CalvinBall wrote:girl i know used to intern for sessions. worked under miller. miller may have taken her on a date after she stopped working there.

thats all i got.

Woody wrote:Good read here from Yale historian. Well mostly it's for Soren. But yeah also everyone else

http://international.sueddeutsche.de/po ... d-american

Last week Trump called those who take part in demonstrations “thugs” and “paid protestors”. This doesn’t show respect for First Amendment right, it sounds more like Putin.

That is exactly what the Russian leadership does. The idea is to marginalize the people who actually represent the core values of the Republic. The point is to bring down the Republic. You can disagree with them. but once you say they have no right to protest or start lying about them, you are in effect saying: „We want a regime where this is not possible anymore.“ When the president says that it means that the executive branch is engaged in regime change towards an authoritarian regime without the rule of law. You are getting people used to this transition, you are inviting them into the process by asking them to have contempt for their fellow citizens who are defending the Republic. You are also seducing people into a world of permanent internet lying and way from their own experiences with other people. Getting out to protest, this is something real and I would say something patriotic. Part of the new authoritarianism is to get people to prefer fiction and inaction to reality and action. People sit in their chairs, read the tweet and repeat the clichés: “yes, they are thugs” instead of “it is normal to get out in the streets for what you believe.” He is trying to teach people a new behavior: You just sit right where you are, read what I say and nod your head. That is the psychology of regime change.

Woody wrote:Good read here from Yale historian. Well mostly it's for Soren. But yeah also everyone else

http://international.sueddeutsche.de/po ... d-american

Last week Trump called those who take part in demonstrations “thugs” and “paid protestors”. This doesn’t show respect for First Amendment right, it sounds more like Putin.

That is exactly what the Russian leadership does. The idea is to marginalize the people who actually represent the core values of the Republic. The point is to bring down the Republic. You can disagree with them. but once you say they have no right to protest or start lying about them, you are in effect saying: „We want a regime where this is not possible anymore.“ When the president says that it means that the executive branch is engaged in regime change towards an authoritarian regime without the rule of law. You are getting people used to this transition, you are inviting them into the process by asking them to have contempt for their fellow citizens who are defending the Republic. You are also seducing people into a world of permanent internet lying and way from their own experiences with other people. Getting out to protest, this is something real and I would say something patriotic. Part of the new authoritarianism is to get people to prefer fiction and inaction to reality and action. People sit in their chairs, read the tweet and repeat the clichés: “yes, they are thugs” instead of “it is normal to get out in the streets for what you believe.” He is trying to teach people a new behavior: You just sit right where you are, read what I say and nod your head. That is the psychology of regime change.

drsmooth wrote:drumpf on with Trudeau

he's such a miserable creep. We have a president who cannot reada paragraph written in the english language from start to finish

Soren wrote:

Woody wrote:Good read here from Yale historian. Well mostly it's for Soren. But yeah also everyone else

http://international.sueddeutsche.de/po ... d-american

Last week Trump called those who take part in demonstrations “thugs” and “paid protestors”. This doesn’t show respect for First Amendment right, it sounds more like Putin.

That is exactly what the Russian leadership does. The idea is to marginalize the people who actually represent the core values of the Republic. The point is to bring down the Republic. You can disagree with them. but once you say they have no right to protest or start lying about them, you are in effect saying: „We want a regime where this is not possible anymore.“ When the president says that it means that the executive branch is engaged in regime change towards an authoritarian regime without the rule of law. You are getting people used to this transition, you are inviting them into the process by asking them to have contempt for their fellow citizens who are defending the Republic. You are also seducing people into a world of permanent internet lying and way from their own experiences with other people. Getting out to protest, this is something real and I would say something patriotic. Part of the new authoritarianism is to get people to prefer fiction and inaction to reality and action. People sit in their chairs, read the tweet and repeat the clichés: “yes, they are thugs” instead of “it is normal to get out in the streets for what you believe.” He is trying to teach people a new behavior: You just sit right where you are, read what I say and nod your head. That is the psychology of regime change.

The odds I get in a fist fight with a Trump supporter go up every day

CalvinBall wrote:girl i know used to intern for sessions. worked under miller. miller may have taken her on a date after she stopped working there.

thats all i got.

Woody wrote:

Soren wrote:

Woody wrote:Good read here from Yale historian. Well mostly it's for Soren. But yeah also everyone else

http://international.sueddeutsche.de/po ... d-american

Last week Trump called those who take part in demonstrations “thugs” and “paid protestors”. This doesn’t show respect for First Amendment right, it sounds more like Putin.

