45th President of the United States, Donald Trump (Vol. 7)
Discussion
I've not heard anyone mention the Tilbrook case, summarised here: https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/why-mlud-we-le...
Is it a real proposition? I heard on the grapevine that Boris is exploring it as an option.
Is it a real proposition? I heard on the grapevine that Boris is exploring it as an option.
fatbutt said:
I've not heard anyone mention the Tilbrook case, summarised here: https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/why-mlud-we-le...
Is it a real proposition? I heard on the grapevine that Boris is exploring it as an option.
I am sure POTUS is watching it as closely as Fox & Friends. Is it a real proposition? I heard on the grapevine that Boris is exploring it as an option.
Wrong thread?
fatbutt said:
I've not heard anyone mention the Tilbrook case, summarised here: https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/why-mlud-we-le...
Is it a real proposition? I heard on the grapevine that Boris is exploring it as an option.
What's that got to do with Trump? Apart from the fact the article is written by a white nationalist, that is.Is it a real proposition? I heard on the grapevine that Boris is exploring it as an option.
rscott said:
fatbutt said:
I've not heard anyone mention the Tilbrook case, summarised here: https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/why-mlud-we-le...
Is it a real proposition? I heard on the grapevine that Boris is exploring it as an option.
What's that got to do with Trump? Apart from the fact the article is written by a white nationalist, that is.Is it a real proposition? I heard on the grapevine that Boris is exploring it as an option.
Tartan Pixie said:
andy_s said:
Lots of good stuff...
I wouldn't quite throw the baby out with the bath water though - the underlying meta for all human experience is neuroscience, but it is either manifested via agents of ideology/division/economics etc or uses those agents to its own advantage in the political sphere - in my opinion.
In the past the agents were all human though whereas today we are faced with algorithms as often as people. To take a simple example done for amusement this is a Daily Mail article generator: https://daily-fail-generator.herokuapp.com/I wouldn't quite throw the baby out with the bath water though - the underlying meta for all human experience is neuroscience, but it is either manifested via agents of ideology/division/economics etc or uses those agents to its own advantage in the political sphere - in my opinion.
'Yea, they have all one breath, so that a man has no preeminence above a beast, for all is vanity'...and Facebook!
desolate said:
It's Friday night, so naturally I sat in my vest and pants trawling for negative things to say about Trump.
Easy example of how to control a population: Get them to say no to everything.EG: An architect and a builder have been contracted to renovate a house. The architect only ever states what they don't want, "I won't knock down that wall, I won't add plumbing to turn that downstairs room in to a bathroom... I won't... I won't... I won't.
The builder on the other hand knows that if he doesn't get the house built then he won't get paid, so if the architect won't make any decisions then the builder will make those decisions and get on with it. Customer wants a downstairs bathroom, well I've got these pink bathroom tiles printed with disney characters that I can't sell so I'll just use those... Customer wanted this wall removed but a cat flap will do, I mean giving the cat some room is probably why they wanted the wall removed in the first place.
In a UK scenario the architects of brexit are the voters who by only expressing negatives, I won't... I won't... I won't, have given up all their decision making potential to the builders of brexit, who don't give a f
k about you. We're not even weeks in to the Johnson premiership yet I see that 4,000 EU workers in the NHS have been replaced by folk from the Indian subcontinent, I mean who knew that giving all decision making potential to the owners of capital would result in them importing cheap labour regardless of what you'd voted for? Sovereignty? It's American standards or European standards. If all you are going to do is say no to everything then there is no choice but servitude.
The stupid thing is that there is a positive case for brexit and if I had to build it then I would advocate a focus on Canada, Nigeria, Botswana and New Zealand with an an honorary mention for Lesotho and a turbo boost for India, I mean they have grown quite a bit so a leg up does seem appropriate, they should be in the top tier
I would build a consensus that consciously ignores America in favour of commonwealth giants. Yes we would have to accept black people to our country as a price but if these people aren't us then we have nothing. Get manufacturing in to India, aggressively take from China to give to Nigeria, push all prosperity we can towards India and trust them to be a giant. This is a vision, this is a thing to say yes to.
By contrast the Americans are not remotely relevant to brexit unless you're in to the submissive side of BDSM. Don't get me wrong here because I do like a good yank but the idea of handing all our sovereignty to America does not appeal, yet by focusing on being against things the voter architects of brexit have given away all their decision making power to the submissive builders who would sell us all out for a taste of the American seed.
I have no ideological preference for brexit or not but I do have a very strong preference towards competence. The only way to create such competence is for the voter architects to be for something instead of against something.
Apologies to the thread for bringing up the B word but this argument's been going round my head so I'm blurting it out in the hope that seeing it written down will help me understand where I've understood or erred.
To reference back to desolate's original comment I would ask desolate whether you understand that by defining yourself entirely by 'I don't want' makes you more vulnerable than a teenager on Epstein's bed. Power only comes from stating that 'I wish to do XYZ' and then carrying it out.
