We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thread

Locked
User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Forty Two » Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:18 pm

Sean Hayden wrote:Are you seriously suggesting that Americans aren't concerned about toilet issues? It's currently a big deal in Texas. :sigh:

Also, didn't he say he was taking the advice of experts? :hehe: :lol: :buwahahaha:
The impetus for the trans ban in the military is military readiness. It's obvious that to accommodate trans people involves time and modifications to procedures and policies, and issues involving how the troops interact.

Like it or not, military guys are a rough bunch. Guys in general, if folks heard how they talk -- among themselves, can be really rough talking, and rough behaving. In my teen and college years, cursing at each other, namecalling and even fighting, was very common among male friends. Women don't behave that way, and they don't understand it, so when you put them in the group, and men act like men, it becomes harassment, and the men must change. Same thing with trans - show up to a barracks of young soldiers, and they'll treat women and trans like they treat each other - rudely, with rough humor and tough interaction. So, bringing in sensitive groups, where calling them Nancy - or saying they're from Oklahoma and the only thing they have there are steers and queers - stuff like that, isn't going to go over well, and it becomes harassment. Now we have a lack of equality sold as equality. Men can talk to each other that way, but once you factor in sensitive groups, everyone has to change.

Here's some examples - http://www.knowable.com/a/25-soldiers-r ... them-again and https://undertheradar.military.com/2015 ... geant-say/

“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Forty Two » Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:28 pm

Scot Dutchy wrote:Dont go to Belgium then.
While I don't doubt there are places with only unisex bathrooms there, there are also men's rooms and ladies rooms in most establishments. It's not another planet. Let's stop pretending that Benelux is some sort of mythical enlightened Shangri La, and the rest of the world seems strange and incomprehensible to the Benelux sophisticates.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Scot Dutchy
Posts: 19000
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:07 pm
About me: Dijkbeschermer
Location: 's-Gravenhage, Nederland
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Scot Dutchy » Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:35 pm

Who is claiming it to be a Shangri La? We just have less problems with our bodies unlike Anglo-Saxons seem to have.
"Wat is het een gezellig boel hier".

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Forty Two » Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:45 pm

Scot Dutchy wrote:Who is claiming it to be a Shangri La? We just have less problems with our bodies unlike Anglo-Saxons seem to have.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 60745
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by pErvinalia » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:08 pm

Animavore wrote:I'll leave you with a funny for today.

Image
:lol:
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Hermit » Fri Jul 28, 2017 2:19 pm

DRSB wrote:
Why the Trump dynasty will last sixteen years

In Washington DC, post-electoral stress disorder has generated a hysteria still amply manifest after eight months: the “Russian candidate” impeachment campaign implies that any contact with any Russian by anyone with any connection to Donald Trump was ipso facto treasonous. The quality press is doing its valiant best to pursue this story, but it is a bit much to claim “collusion” – a secret conspiracy – given that, during the election campaign, Trump very publicly called on the Russians to hack and leak Hillary Clinton’s missing emails. And it did not seem especially surprising when the latest target, Donald Trump Jr, promptly released all his emails to and from the Russians to confirm that he did indeed try to help his dad by finding dirt on the other guy. As for the other impeachment track underway, triggered by the ex-FBI director James Comey’s accusation of attempted obstruction of justice, Comey’s failure to accuse Trump until he was himself fired will make it easier for the Republicans who control the House to dismiss an otherwise plausible accusation as a naive error.
...
In the dramatic crescendo of the 2016 elections that gave Trump to the United States and the world, very possibly for sixteen years (the President’s re-election committee is already hard at work, while his daughter Ivanka Trump is duly apprenticed in the White House that, according to my sources, she means to occupy as America’s first female President), none of the countless campaign reporters and commentators is on record as having noticed the car “affordability” statistics distributed in June 2016 via http://www.thecarconnection.com. Derived from very reliable Federal Reserve data, they depicted the awful predicament of almost half of all American households. Had journalists studied the numbers and pondered even briefly their implications, they could have determined a priori that only two candidates could win the Presidential election – Sanders and Trump – because none of the others even recognized that there was problem if median American households had been impoverished to the point that they could no longer afford a new car. This itself was remarkable because four wheels and an engine might as well be grafted to Homo americanus, who rarely lives within walking distance of his or her job, or even a proper food shop, who rarely has access to useful public transport, and for whom a recalcitrant ignition or anything else that prevents driving often means the loss of a day’s earnings, as well as possibly crippling repair costs. But even that greatly understates the role of automobiles in the lives of the many Americans who do not have private jets and do not live in New York City or San Francisco, for whom a car provides not only truly essential transport, but also the intensely reassuring sense of freedom depicted in countless writings and films, which reflect the hard realities of labour-mobility imperatives even more than the romance of the open road.
https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/publ ... d-_-FBPAGE
Fascinating.

