Trump's Team

Seattle Husker said:
...Pudzer also is getting his from the sexism side due to Carl Jr.'s ad campaign with sexy models in bikinis eating burgers. Hi response was something like "nothing is more American a woman in a bikini" certainly is a warning to the PC crowd.
Click to expand...


If we are gonna go burger exec, Jack would have been more fun

6dc5bc559648ff35d62b22955788469e.jpg
 
Rudy Guiliani removed himself from consideration for a cabinet position last month according to the Trump transition team in an announcement today. The New Yorker is reporting he was told recently he was no longer being considered for Sec. of State.
 
texas_ex2000 said:
I think term limits are good for the House.
Click to expand...

Term limits aren't the answer. You'd get rid of some crooks (who would cash in as lobbyists) and replace them with more crooks, because the problem is that some constituencies don't mind electing crooks. Term limits won't change that, and they will arbitrarily force out qualified and conscientious members.

If you think California is a model of responsible governance, then pass term limits.

texas_ex2000 said:
Term limits for the upper house/Senate, imho, defeat the whole point of a bicameral legislature.
Click to expand...

That was lost when we foolishly adopted the 17th Amendment. Other than prohibition, that was the dumbest constitutional amendment we've ever passed (though the federal income tax amendment is pretty close).
 
Mr. Deez said:
Term limits aren't the answer. You'd get rid of some crooks (who would cash in as lobbyists) and replace them with more crooks, because the problem is that some constituencies don't mind electing crooks. Term limits won't change that, and they will arbitrarily force out qualified and conscientious members.

If you think California is a model of responsible governance, then pass term limits.
Click to expand...
I get what you are saying. There really is no right or wrong answer. Shelia Jackson Lee (sorry for being unfair Deez) is just my prototype for this amendment. Is there a chance she's just replaced with someone worse? I guess...statistically that's not likely though. She's like three standard deviations bad.
 
Last edited:
texas_ex2000 said:
I get what you are saying. There really is no right or wrong answer. Shelia Jackson Lee (sorry for being unfair Deez) is just my prototype for this amendment. Is there a chance she's just replaced with someone worse? I guess...statistically that's not likely though. She's like three standard deviations bad.
Click to expand...

I don't like Sheila Jackson-Lee, but I wouldn't amend the Constitution to get rid of her. Like most Congressional Black Caucus members, she shoots off her mouth a lot and says a lot of inflammatory and stupid things usually against cops, white people, and Jews. But is she really the problem? I don't think so. She says those things, because they play well in her district. If she got term limited out, you may not get somebody who's worse, but you'd get somebody who's comparable.
 
NJlonghorn said:
This is neither parody, nor satire, nor fake news. It is an opinion piece, with which you vehemently disagree. I disagree with it too, btw -- but that doesn't make it fake.
Click to expand...

Reads like a statement of fact.
For example, would it be fact or opinion if SeatleHorn wrote "NJHorn is into little boys?"
 
I have come to be solidly in favor of term limits. Yes it would limit the Sheila Jacksons (cannot believe she gets reelected) but most importantly, to me, it provides a built in limit to the power obsession which I believe overcomes even the most honorable intentions of the freshmen congressmen (sorry congress 'persons' to any offended). It is not an absolute answer, it won't convert the currupt, but it's a d*** good way to start cleaning house. Just my opinion.
 
Trump picks Exxon CEO as Secretary of State (Link).

Finally, as NBC also adds, Tillerson's deputy secretary of state for day-to-day management of the department will be former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton.​

So Trump selects a businessman with great relations with Putin and will work alongside a neocon warmonger ideologue who wants more sanctions and to expand NATO. Should be a great working environment. Does anyone remember Buddy Ryan throwing a punch at the offensive coordinator years ago? These two should get along just dandy.
 
Musburger1 said:
Trump picks Exxon CEO as Secretary of State (Link).

Finally, as NBC also adds, Tillerson's deputy secretary of state for day-to-day management of the department will be former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton.​

So Trump selects a businessman with great relations with Putin and will work alongside a neocon warmonger ideologue who wants more sanctions and to expand NATO. Should be a great working environment. Does anyone remember Buddy Ryan throwing a punch at the offensive coordinator years ago? These two should get along just dandy.
Click to expand...
Huh? Hillary was the neocon warmonger. Never mind you are referring to Bolton.
 
Hillary is a neo-liberal warmonger. However she is a globalist. She will not protect US borders in terms of immigration policy. She really is an internationalist in that she doesn't put a lot of emphasis on US sovereignty.

Bolton is a neo-con warmonger. He differs from Hillary in that he is very conservative in terms of US sovereignty, does not hold international institutions such as the UN and World Court in high regard as does Clinton. Bolton also is stronger against unchecked immigration wheres the neo-liberals basically want to let everybody in.

But both Hillary and Bolton advocate US intervention. The neo-cons have used nation building (spreading democracy) as the rationale whereas the neo-liberals are more inclined to use humanitarianism (we will bomb the hell out of your country, or use proxy armies to invade and to set you free if color revolutions fail) as the rationale for intervention.

Obviously, some of Bolton's views contradict the views expressed by Trump even as they are on the same page in other areas. But Bolton is extremely hostile toward bot Russia and China, whereas Trump does not appear to be. I don't understand Trump's rationale for having Bolton on the team unless his role is to target Iran which Trump is also targeting.
 
NJlonghorn said:
This is neither parody, nor satire, nor fake news. It is an opinion piece, with which you vehemently disagree. I disagree with it too, btw -- but that doesn't make it fake.
Click to expand...
I have no opinion on this except that the tweet "really into hot women in bikinis" is just bad copy and rhetoric.

That's like saying golf fans are really into beautiful weather at the Masters. What man isn't really into hot women in bikinis? Does liking hot women in bikinis all of a sudden make you a mysogynist?

If Slate wanted to write an opinion, they can argue he objectifies women. Maybe all this fake news and poor journalism today is simply liberals failing English and writing class. Or more likely, their teachers diluted their education by passing them when they should have given them an F, and then these students somehow get a job at Slate where other young adults read their articles and think that's good writing and rhetoric.
 
Joe Fan said:
Reads like a statement of fact.
For example, would it be fact or opinion if SeatleHorn wrote "NJHorn is into little boys?"
Click to expand...

The article doesn't merely say that Pudzer is a misogynist. Instead, it describes things that Pudzer has done, and uses those things as support for an opinion that Pudzer is a misogynist. I disagree with the opinion, but I don't think it s made up out of thin air.

As to me, what's wrong with being into little boys?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top