Has anyone else read the Comey opening statement? It's pretty pretty weird. Really hard to understand what motivates the guy. On the one hand he wants to be seen as a boy scout and everyone talks about how honorable he is. On the other hand, he seems to have pretty loose lips with regards to his conversations with Trump which is inconsistent with his self-professed concern regarding leaks.

There are a number of weird details in the opening statement that makes me wonder who proofread this thing and how carefully it was put together. There is at least one sentence that makes no sense ("During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on President Elect Trump's reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the Intelligence chiefs won't say if Trump asked them to downplay Russia probe question, I offered that assurance") and for some reason he says Trump told him he had no involvement with "hookers" in Russia. I note that Comey didn't put quotes around the word, so he wasn't quoting Trump directly there. I would have gone with "prostitutes" if I were testifying before the senate. Just sayin'

Overall it's a fascinating read and feels more like fan fiction than a documentary of interactions between officials at the highest level of our federal government but that's Trumpland for ya. It does make me think that Trump fan fiction will be a huge genre in a few years.

sycasey;842844985 said:

---

Define "go against their religious belief." I don't believe any Democratic politician has suggested that Christian ministers should be forced to administer gay weddings. Just that people who want to buy a cake should be sold a cake. To me, that latter example is one of right-wing conservatives taking the extra step and saying that action violates their religious freedom because of what that cake might later be USED for. I don't think that's an actual encroachment on their freedoms.

---

If the discussion is that everyone should be sold a cake for just general purposes, I agree. But if someone is asked to bake a cake for a gay wedding and bring the cake to the proceeding, plan the wedding cake with the couple and, thereby, participate in the wedding, they should not be required to do so. Seems like we are in agreement.

sycasey;842844985 said:

---

So let's talk about what "far left" actually means. Everything advocated by Bernie Sanders would be solidly middle-of-the-road in most European countries. None of it is particularly radical on a worldwide scale. So when Democrats and progressives talk about moving the party in that direction, we see it as moving the country out of the right-leaning "norm" it's been in since Reagan. Obama moved the needle a bit, but still nowhere near where most other first-world countries are.

To me, that is still not anywhere close to dangerously illiberal politics. Trump has talked about the press being an "enemy of the people." That is an actual threat..

---

First of all, I am not viewing the European society as model, liberal society. You may, but your argument that Bernie is middle of the road for the French is not winning me over. And let's not confuse liberalism (in the classical sense of personal freedom) with progressive. And I am not even talking about economic issues or even Bernie Sanders as a candidate. I actually like Bernie Sanders but despise the social justice warriors who think identity politics is great, microagression is real and should be regulated, and that government should control and monitor proper behavior down to the weeds. So, when I write about HRC pandering to the Sanders crowd, I mean what I wrote...BLM group, the fascist element of ignorant but know-it-all social justice warriors in college campuses, idiots who thought Trump and HRC were equally bad and didn't vote (now they just need to STFU about Trump because they did nothing when they could have - even Republicans like me could see the difference between Trump and HRC)..

---

sycasey;842844985 said:

---

Trump is in charge. Progressives are attempting to build a movement. There is no equivalence here, in terms of what I am worried about.

---

Of course you are not worried. I am sure many less central Republicans were not worried about the Tea Party and are not worried about the Tea Party. But I am sure Democrats thought the Tea Party element was repulsive. Well, that is how we Republicans view the progressives. Even moderates one like me (and in any sane world, I would be deemed a moderate Republican).

GB54;842845037 said:

---

This board is nothing but moderate. After all, you and Dajo voted for the same corporate Democrat. I have to say the lamenting of the lost moderates amuses me. We've had nothing but bi-partisan moderation until 2008 and it's hollowed out the country in lock step to corporate masters

---

I think you are missing the point. I have nothing against Dajo's alleged political views (his admitted behavior betrays that he really doesn't believe what he promotes). I actually respect and dialogue with those on this board with far more liberal views. I just think his empty talk and trolling is moronic, and his lack of people skills and self-awareness is pathetic.

Unit2Sucks;842844979 said:

---

That's exactly what I'm doing. I noticed you didn't question Odonto when he quoted Reagan. Did you think that moved this conversation forward? How did your link to a youtube video move the conversation forward?