The author forgot to mention that 1. as far as the popular vote goes, Trump lost the election by almost three million votes to begin with and 2. voters tend to become increasingly dissatisfied with incumbent governments over time.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Forty Two » Fri Jul 28, 2017 2:46 pm

Sure, but the popular vote would not likely come out the same, were the rules different. If the US moved to a pure popular vote nationally, instead of having the States send electors to elect the President in accordance with the will of each state, then there would be different kinds of political campaigns. Trump lost the popular vote, but won the election under the electoral rules that apply.

Now, if the rules were different, and Trump was able to get votes that mattered to him from LA County in California, and Manhattan in New York, then he would have had an advertising and campaign blitz in those populous areas, trying to siphon votes out of there. The reason he didn't is because those are lost causes for him, and if he's already lost those electoral votes, then he's not going to dump money and time and resources into those lost causes. He's going to look to where the game is close, and work hard to tip the balance in the places where the game is close.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 6236
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:02 pm

So, how are things going at the Department of Energy, I hear nobody asking. If you're interested at all, Michael Lewis spent a lot of time and energy finding out.

"Why the Scariest Nuclear Threat May be Coming From Inside the White House"


Donald Trump’s secretary of energy, Rick Perry, once campaigned to abolish the $30 billion agency that he now runs, which oversees everything from our nuclear arsenal to the electrical grid. The department’s budget is now on the chopping block. But does anyone in the White House really understand what the Department of Energy actually does? And what a horrible risk it would be to ignore its extraordinary, life-or-death responsibilities?

...

There is a telling example of this Trumpian impulse—the desire not to know—in a small D.O.E. program that goes by its acronym, ARPA-E. ARPA-E was conceived during the George W. Bush administration as an energy equivalent of DARPA—the Defense Department’s research-grant program that had funded the creation of G.P.S. and the Internet, among other things. Even in the D.O.E. budget the program was trivial—$300 million a year. It made small grants to researchers who had scientifically plausible, wildly creative ideas that might change the world. If you thought you could make water from sunlight, or genetically engineer some bug so that it eats electrons and craps oil, or create a building material that becomes cooler on the inside as it grows hotter on the outside, ARPA-E was your place. More to the point: your only place. At any given time in America there are lots of seriously smart people with bold ideas that might change life as we know it—it may be the most delightful distinguishing feature of our society. The idea behind ARPA-E was to find the best of these ideas that the free market had declined to finance and make sure they were given a chance. Competition for the grants has been fierce: only two out of every hundred are approved. The people who do the approving come from the energy industry and academia. They do brief tours of duty in government, then return to Intel and Harvard.

The man who ran the place when it opened was Arun Majumdar. He grew up in India, finished at the top of his engineering class, moved to the United States, and became a world-class materials scientist. He now teaches at Stanford University but could walk into any university in America and get a job. Invited to run ARPA-E, he took a leave from teaching, moved to Washington, D.C., and went to work for the D.O.E. “This country embraced me as one of her sons,” he said. “So when someone is calling me to serve, it is hard to say no.” His only demand was that he be allowed to set up the program in a small office down the street from the Department of Energy building. “The feng shui of D.O.E. is really bad,” he explained.

Right away he faced the hostility of right-wing think tanks. The Heritage Foundation even created its own budget plan back in 2011 that eliminated ARPA-E. American politics was alien to the Indian immigrant; he couldn’t fathom the tribal warfare. “Democrat, Republican—what is this?,” as he put it. “Also, why don’t people vote? In India people stand in line in 40 degrees Celsius to vote.” He phoned up the guys who had written the Heritage budget and invited them over to see what they’d be destroying. They invited him to lunch. “They were very gracious,” said Majumdar, “but they didn’t know anything. They were not scientists in any sense. They were ideologues. Their point was: the market should take care of everything. I said, ‘I can tell you that the market does not go into the lab and work on something that might or might not work.’ ”

Present at lunch was a woman who, Majumdar learned, helped to pay the bills at the Heritage Foundation. After he’d explained ARPA-E—and some of the life-changing ideas that the free market had failed to fund in their infancy—she perked up and said, “Are you guys like DARPA?” Yes, he said. “Well, I’m a big fan of DARPA,” she said. It turned out her son had fought in Iraq. His life was saved by a Kevlar vest. The early research to create the Kevlar vest was done by DARPA.

The guys at Heritage declined the invitation to actually visit the D.O.E. and see what ARPA-E was up to. But in their next faux budget they restored the funding for ARPA-E. (The Heritage Foundation did not respond to questions about its relationship with the D.O.E.)

As I drove out of Hanford the Trump administration unveiled its budget for the Department of Energy. ARPA-E had since won the praise of business leaders from Bill Gates to Lee Scott, the former C.E.O. of Walmart, to Fred Smith, the Republican founder of FedEx, who has said that “pound for pound, dollar for dollar, activity for activity, it’s hard to find a more effective thing government has done than ARPA-E.” Trump’s budget eliminates ARPA-E altogether. It also eliminates the spectacularly successful $70 billion loan program. It cuts funding to the national labs in a way that implies the laying off of 6,000 of their people. It eliminates all research on climate change. It halves the funding for work to secure the electrical grid from attack or natural disaster. “All the risks are science-based,” said John MacWilliams when he saw the budget. “You can’t gut the science. If you do, you are hurting the country. If you gut the core competency of the D.O.E., you gut the country.”

