Unirionic invoking of Godwin's Law. *Sigh*
Unirionic invoking of Godwin's Law. *Sigh*
Considering how much of the tech industry is concentrated in California... and the political demographics of California, I'd say its more than half the market.
Like the week-long "scandal" over a star-shape in a Trump tweet, the time he "didn't" disavow David Duke, or the two times he "called for Hillary to be assassinated?" Please, I'd love to see the videos of these things that never happened.
My kingdom for mod points. Let's not forget the Democratic-controlled Congress that cut all funding to South Vietnam.
I really wish I could mod you up for this. There's enough people posting angry shoot-from-the-hip comments on
she's probably the best (pre-Reagan) Republican candidate that is possible, since the Dixiecrats have taken over the Republican party.
You put your finger right on it, there. They have - and the Republican base knows it. You remember the Tea Party movement some years back? Most of those reps/senators found themselves marginalized and shut out of important positions by the "establishment party" in short order. This election has seen the issue come to a head - Trump is universally loathed by the party's "old guard" and the guy who emerged as a front-runner against him was - you guessed it - a Tea Party Senator. Incidentally, Ted Cruz was and is loathed by his Congressional colleagues for his constant grand-standing and stunts on the Senate floor, much of which seems to have been done simply to build his reputation as "tough" or something - almost like he was planning to run for President all along. Thus the party's Old Boy Club had to back Cruz - a man they hated - because they hated Trump even more!
What's really telling is how Cruz was talking in the later days of the primary campaign - he actually called Trump voters "low information" and later said of Trump (after Trump had won a few important states in the primaries) that it was "time for the clowns and dancing bears" to clear out of the circus. Up until that first vote, it was possible to shrug Trump off as a demagogue who people considered entertaining, but not a serious option for President. After it, he was a real threat - because he'd received the actual votes of the people. And yet, right up to the last days of the election campaign, Cruz - and the old-guard party who'd swallowed their disgust to back him - consistently insulted the very voters they needed to back them up. They seemingly had no cognizance of a democratic system being one where the voters choice is the final arbiter of power. This is always the ultimate failure - for an excellent example, compare the backlash from Hillary's "Deplorables" comment to the similar backlash Romney received when he issued a similar insult to the other side's voters. In both cases they were talking about people who weren't going to vote for them anyway, to their own supporters - but it still impacted them negatively, because it's never a good idea to insult voters. People that would've stayed home on election day will go out and vote for your opponent just because you called them names - and they resent it.
The Republican party hasn't been representative of most Republicans for a while now, as you point out - and on top of that, they've insulted voters who think they ought to be. Even more interesting is how well Bernie Sanders did - a Ralph Nader tier candidate came within ten points of toppling and Old Party powerhouse. Like you say, she's much like a more liberal pre-Reagan Republican in many aspects, and her party knows it, which is why they flocked to the much more liberal Bernie.
I personally doubt it. Elon Musk dreams big, and more power to him - but rationality rarely impinges on his lofty aims. Private sector is currently doing (with SpaceX) what it does best - improve efficiency and reduce costs. NASA, on the other hand, blows scads of money on breaking new ground to do things with no practical value - such as landing a two-ton rover on Mars to return amazing amounts of new science. NASA should be tasked with breaking new ground (including on Mars) and private sector should be encouraged to do what they do best; reduce the costs of tilling the already-broken earth.
OK, a couple of things. The site you linked to hasn't published all Hitler's speeches. Just the ones they thought reflected best on him. If you want to know what Hitler was saying about the Jews, I refer you to Mein Kampf.
No need to go that far - you can find speeches online he was giving to the Nazi Party in the 1920s that are nothing but "Jews are evil, destroy the Jews" from start to finish. (I was going to use this in my prior post but the comment I was replying to specified "1930s.") And they're not short speeches, either. I haven't seen anyone turn up any long, angry, hate-filled rants from Trump's past demonizing Muslims.
he did not specifically call for internment of Muslims (as far as I can see) but invited comparisons by suggesting his policies were akin to FDR's policies on Japanese Americans.
One should recall that the internment of Japanese-Americans was upheld by the Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision that has yet to be revisited or rebuked by the Court. One should also remember the historical context - popular support for internment was very low until after the Niihau incident was made public; in which a Japanese aviator who crash-landed after taking damage attacking Pearl Harbor received materiel aid and support from a local Japanese-American. At that point the possibility of fifth-column traitorous activities by Japanese-Americans was no longer academic - it'd actually happened.
(1) Warrantless searches targetted at Muslims
(2) Requiring Muslims to register in a national database
(3) Requiring Muslims to carry special identification papers.