I used the fracking discussion to twist the knife on a previous discussion with Cal88 who incorrectly stated that I "have no leg to stand on when [I'm] reducing climate skeptics to tobacco industry hacks." In fact, I have at least one leg to stand on because one of the more prominent and well-funded "think tanks" engages in climate change denial as well as having claimed smoking isn't unhealthy and that it is a myth that fracking negatively impacts our environment. That sure seems like relevant information to the discussion. As someone who has claimed in this very thread that fracking has environmental impacts, I'm surprised that you don't find that interesting.

You are more than welcome to address any facts or opinions I've posted, but I don't see how you have standing to call me out for not moving the conversation forward especially so soon after you posted what is basically a youtube attack video on a stereotypical group of partisans that doesn't seem to apply to anyone in this discussion.

---

I think the link did provide basis for further discussion. Why wouldn't sharing a viewpoint (instead of twisting words or jumping to ridiculously incorrect conclusion due to faulty reading) move the conversation forward?

Why are you again projecting what I meant by posting the video? Did you even ask before you went on your rant? You and I discussed this before, but I find it highly offensive your behavior of projecting my intent or twisting my words. Can you please stop so we don't make this personal?

The link was posted not to you or in response to you. It was not an attack but a viewpoint response to another more conservative poster to show why people like me are turned off by the progressive movement. You can disagree with his take and let us know how you disagree as Sycasey has done. Instead, you just jump to conclusion and categorize statements not even addressed to you as an attack.

You know what? You and I have been down this road before. Wittgenstein would have a field day on how we use the same words but continue to talk about two different things. Let's just stop. This is like a broken record with us. Sorry I bothered you with my original response to your post. I won't make that mistake again.

calbear93;842845064 said:

---

If the discussion is that everyone should be sold a cake for just general purposes, I agree. But if someone is asked to bake a cake for a gay wedding and bring the cake to the proceeding, plan the wedding cake with the couple and, thereby, participate in the wedding, they should not be required to do so. Seems like we are in agreement.

---

Cool, we are in agreement. Is the latter scenario something being pushed by Democratic politicians? I can't say I've seen anything like that gaining traction.

That is what I mean by the freedom-encroaching elements of the far left not having much influence with the major party they would ostensibly be aligned with.

calbear93;842845064 said:

---

First of all, I am not viewing the European society as model, liberal society. You may, but your argument that Bernie is middle of the road for the French is not winning me over.

---

I'm not saying you have to like the way European countries are run, only that there is nothing especially radical about these ideas. France, Germany, the U.K., etc., are functioning democracies, not authoritarian states. That tells me Bernie's ideas are not incompatible with a free society.

calbear93;842845064 said:

---

And let's not confuse liberalism (in the classical sense of personal freedom) with progressive. And I am not even talking about economic issues or even Bernie Sanders as a candidate. I actually like Bernie Sanders but despise the social justice warriors who think identity politics is great, microagression is real and should be regulated, and that government should control and monitor proper behavior down to the weeds. So, when I write about HRC pandering to the Sanders crowd, I mean what I wrote...BLM group, the fascist element of ignorant but know-it-all social justice warriors in college campuses, idiots who thought Trump and HRC were equally bad and didn't vote (now they just need to STFU about Trump because they did nothing when they could have - even Republicans like me could see the difference between Trump and HRC)..

---

So you used "Sanders crowd" as a catch-all for "whatever I don't like about the Left." Sanders voters, BLM, "Antifa" groups, college movements, etc. . . . these groups are not aligned with one another. Sanders didn't do particularly well with African-American voters in the primary, so lumping BLM in with him seems especially strange. Again, this is what I mean. A lot of what you are talking about are fringe groups who don't have a ton of pull within the party itself. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but it's not an imminent danger.

I mean . . . "government should control and monitor proper behavior down to the weeds?" Who is advocating for this? Which Democrats? Which groups? You have a habit of throwing out these accusations of a nebulous "left wing" but lack specific examples. I can't respond to this stuff without knowing exactly what you are talking about.

calbear93;842845064 said:

---

Of course you are not worried. I am sure many less central Republicans were not worried about the Tea Party and are not worried about the Tea Party. But I am sure Democrats thought the Tea Party element was repulsive. Well, that is how we Republicans view the progressives. Even moderates one like me (and in any sane world, I would be deemed a moderate Republican).