But you can. Indeed, if you are seeking to preserve a certain worldview, it actually helps to gut science. Trump’s budget, like the social forces behind it, is powered by a perverse desire—to remain ignorant. Trump didn’t invent this desire. He is just its ultimate expression.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Hermit » Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:48 pm

Forty Two wrote:Sure, but the popular vote would not likely come out the same, were the rules different.
Your hypothetical contains too many ifs. I could use one or two of them to create a scenario in which Clinton would have won by a landslide. And then we could just keep arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 51272
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: 15-32-25
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Tero » Fri Jul 28, 2017 5:17 pm

Trump Administration Worried President Burning Through Minority Scapegoats At Unsustainable Rate

WASHINGTON—Citing today’s announcement that transgender individuals would be banned from serving in any capacity in the United States armed forces, numerous sources within the Trump administration expressed a deep sense of concern Wednesday that the president was burning through minority scapegoats at an unsustainable rate. “I was hoping we’d be able to keep the transgender community in our back pockets for at least another year, but we’re barely six months into the first term and the president goes and wastes that card on military overspending and unpreparedness—we just can’t keep up this kind of pace,” Chief of Staff Reince Priebus reportedly told top advisors in a closed-door meeting this morning, sharing his concern that President Trump had already used the nation’s Hispanics and Muslims as targets of blame for all of the country’s criminal problems and terrorist threats, respectively. “We’ve got to make it through three and a half more years, and there are only so many minorities we can pin the country’s issues on. At this rate, we’ll be holding gay parents responsible for our cultural decline by October and targeting Jews for economic stagnation by the end of this year. Who the hell are we going to hit after that when we get into another crisis? Christ, this is bad.” Priebus reportedly took some solace, however, upon being reminded that the nation’s black community was always available as a suitable fallback scapegoat for any conceivable social or political ill whenever the Trump administration needed one.

User avatar
Rum
Absent Minded Processor
Posts: 37285
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Rum » Fri Jul 28, 2017 5:23 pm

There's a constant update of the Trumper's approval rating here. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/tr ... l-ratings/

It isn't looking too rosy for him.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Forty Two » Fri Jul 28, 2017 5:35 pm

Hermit wrote:
Forty Two wrote:Sure, but the popular vote would not likely come out the same, were the rules different.
Your hypothetical contains too many ifs. I could use one or two of them to create a scenario in which Clinton would have won by a landslide. And then we could just keep arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
The assertion that Hillary won the popular vote by 3,000,000 votes is true in the context of a federal system where basically States vote for the President. So, a candidate does not campaign in states that are known quantities - i.e., where they are solidly Blue or solidly Red. That would not be the case if the election were purely popular votes because they would go anywhere the polling showed they had voters to get.

My hypothetical doesn't contain many ifs. I'm not saying Trump would have won the popular vote. I'm saying that if you change the rules of the game, the players play the game differently, and therefore the outcome would be expected to be somewhat different. I admit that it might be that Hillary would actually win bigger than by 3,000,000 votes. Or, Trump might catch up. I don't know. I am confident, however, that the outcome would be at variance to the electoral college system in some way, so it can't simply be taken for granted that Hillary's margin for victory would have been the same.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 6236
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Fri Jul 28, 2017 6:20 pm

A little history lesson from that guy who's happy to do the fandango:

"Anthony Scaramucci compares Obamacare repeal to ending slavery"
On Wednesday afternoon, BBC reporter Emily Maitlin spoke with White House director of communications Anthony Scaramucci to discuss, among other things, cheeseburgers and slavery.

The slavery discussion started when Scaramucci was asked if Trump “feels that he has been ‘front stabbed’ by some of the Senators who voted down the repeal of Obamacare.”

“If you read ‘Team of Rivals,'” Scaramucci replied, “it took Lincoln three or four times to get what he wanted from the Senate and House of Representatives — which was the full abolition of slavery.”
Here I was thinking that Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation all on his own, then in December, 1864 asked Congress to write and pass the Thirteenth Amendment as the war was ending, which they promptly did in January, 1865. Huh. Learn something new every day.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by Forty Two » Fri Jul 28, 2017 6:36 pm

The Emancipation Proclamation was not the full abolition of slavery. It ended slavery only in states in rebellion. There were slaveholding union states. Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland and Missouri never declared secession, so the emancipation proclamation did not effect them.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 6236
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thr

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Fri Jul 28, 2017 7:07 pm

Forty Two wrote:The Emancipation Proclamation was not the full abolition of slavery. It ended slavery only in states in rebellion. There were slaveholding union states. Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland and Missouri never declared secession, so the emancipation proclamation did not effect them.
Oh, OK, thanks for that history lesson. Maybe you can tell me about the 3 or 4 times that Lincoln tried to get the 13th Amendment through Congress before he finally succeeded.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests