This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Isn't it great how Trump has brought out all these lovely adjectives and inserted them into political discourse? "Disgusting", "horrible", "terrible", "the worst",...the list goes on and on. But I suppose if I had to choose any of them, "disgusting" would be my favorite Trumpian adjective to describe things in politics. It just elicits a reaction that some of the other words don't.
Sessions is an all-world ##### who has no business anywhere near AG. Maybe the most repulsive of all the repulsive nominees. Though that's a tough mantle.
Well he just told Hatch that he's open to re-establishing the unit that goes after obscenity and porn.
Add in the talk about using inmates to help build the wall. Business will be booming soon.
Because who the chief executive hires does matter. The first task of governance is hiring the people who will govern. This is the clearest window we have into what a President Trump will value. And it shows a pattern of hiring people who either: 1) seem to have contempt for the role of government; 2) seem to be aligned with people who can uniquely benefit from government favor; or 3) are a little bit of both.
From a smarts pov, I'm okay with him coming aboard. I don't know where he stands on things but intelligence in this administration is a welcomed addition.
But not to worry, Trump will hire the best people. With his short fingers.
I think the KKK protesters were the Good Liars. These guys are hysterical. "You can't arrest us. We're white!"Gotta love these protesters......not sure how they think these obnoxious actions change anything in a positive way.
Uh, no.
This was sort of a controversial electoral position among almost everybody smart in the aughts.
Not with Trump. It was clear from the primaries and the polling that he has a special appeal to white people. He didn't really even have the option to do otherwise. So the strategy is obvious- if you need to pick off a handful of states Obama won, start with the whitest ones. I was saying for weeks before the election that the path to victory for Trump ran through an upset or two in the whitest areas of the rust belt, and that such a thing seemed very possible. And I'm no campaign strategist.
As we all know, Trump is an anti vaxxer himself: https://twitter.com/markberman/status/818901421617741824
Yeah, I'm not debating your take on the cabinet appointee, but the shibboleth in the aughts was that Republicans needed to "pick off" "minority" voters to win a presidential election.
He did micro-target them much better with radio and Sinclair broadcasting and was smart enough to know Bretbart should be used. Much like Trump though, his business acumen isn't legendary (for instance, he's had to bring that Chinese company in for 666 5th Ave).
The prep school he went to is on record saying they were stunned he got into Harvard because he was such a lousy student.
I'm a #NeverTrumper but Leahy is a hardball politico. No surprise there. He'll bury you if you cross him. VT Dems can get nasty. Could have used some of him in Bernie.
I don't see why it matters who Hillary was going to pick. She's not going to be President. Trump is.
Most of the original states actually did have state established religions at the time of ratification. The Establishment Clause was incorporated against the states in 1947, but that is a decision that has attracted a lot of scholarly disagreement. So Sessions is wrong, but maybe less wrong than he appears.
Don't believe I told you not to complain. Jeff Sessions is going to be AG. Complain away.
There have been a couple rounds as probing and challenging as Chris Farley's old talk show on SNL: "Remember when we were in the Senate together? Remember that? That was AWESOME."
It's pretty brutal but somewhat comical watching the clowns get thrown out trying to protest. Not sure how the old dude can spend the whole day fielding questions looks like he needs a nap.Seriously? People actually watch this ####?
Not to nit pick, but there are some drastic differences on the surface. From what I know of Starbucks, they treat their employees pretty well (full benes, tuition reimbursement, 401K, stock options, etc.). The guy from Carl's jr. wants more automation and less humans to employee.
Schultz is famous for offering his workers health insurance benefits even at 20 hours a week. He's also famous for bitterly fighting any attempts to unionize. For instance, he broke the local baristas union in Seattle demanding health insurance in 1987. Some years later, he had an epiphany that offering such benefits would decrease turnover, so he initiated it. Schultz generally seems OK with some progressive policies toward workers if he's determined that it makes business sense. He's been historically more hostile to them if they are demanded in collective bargaining.
Horrible nepotism. #### these Ivy League schools for sacrificing their standards.
This isn't getting retweeted on Twitter, so I'll aim it for the cheap seats here:
The Ivys were nepotism until a radical meritocrat called SAT leveled them.