To you and all not trump supporters I would ask, do you understand that by defining yourself entirely in the negative you have spread your ideological a
hole open wide and announced, "Come on in because I'm your bh."?andy_s said:
Good stuff and yes, a big shift - probably bigger than I've accounted for - and makes sense from your network pov. Tech is so 'unintended consequences evolving faster than us' - who are adapted to yesterday [literally].
'Yea, they have all one breath, so that a man has no preeminence above a beast, for all is vanity'...and Facebook!
Without the fear of the Lord, man is but vanity; set that aside, and judges will not use their power well.'Yea, they have all one breath, so that a man has no preeminence above a beast, for all is vanity'...and Facebook!
Blackpuddin said:
Put very simply, a truth app. I've been wondering about that on PH threads for quite a while but have always been told it will never work because (in the minds of objectors) the 'information pollution' will simply move up the chain to those responsible for creating and running the app.
Bingo!Tartan Pixie said:
Easy example of how to control a population: Get them to say no to everything.
EG: An architect and a builder have been contracted to renovate a house. The architect only ever states what they don't want, "I won't knock down that wall, I won't add plumbing to turn that downstairs room in to a bathroom... I won't... I won't... I won't.
The builder on the other hand knows that if he doesn't get the house built then he won't get paid, so if the architect won't make any decisions then the builder will make those decisions and get on with it. Customer wants a downstairs bathroom, well I've got these pink bathroom tiles printed with disney characters that I can't sell so I'll just use those... Customer wanted this wall removed but a cat flap will do, I mean giving the cat some room is probably why they wanted the wall removed in the first place.
In a UK scenario the architects of brexit are the voters who by only expressing negatives, I won't... I won't... I won't, have given up all their decision making potential to the builders of brexit, who don't give a fk about you. We're not even weeks in to the Johnson premiership yet I see that 4,000 EU workers in the NHS have been replaced by folk from the Indian subcontinent, I mean who knew that giving all decision making potential to the owners of capital would result in them importing cheap labour regardless of what you'd voted for?
Sovereignty? It's American standards or European standards. If all you are going to do is say no to everything then there is no choice but servitude.
The stupid thing is that there is a positive case for brexit and if I had to build it then I would advocate a focus on Canada, Nigeria, Botswana and New Zealand with an an honorary mention for Lesotho and a turbo boost for India, I mean they have grown quite a bit so a leg up does seem appropriate, they should be in the top tier
I would build a consensus that consciously ignores America in favour of commonwealth giants. Yes we would have to accept black people to our country as a price but if these people aren't us then we have nothing. Get manufacturing in to India, aggressively take from China to give to Nigeria, push all prosperity we can towards India and trust them to be a giant. This is a vision, this is a thing to say yes to.
By contrast the Americans are not remotely relevant to brexit unless you're in to the submissive side of BDSM. Don't get me wrong here because I do like a good yank but the idea of handing all our sovereignty to America does not appeal, yet by focusing on being against things the voter architects of brexit have given away all their decision making power to the submissive builders who would sell us all out for a taste of the American seed.
I have no ideological preference for brexit or not but I do have a very strong preference towards competence. The only way to create such competence is for the voter architects to be for something instead of against something.
Apologies to the thread for bringing up the B word but this argument's been going round my head so I'm blurting it out in the hope that seeing it written down will help me understand where I've understood or erred.
To reference back to desolate's original comment I would ask desolate whether you understand that by defining yourself entirely by 'I don't want' makes you more vulnerable than a teenager on Epstein's bed. Power only comes from stating that 'I wish to do XYZ' and then carrying it out.
To you and all not trump supporters I would ask, do you understand that by defining yourself entirely in the negative you have spread your ideological ahole open wide and announced, "Come on in because I'm your bh."?
Congratulations my friend. EG: An architect and a builder have been contracted to renovate a house. The architect only ever states what they don't want, "I won't knock down that wall, I won't add plumbing to turn that downstairs room in to a bathroom... I won't... I won't... I won't.
The builder on the other hand knows that if he doesn't get the house built then he won't get paid, so if the architect won't make any decisions then the builder will make those decisions and get on with it. Customer wants a downstairs bathroom, well I've got these pink bathroom tiles printed with disney characters that I can't sell so I'll just use those... Customer wanted this wall removed but a cat flap will do, I mean giving the cat some room is probably why they wanted the wall removed in the first place.
In a UK scenario the architects of brexit are the voters who by only expressing negatives, I won't... I won't... I won't, have given up all their decision making potential to the builders of brexit, who don't give a f
k about you. We're not even weeks in to the Johnson premiership yet I see that 4,000 EU workers in the NHS have been replaced by folk from the Indian subcontinent, I mean who knew that giving all decision making potential to the owners of capital would result in them importing cheap labour regardless of what you'd voted for? Sovereignty? It's American standards or European standards. If all you are going to do is say no to everything then there is no choice but servitude.
The stupid thing is that there is a positive case for brexit and if I had to build it then I would advocate a focus on Canada, Nigeria, Botswana and New Zealand with an an honorary mention for Lesotho and a turbo boost for India, I mean they have grown quite a bit so a leg up does seem appropriate, they should be in the top tier
I would build a consensus that consciously ignores America in favour of commonwealth giants. Yes we would have to accept black people to our country as a price but if these people aren't us then we have nothing. Get manufacturing in to India, aggressively take from China to give to Nigeria, push all prosperity we can towards India and trust them to be a giant. This is a vision, this is a thing to say yes to.