---

Some things about the Tea Party movement I found repulsive (particularly Birtherism, which seems motivated by little more than racism to me), but at root I don't necessarily think it's bad to have a libertarian-type element with a voice in politics. I largely disagree with their platform and think most of the Tea Party types in Congress (roughly defined as those in the self-described Freedom Caucus) would take "small government" too far, to the point where it was no longer functional, but their presence is not fundamentally a threat to democratic norms.

Trump is. He's shown no knowledge or respect for American institutions or any concern for the country above himself. His primary concern seems to be salving his own ego and/or lining his own pockets. The rest of the Republicans are only a threat insofar as they continue to enable him.

calbear93;842845064 said:

---

If the discussion is that everyone should be sold a cake for just general purposes, I agree. But if someone is asked to bake a cake for a gay wedding and bring the cake to the proceeding, plan the wedding cake with the couple and, thereby, participate in the wedding, they should not be required to do so. Seems like we are in agreement.

.

---

My take is that were I a baker, I would be more than happy to bake, decorate, deliver the cake to the recipients desires. What I abhor is any government intervention in such and telling me I must do so. Never.

At the same time I find Tea Party conservatives as guilty of the gridlock and polarization in our society as I do progressives.

Moderation in all things, with fiscal pragmatism.

OdontoBear66;842845101 said:

---

My take is that were I a baker, I would be more than happy to bake, decorate, deliver the cake to the recipients desires. What I abhor is any government intervention in such and telling me I must do so. Never.

---

What about when this happens on a large scale? For example, all of the bakers in a particular town deciding independently that they won't sell to black people?

At some point these decisions become oppression of some other person's freedom, no?

Right, I'd be happy to serve the colored in my luncheonette but don't want the government telling me to do it

calbear93;842845065 said:

---

I think you are missing the point. I have nothing against Dajo's alleged political views (his admitted behavior betrays that he really doesn't believe what he promotes). I actually respect and dialogue with those on this board with far more liberal views. I just think his empty talk and trolling is moronic, and his lack of people skills and self-awareness is pathetic.

---

Only commenting to say your accusation that I don't believe what I promote is made up garbage. It fits with your approach of making up alternate realities for other liberals (fundamentalists being forced to serve cake at gay weddings, the Sanders crowd oppressing speech, etc.)

On a separate note, it is my view that if you own a business open to the public you should not be allowed to discriminate based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. The government should enforce that so no citizens are treated as second class in the public. I'm amazed that we still have to have this discussion nearly 50 years after MLK was assassinated.

OdontoBear66;842845101 said:

---

Moderation in all things, with fiscal pragmatism.

---

We completely agree

When we bought the house in Louisiana, we looked at close to 50 houses in two separate trips (the first house failed inspection). Our only stipulation that the house could not be in a flood zone. All the houses were in all-white neighborhoods. We were obviously white and we were looking at larger homes (over 2600 SF) and we didn't say a thing about wanting to look only at houses in all-white neighborhoods. That's just the way business was done. In Chula Vista my neighbor is black, as is her neighbor on the other side. Across the street my neighbors are Hispanic. One house in our cul-de-sac of six homes has been empty for four years and another black neighbor moved five years ago and a Korean family lived here for a couple of years. All in all a much more integrated neighborhood than any we saw in Louisiana. The Government isn't going to change behavior in some places, it's just ingrained, part of the landscape.

GB54;842845117 said:

---

Right, I'd be happy to serve the colored in my luncheonette but don't want the government telling me to do it

---

sp4149;842845151 said:

---

When we bought the house in Louisiana, we looked at close to 50 houses in two separate trips (the first house failed inspection). Our only stipulation that the house could not be in a flood zone. All the houses were in all-white neighborhoods. We were obviously white and we were looking at larger homes (over 2600 SF) and we didn't say a thing about wanting to look only at houses in all-white neighborhoods. That's just the way business was done. In Chula Vista my neighbor is black, as is her neighbor on the other side. Across the street my neighbors are Hispanic. One house in our cul-de-sac of six homes has been empty for four years and another black neighbor moved five years ago and a Korean family lived here for a couple of years. All in all a much more integrated neighborhood than any we saw in Louisiana. The Government isn't going to change behavior in some places, it's just ingrained, part of the landscape.