Trump recently spoke in favor of "search and frisk," which are warrantless searches directed at everyone- to say nothing of the searches you undergo at the airport, which are most certainly undertaken without a warrant. Focusing very limited TSA manpower on the demographics from which the overwhelming majority of terrorists come - namely, young males from a short list of Arabian nations - has been characterized as horribly racist, which is why the TSA performs "random" searches as likely to target an old lady with knitting needles in her bag as anyone else. As for "national databases" and "special identification papers," that's nothing that any legal immigrant doesn't have to do anyway: green cards, and the national database that keeps track of the information. The state of US Immigration system is terrible for everyone, even legal immigrants (our work visa system is a lovely mess, for example) and Trump's made that fact a core campaign issue. The ideal solution is a proper reform and revamp of the immigration system, but that could take years - and at the moment, the dangers are pressing and dire. Trying to refocus resources or priorities within the current framework would probably do more harm than good; inconveniencing innocent American citizens (who are Muslim) while doing nothing to improve national security.
Suggesting that this is tantamount to demanding Muslims sew yellow crescents to their clothing is nothing short of slander, and I see no reason to countenance it as anything but.
Not quite. Concerted training efforts started quite early: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
What absolute bulltshit. Trump is saying what his base wants. Almost every one of his "opinions" is the polar opposite of what it was 10 years ago.
Funny coincidence - I remember when conservatives were the ones seeing wicked Russians behind every lamp and underneath every sofa cushion, and Democrats were the ones tut-tutting and saying "Red scare!" Oh, how times have changed.
The bill includes specific milestones for an unmanned exploration mission by 2018 and a crewed exploration mission by 2021.
So in other words its a ton of hot air and complete horseshit. At best it's a way to secure funding for NASA under a label that'll be hard to attack - HAY U GUIES LETS GO TO MARS!!1! is the latest pop-sci meme after all. The Lunar missions only happened because of the most intense military/industrial standoff in human history - and even then there were Presidential advisers doing their damnedest to kill the Moon missions. The political will to undertake the Apollo program was purely the result of the Cold War standoff - where two superpowers were locked in an existential deathmatch - and the specific technology to deliver astronauts could also deliver thermonuclear warheads to enemy territory.
The likes of Apollo will never happen again. If you weren't convinced that "25 years to Mars" is a horseshit timeframe, its appearance in a Congressional budget bill should remove all doubt.
Trump is Bush with more bankruptcies, less military service, and no discernible interest in anything about the job other than power.
Obama's administration carried on most of the Bush-era policies that Democrats loathed the most - and Hillary's being billed by everyone, even Obama, as Obama's Third Term.
Have fun with that!
If you don't see some of the parallels in the wording of antisemitic propaganda of the 30's and anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim propaganda of the last year, you are not paying attention or refusing to listen.
Or maybe I just know how to read. Hitler's actual campaign speeches of the 30s barely mention Jews at all - and when he does, it's (1) in passing and (2) always in the same breath as "Soviets" to link them to a tangible, plausible threat looming on the border. There's parallels here - "Make Germany Great Again," etc. - and they're common to any populist candidate billing himself as a Change candidate. It's almost like you're full of shit.
And it's not all "Nazi" in origin - many Trump supporters, including several IN CONGRESS, have LITERALLY DEFENDED the idea of bringing back US Internment camps.
Got some evidence to back up those wanton slanders?
Or maybe Syria is the "proxy war" you speak of?
It already is. Russia's intervening directly to support their man - Assad's regime - and America is providing direct and indirect support to the rebellion against Assad, with money, training and airstrikes (though to a lesser extent than Russia.) This follows the pattern of the proxy wars that marked the "Cold" War to a tee. The poster you're responding to wasn't implying that America started this conflict, but that getting involved with it would move it from "Russian intervention" to actual "proxy war" status. The "alt-right" (such as Trump) are wary of said proxy wars, and for good reason - they tend to favor the nation that takes a hands-off approach and punishes the nation that gets directly involved (see America in Vietnam and Russia in Afghanistan.)
To be perfectly clear, I'm a "neocon" in the Bush mold - I'm 100% set against renewed Russian aggression and I think we need to be ready, willing and able to defeat them in open war, which is looking more and more liable to break out due to their actions, not ours. But the alt-right isn't wrong when they suggest that we should avoid these proxy wars if possible. Putin wants a return to the Cold War status quo - and anything that Putin wants is usually bad for the West by definition.
we'll be more anti-Americans next time you finance armed "rebels" or start a war.
Note how the man from South America - where covert American meddling has had serious consequences in the past - has a vastly different worldview than Europeans, who desperately want America to meddle more because Russia's pawing at the door again. The "alt-right" movement views foreign interventionism with great skepticism due to a keen knowledge of the former, but most media coverage only seems concerned with the European view - and the European complaints.
And yet the alt-right candidate is the one labeled as a "white supremacist-" by the Brazilian making this observation! Riddle me THAT one, folks.
Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be yours too." -- Dave Haynie