By contrast the Americans are not remotely relevant to brexit unless you're in to the submissive side of BDSM. Don't get me wrong here because I do like a good yank but the idea of handing all our sovereignty to America does not appeal, yet by focusing on being against things the voter architects of brexit have given away all their decision making power to the submissive builders who would sell us all out for a taste of the American seed.
I have no ideological preference for brexit or not but I do have a very strong preference towards competence. The only way to create such competence is for the voter architects to be for something instead of against something.
Apologies to the thread for bringing up the B word but this argument's been going round my head so I'm blurting it out in the hope that seeing it written down will help me understand where I've understood or erred.
To reference back to desolate's original comment I would ask desolate whether you understand that by defining yourself entirely by 'I don't want' makes you more vulnerable than a teenager on Epstein's bed. Power only comes from stating that 'I wish to do XYZ' and then carrying it out.
To you and all not trump supporters I would ask, do you understand that by defining yourself entirely in the negative you have spread your ideological a
hole open wide and announced, "Come on in because I'm your bh."?You win the ‘random screed’ prize of the evening
Tartan Pixie said:
To you and all not trump supporters I would ask, do you understand that by defining yourself entirely in the negative you have spread your ideological ahole open wide and announced, "Come on in because I'm your bh."?
If you are referring to me, I suggest you reconsider. hole open wide and announced, "Come on in because I'm your bh."?And also, f
k off.desolate said:
Tartan Pixie said:
To you and all not trump supporters I would ask, do you understand that by defining yourself entirely in the negative you have spread your ideological ahole open wide and announced, "Come on in because I'm your bh."?
If you are referring to me, I suggest you reconsider. hole open wide and announced, "Come on in because I'm your bh."?And also, f
k off.Your only contribution to this thread is negative. That makes you a pawn, a play thing for anybody who has an actual vision that they wish to implement.
Tell us your positive vision for the future or accept that you are an ideological cum dumpster.
<><><>
Edit for clarity: I took the phrase "It's Friday night, so naturally I sat in my vest and pants trawling for negative things to say about Trump" as a low intelligence insult thrown at myself, Byker and other regular contributors.
If I misread then apologies but otherwise the point stands. People who are for something are very welcome.
Edited by Tartan Pixie on Saturday 17th August 02:00
Tartan Pixie said:
Yes I am talking about you and your answer is exactly what I refer to.
Your only contribution to this thread is negative. That makes you a pawn, a play thing for anybody who has an actual vision that they wish to implement.
Tell us your positive vision for the future or accept that you are an ideological cum dumpster.
You are making a fool of yourself.Your only contribution to this thread is negative. That makes you a pawn, a play thing for anybody who has an actual vision that they wish to implement.
Tell us your positive vision for the future or accept that you are an ideological cum dumpster.
When you sober up hopefully you'll think again.
But as it stands - f
k off dhead.
Tartan Pixie said:
Edit for clarity: I took the phrase "It's Friday night, so naturally I sat in my vest and pants trawling for negative things to say about Trump" as a low intelligence insult thrown at myself, Byker and other regular contributors.
Is there any positive news then? With trump on his golfing holiday, punctuated with his rally's, it looks like Steven Miller is off and running with his policies with trumps blessing.The Trump administration on Friday took one of its most aggressive steps yet to legalize anti-transgender discrimination by telling the Supreme Court that federal law allows firing workers solely for being transgender, arguing a Michigan funeral home could fire a transgender woman because she wanted to wear women’s clothing on the job.
Although the administration was expected to take the stance — and had previously said firing workers on the basis of gender identity is legal under federal law — the latest court filing asks the nation’s top court to establish federal case law in a potentially sweeping setback for LGBTQ rights nationwide.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/dominicholden...
We probably won't hear from trump on that, but I bet we will hear about the voting to remove trump's Hollywood walk of fame star
https://abcnews.go.com/US/city-passes-proposal-rem...
https://abcnews.go.com/US/city-passes-proposal-rem...
Donald J. Trump
Verified account @realDonaldTrump
Biggest crowd EVER, according to Arena people. Thousands outside trying to get in. Place was packed! Radical Left Dems & their Partner, LameStream Media, saying Arena empty. Check out pictures. Fake News. The Enemy of the People!
trumps new rhetoric is to call the media 'the enemy of the people'. Just last year a maga bomber sent devices based on trumps rhetoric...
You don't have to see trump but if you don't go you don't get paid...
https://www.post-gazette.com/business/powersource/...
https://www.post-gazette.com/business/powersource/...
Federal Election Commission Chair Ellen Weintraub was on Maddow yesterday complaining that Republicans on the Federal Election Commission are blocking her from formally inquiring with the Department of Justice about the status of the case with Maria Butina. As part of her cooperation deal she's supposed to be providing evidence on her NRA activities and contacts, yet the DOJ under Barr aren't progressing this...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff