Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread

05-01-2019 , 02:52 PM
Tooth Sayer has chosen not to receive private messages or may not be allowed to receive private messages. Therefore you may not send your message to him/her.


is this due to the ban?
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-01-2019 , 03:27 PM
not afaik
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-01-2019 , 07:59 PM
Quote:
Bob Kerrey rescinded his acceptance of Creighton University's invitation to be its 2019 commencement speaker in a letter stating that he does not want that moment of celebration to be "interrupted with politics."

Kerrey's withdrawal came after the executive director of the Nebraska Republican Party objected to his appearance at Creighton because of his pro-choice voting record as a former member of the U.S. Senate.
Left wing political correctness gone mad!

https://journalstar.com/news/state-a...a914018ed.html

Last edited by Huehuecoyotl; 05-01-2019 at 08:06 PM.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-01-2019 , 10:25 PM
Quote:
In 2015, McHugh says she witnessed an encounter between Bannon and the white nationalist activist Devin Saucier at Breitbart’s party following CPAC that has stuck in her memory as a sign of just how permissive Bannon was willing to be. At the time, she was good friends with Saucier, who*has edited for*Taylor’s publication American Renaissance under a pen name, and in 2017 wrote a pseudonymous article titled “Why I Am (Among Other Things) A White Nationalist.” Taylor calls himself a “white advocate” and has written that “When blacks are left entirely to their own devices, Western civilization — any kind of civilization — disappears." McHugh brought Saucier along to the party.

As McHugh recalls it, Bannon looked at Saucier, sizing him up. He asked, “Who do you work for? Peter?” referring to Brimelow. Saucier, smiling, said no. Bannon said, “Far to the right, right?” Saucier responded in the affirmative. “AmRen? American Renaissance?” Saucier said, “Yes, sir,” and Bannon put his hand on his shoulder and said: “Well, we’re all fighting the same fight.”
A quip about Steve Bannon in a story about one woman's journey through the alt right movement
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...y/katie-mchugh

Last edited by Huehuecoyotl; 05-01-2019 at 10:32 PM.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-01-2019 , 10:31 PM
Quote:
In 2015, McHugh says she witnessed an encounter between Bannon and the white nationalist activist Devin Saucier at Breitbart’s party following CPAC that has stuck in her memory as a sign of just how permissive Bannon was willing to be. At the time, she was good friends with Saucier, who*has edited for*Taylor’s publication American Renaissance under a pen name, and in 2017 wrote a pseudonymous article titled “Why I Am (Among Other Things) A White Nationalist.” Taylor calls himself a “white advocate” and has written that “When blacks are left entirely to their own devices, Western civilization — any kind of civilization — disappears." McHugh brought Saucier along to the party.

As McHugh recalls it, Bannon looked at Saucier, sizing him up. He asked, “Who do you work for? Peter?” referring to Brimelow. Saucier, smiling, said no. Bannon said, “Far to the right, right?” Saucier responded in the affirmative. “AmRen? American Renaissance?” Saucier said, “Yes, sir,” and Bannon put his hand on his shoulder and said: “Well, we’re all fighting the same fight.”
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...y/katie-mchugh
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-02-2019 , 08:52 PM
Need to bring back Trollys Troll of the Week

The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-02-2019 , 09:38 PM
What % of homeless people are too mentally ill to ever hold a job or manage their own finances? Just by walking around LA and SF I'd guess 75%.

The only ones who didn't fit were the street kids in the Haight who by their own admission would rather be homeless in SF than in some apartment in Cleveland.

But man everyone else - what is the solution? I could see aggressive programs for the first 25% - who are just in bad straits due to drugs or w/e. Then maybe free housing for the next 25% or so.

But the bottom 50% (give or take by whatever my estimate is off) - the people who would have been in sanitariums in the 50s - what is the answer for them?

I read an article about some apartment building in DC that opened up a ton of spots for the homeless. And of course, the seriously mentally ill people caused a lot of problems.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-02-2019 , 10:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
What % of homeless people are too mentally ill to ever hold a job or manage their own finances? Just by walking around LA and SF I'd guess 75%.

The only ones who didn't fit were the street kids in the Haight who by their own admission would rather be homeless in SF than in some apartment in Cleveland.

But man everyone else - what is the solution? I could see aggressive programs for the first 25% - who are just in bad straits due to drugs or w/e. Then maybe free housing for the next 25% or so.

But the bottom 50% (give or take by whatever my estimate is off) - the people who would have been in sanitariums in the 50s - what is the answer for them?

I read an article about some apartment building in DC that opened up a ton of spots for the homeless. And of course, the seriously mentally ill people caused a lot of problems.
More humane sanitariums?
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-02-2019 , 10:35 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ion-stock.html

Cliff notes: Chelsea Clinton makes over $300k per year and has over $6M in stocks for apparently doing very little on a couple boards.