That is exactly what the Russian leadership does. The idea is to marginalize the people who actually represent the core values of the Republic. The point is to bring down the Republic. You can disagree with them. but once you say they have no right to protest or start lying about them, you are in effect saying: „We want a regime where this is not possible anymore.“ When the president says that it means that the executive branch is engaged in regime change towards an authoritarian regime without the rule of law. You are getting people used to this transition, you are inviting them into the process by asking them to have contempt for their fellow citizens who are defending the Republic. You are also seducing people into a world of permanent internet lying and way from their own experiences with other people. Getting out to protest, this is something real and I would say something patriotic. Part of the new authoritarianism is to get people to prefer fiction and inaction to reality and action. People sit in their chairs, read the tweet and repeat the clichés: “yes, they are thugs” instead of “it is normal to get out in the streets for what you believe.” He is trying to teach people a new behavior: You just sit right where you are, read what I say and nod your head. That is the psychology of regime change.

The odds I get in a fist fight with a Trump supporter go up every day

sorry cuck, i think you mean LOSE a fist fight to a Patriot

JUburton wrote:if stephen miller can go on dates there is HOPE FOR ME YET THANKS CAL

JFLNYC wrote:If there's any good news from the first few weeks it's that, despite all the bombast from Trump and his henchmen, he has been almost totally ineffective on his signature issues. Nothing happening on The Wall (Congress is ignoring him), repeal and replace Obamacare (stuck in the inconvenient reality that it can't be done without millions losing their insurance), banning of immigrants (smacked down by the courts), promises about moving US embassy to Jerusalem and supporting more Israeli settlements (flip flop), major infrastructure spending (see Congress' reaction to first point), etc.

He may have made more noise in 3 weeks than other Presidents have in 4 years, but his actual achievements so far have been seriously lacking.

jerseyhoya wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:If there's any good news from the first few weeks it's that, despite all the bombast from Trump and his henchmen, he has been almost totally ineffective on his signature issues. Nothing happening on The Wall (Congress is ignoring him), repeal and replace Obamacare (stuck in the inconvenient reality that it can't be done without millions losing their insurance), banning of immigrants (smacked down by the courts), promises about moving US embassy to Jerusalem and supporting more Israeli settlements (flip flop), major infrastructure spending (see Congress' reaction to first point), etc.

He may have made more noise in 3 weeks than other Presidents have in 4 years, but his actual achievements so far have been seriously lacking.

A wise man wrote about this at length last week.

Werthless wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:If there's any good news from the first few weeks it's that, despite all the bombast from Trump and his henchmen, he has been almost totally ineffective on his signature issues. Nothing happening on The Wall (Congress is ignoring him), repeal and replace Obamacare (stuck in the inconvenient reality that it can't be done without millions losing their insurance), banning of immigrants (smacked down by the courts), promises about moving US embassy to Jerusalem and supporting more Israeli settlements (flip flop), major infrastructure spending (see Congress' reaction to first point), etc.

He may have made more noise in 3 weeks than other Presidents have in 4 years, but his actual achievements so far have been seriously lacking.

A wise man wrote about this at length last week.

“Brevity is the soul of wit.”
― William Shakespeare, Hamlet

jerseyhoya wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:If there's any good news from the first few weeks it's that, despite all the bombast from Trump and his henchmen, he has been almost totally ineffective on his signature issues. Nothing happening on The Wall (Congress is ignoring him), repeal and replace Obamacare (stuck in the inconvenient reality that it can't be done without millions losing their insurance), banning of immigrants (smacked down by the courts), promises about moving US embassy to Jerusalem and supporting more Israeli settlements (flip flop), major infrastructure spending (see Congress' reaction to first point), etc.

He may have made more noise in 3 weeks than other Presidents have in 4 years, but his actual achievements so far have been seriously lacking.

A wise man wrote about this at length last week.

JFLNYC wrote:If there's any good news from the first few weeks it's that, despite all the bombast from Trump and his henchmen, he has been almost totally ineffective on his signature issues. Nothing happening on The Wall (Congress is ignoring him), repeal and replace Obamacare (stuck in the inconvenient reality that it can't be done without millions losing their insurance), banning of immigrants (smacked down by the courts), promises about moving US embassy to Jerusalem and supporting more Israeli settlements (flip flop), major infrastructure spending (see Congress' reaction to first point), etc.

He may have made more noise in 3 weeks than other Presidents have in 4 years, but his actual achievements so far have been seriously lacking.

jerseyhoya wrote:A wise man wrote about this at length last week.