---

Housing is hard to resolve, no doubt. But if you open a store that the public can walk into, the government has every obligation to enforce non-discrimination based on race, religion, gender, and sexual orientation, in my opinion.

There is that tricky little 14th Amendment

sycasey;842845113 said:

---

What about when this happens on a large scale? For example, all of the bakers in a particular town deciding independently that they won't sell to black people?

At some point these decisions become oppression of some other person's freedom, no?

---

Actually, sycasey, you caught me in a bad mistake. I used the word never, and should not have done so. Immediately what comes to mind in the 50s in the Deep South when there was no way that integration was going to be effected by the localities. So, even with my distaste of gov't intervention, I think my use of never was an overstatement. More in the direction of "moderation in all things".

OdontoBear66;842845236 said:

---

Actually, sycasey, you caught me in a bad mistake. I used the word never, and should not have done so. Immediately what comes to mind in the 50s in the Deep South when there was no way that integration was going to be effected by the localities. So, even with my distaste of gov't intervention, I think my use of never was an overstatement. More in the direction of "moderation in all things".

---

Right, and that is where a lot of the disagreement between right and left happens, on where the balance between personal freedom and public interest should be drawn. IMO, the current Republican leadership has leaned so far into "personal freedom" that they are abdicating their responsibility to the public interest (on health care policy in particular). Others may disagree, but I've made my case for it and haven't found anything to sway me otherwise.

OdontoBear66;842845236 said:

---

More in the direction of "moderation in all things".

---

This is a bit of a handwave isn't it? Surely you are not urging moderation in dealing with war crimes. For example, I haven't heard anyone argue that Assad's occasional use of chemical weapons was acceptable because it was in moderation.

In this country we hold certain truths to be self-evident. Nowhere did the framers of the constitution insert the phrase "in moderation".
Sometimes you just need to draw bright lines because you will always have people on both sides of the line and without clarity you promote even more conflict. There are other less ridiculous examples (murder, rape, religious persecution, etc.) but really it comes down to choosing where to draw the line.

Unit2Sucks;842845333 said:

---

This is a bit of a handwave isn't it? Surely you are not urging moderation in dealing with war crimes. For example, I haven't heard anyone argue that Assad's occasional use of chemical weapons was acceptable because it was in moderation.

In this country we hold certain truths to be self-evident. Nowhere did the framers of the constitution insert the phrase "in moderation".
Sometimes you just need to draw bright lines because you will always have people on both sides of the line and without clarity you promote even more conflict. There are other less ridiculous examples (murder, rape, religious persecution, etc.) but really it comes down to choosing where to draw the line.

---

If you've read Odonto over the years you will know that Odonto's position is always moderate. No matter what his position is, it is the moderate position. Therefore, everyone who disagrees with him is immoderate. That should help you better understand his handwave.

Cool. Looks like Theresa May might not get a majority in the UK

GB54;842845397 said:

---

Cool. Looks like Theresa May might not get a majority in the UK

---

Not a great record lately for British PMs deciding when to call elections.

sycasey;842845403 said:

---

Not a great record lately for British PMs deciding when to call elections.

---

There's no more room under that bus

dajo9;842845341 said:

---

If you've read Odonto over the years you will know that Odonto's position is always moderate. No matter what his position is, it is the moderate position. Therefore, everyone who disagrees with him is immoderate. That should help you better understand his handwave.

---

You were doing so well with the first two sentences. You finally got it. Then you blow it all in the third. Old dajo expressing opinions for others again, and again, and again.

GB54;842845405 said:

---

There's no more room under that bus

---

That's why the buses there come with an upper deck, they'll keep her there until there's room below.

The fake Time Magazine covers with the made up cover stories hanging in Trump's golf clubs speak volumes more about the character and/or mental state of our current POTUS than an 800 page biography ever could. In addition to being an example of the type of Orwellian revisionist history perfected by the Soviets, it goes pretty deep into One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest territory, which is disconcerting to say the least.



https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/28/opinion/trump-china-asia-pacific-trade-tpp.html?referer=https://www.google.com/

Cal88;842850202 said:

---

---

Is this like those t-shirts for teams that lost the championship? Will we see kids in Africa carrying these around?

sycasey;842850206 said:

---

Is this like those t-shirts for teams that lost the championship? Will we see kids in Africa carrying these around?

