they have no bias. Also I get uppity about the media because it is their job to not be biased. This means, understanding that they are biased, and working hard to provide the story of the opposing view. This is something they severely suck at. They like to end their story at the point that "it's factual" while not taking it as far as being "unbiased". They work hard to equate fact and bias as one.

The media is allowed to be biased, that's to say that the truth is often far different than the current narrative. It's perfectly acceptable for the news to form opinions, so long as those opinions are formed on all the available information. Cherry picking data is not acceptable. When it comes to this administration, when presented with facts, it does appear biased against the agenda of the current administration. Of course, the current administration is full of habitual liars. They, and their supporters are literally blaming others when they get caught in lies.

I would love all the facts, and the administration is clearly not giving all the facts. It's time for an independent investigation into the matter.

- - - Updated - - -

ha..haha..hahahaha.

I'm not sure why you are laughing, it's true. He wants to limit freedoms, just so some people can feel more safe. he wants to increase tariffs, in order to unbalance the competitive playing field.

[Jeezy911]

That particularly story you so glibly ignored was about potential violation of conflict of interest laws on the part of the president and his staff. Conway on national television advising folks to go out and buy ivankas stuff for example/

So maybe he should just close all of his businesses then? Seems logical.

[Dug]

So maybe he should just close all of his businesses then? Seems logical.

Or you know give them over to a blind trust that isn't his children...

[Glorious Leader]

So maybe he should just close all of his businesses then? Seems logical.

Or divest himself from all interest in those business to avoid any conflict of interests and no handing them to his children does not count...