---

Not exactly Trumanesque, but close.

In light of the recent tweet controversy, if I was a foreign power I would troll Trump until he was catatonic and then swiftly follow up with aggressive military moves. One can only hope that Mattis has issued orders to the military not to follow any directives from Trump unless approved by Mattis. The nuclear football they gave Trump is probably made by Wilson.

bearister;842850218 said:

---

The nuclear football they gave Trump is probably made by Wilson.

---

Don't worry, he can't grip it. Small hands.

sycasey;842850206 said:

---

Is this like those t-shirts for teams that lost the championship? Will we see kids in Africa carrying these around?

---

Russian translation would go viral

Cal88;842850202 said:

---

---

The only difference being Hillary did not have a hand in that---unlike the Mad King's Time cover. He has been on the cover of Time 14 times or thereabouts--but all of them were too reality based for him? I wonder if he has any Purple Hearts on the wall? His goofiness is similar to the fake soldier guys.

There is a very clear procedure in the US Constitution for dealing with this Mad King (the 25th Amendment):

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

bearister;842850218 said:

---

In light of the recent tweet controversy, if I was a foreign power I would troll Trump until he was catatonic and then swiftly follow up with aggressive military moves. One can only hope that Mattis has issued orders to the military not to follow any directives from Trump unless approved by Mattis. The nuclear football they gave Trump is probably made by Wilson.

---

Why? He is such an egomaniac that he would betray our secrets to show how much of an insider he is (truly sad that a president feels the need to show to the Russian ambassador that he has access to secrets) or would demonstrate how shrewd he is in negotiation by folding at the first sign of flattery. It would seem like they can get a lot more by playing to his ego.

I am amazed at how resilient our country is. We can have a tacky, ignorant but intellectually lazy, racist, sexist grandfather for our president and things really haven't changed much.

calbear93;842850254 said:

---

I am amazed at how resilient our country is. We can have a tacky, ignorant but intellectually lazy, racist, sexist grandfather for our president and things really haven't changed much.

---

He hasn't been in office very long. Give him time.

sycasey;842850258 said:

---

He hasn't been in office very long. Give him time.

---

He will get significant time.


This is the end, beautiful friend
This is the end, my only friend, the end
Of our elaborate plans, the end
Of everything that stands, the end
No safety or surprise, the end
I'll never look into your eyes, again
-Jim Morrison

calbear93;842850254 said:

---

I am amazed at how resilient our country is. We can have a tacky, ignorant but intellectually lazy, racist, sexist grandfather for our president and things really haven't changed much.

---

There have been years of warning signs about Trump, so still amazed people like Tillerson, Haley, Mattis, and McMaster went to work for him. The Huckabees have really dragged down the GOP and Christianity. Sarah has 3 really little kids and Kelllyanne has 4 young kids. Lots of luck explaining why they went to work for Trump when those kids are young adults. Kasich has teen daughters and he wisely avoided Trump.

BearDevil;842850311 said:

---

There have been years of warning signs about Trump, so still amazed people like Tillerson, Haley, Mattis, and McMaster went to work for him. The Huckabees have really dragged down the GOP and Christianity. Sarah has 3 really little kids and Kelllyanne has 4 young kids. Lots of luck explaining why they went to work for Trump when those kids are young adults. Kasich has teen daughters and he wisely avoided Trump.

---

Nicolle Wallace:
"On her show "Deadline: White House," Wallace said women in the White House needed to join the chorus of criticism. She singled out deputy national security adviser Dina Powell, top Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.

"As a woman who was fortunate enough to work in the White House as a public servant, all the women collecting paychecks from the U.S. taxpayers Dina Powell, Kelly Anne Conway, Elaine Chao, Betsy DeVos you should all go on the record and condemn your boss' comments," Wallace, a frequent Trump critic, said. "And you should work behind the scenes to educate him just how offensive they are."

She finished off her remarks by appealing to maternal instincts.

"And finally, most importantly, as the mother of a son, I ask any woman who's defending these comments how they plan to raise good men if the most powerful man in the world gets away with this," Wallace said. Yahoo News