It is interesting how welfare for poors is such a hot button issue, where the truth is our society is structured so the wealthy get much more free ****, and it isn't even close. And it seems corporate boards is a real hidden source of this. It seems every major company has several board members from rich, connected families who don't do much more than show up to collect their checks and stock options. It is funny, we are so critical of CEO salaries, but CEOs are actually working. There is a whole class of people in these big companies on boards getting handsomely rewarded for doing nothing. Sounds like welfare to me.

Thinking about this reminds me of the first season of Billions where the hedge fund manager guy (I dont remember any of their names) gets revenge on the other guy by getting his mistress kicked off a board.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-02-2019 , 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999
More humane sanitariums?
I think that was the plan for 100 years until it was finally deemed impossible.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-02-2019 , 10:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ion-stock.html

Cliff notes: Chelsea Clinton makes over $300k per year and has over $6M in stocks for apparently doing very little on a couple boards.

It is interesting how welfare for poors is such a hot button issue, where the truth is our society is structured so the wealthy get much more free ****, and it isn't even close. And it seems corporate boards is a real hidden source of this. It seems every major company has several board members from rich, connected families who don't do much more than show up to collect their checks and stock options. It is funny, we are so critical of CEO salaries, but CEOs are actually working. There is a whole class of people in these big companies on boards getting handsomely rewarded for doing nothing. Sounds like welfare to me.

Thinking about this reminds me of the first season of Billions where the hedge fund manager guy (I dont remember any of their names) gets revenge on the other guy by getting his mistress kicked off a board.
Boards are 100% bull****.

I know people on them who say basically if you ever rock the boat, you get kicked off and never get any more lucrative board gigs. Until people start going to jail - the incentives are 100% to align with management. It's just about connections - which obviously she has.

Although I guess it's a bulwark against a literally insane CEO. So it has one possible albeit extremely rare purpose.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-04-2019 , 06:38 PM
Property taxes were going up in Texas so the Texas legislature proposed increasing the sales tax to replace some of property tax. Of course the end result is taxes are going up for the poorer but going down for the richer




I guess the good news is that even Republicans are willing to tax the middle class, it's just to give those with more income more wealth instead of Medicare 4 All, etc.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-06-2019 , 09:36 AM
lol Nevada

Quote:
But there’s no question that Lincoln’s decision to sign the Nevada legislation was a gross departure from ordinary practice. As Nolan McCarty, Keith Poole, and Howard Rosenthal explain in a 1999 paper laying out much of the history of statehood admissions in the United States, Congress typically would not consider a territory’s petition for full statehood until that territory reached a certain population threshold — “the norm for eligibility was sufficient population to reach the current quota for a House seat.”

In 1864, when Nevada became a state, that quota was about 125,000 residents. Nevada, with a population of less than 7,000 in the most recent census, did not even come close to crossing that threshold. Indeed, as Charles Stewart and Barry Weingast note in a seminal paper laying out the history of statehood admissions in the later half of the 1800s, “had Nevada waited until the standard population criterion had been met . . . it would not have entered the Union until 1970.”
https://thinkprogress.org/how-abraha...mpression=true
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-06-2019 , 10:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl
So you're telling me that Lincoln out maneuvers the racist Confederate Democrat politicians until 1893... Almost 30 years after his assassination?

He was a master politician.

Quote:
It’s hard to blame President Lincoln for signing the 1864 legislation turning the barren Nevada desert into a state. America, after all, was caught in a civil war. If unionists lost their majority in the Senate, the new majority could force a surrender. War often requires leaders to take actions that would be unconscionable during peacetime. Inter arma enim silent lēgēs.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-06-2019 , 11:41 AM
That's how good he was
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-08-2019 , 09:42 AM
Any book recommendations for a centrist scumbag to broaden their political horizons
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-08-2019 , 10:12 AM
I really like Ulysses.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-08-2019 , 10:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by coordi
Any book recommendations for a centrist scumbag to broaden their political horizons
Banned on Amazon or not banned on Amazon? Probably not banned to start...
The Power Elite by C.W. Mills is old but a classic
Who Rules America
Both of those are tame enough to be taught in college sociology classes.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-08-2019 , 10:47 AM
I don't read a lot of political books, but here's a random selection of books I've read in the last couple years that I thought were generally worthwhile.

Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy (Joseph Stiglitz 2016)

Stubborn Attachments: A Vision for a Society of Free, Prosperous, and Responsible Individuals (Tyler Cowen 2018)

The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America (Richard Rothstein 2017)

Labor and Legality: An Ethnography of a Mexican Immigrant Network (Ruth Gomberg-Muñoz 2010)
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-08-2019 , 11:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
Banned on Amazon or not banned on Amazon? Probably not banned to start...
The Power Elite by C.W. Mills is old but a classic
Who Rules America
Both of those are tame enough to be taught in college sociology classes.

I'd be interested in one or two off the banned list as well, for sure
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-08-2019 , 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by coordi
I'd be interested in one or two off the banned list as well, for sure
I've been told to keep the spiciness of my posting to a minimum and if you actually self-identify as a centrist then those books that I recommended would be good because they attempt to blow up the whole two-party system, left/right paradigm, democracy is real way of thinking.

As far as conspiracy stuff goes--youtube is the place for that. But I can't recommend anybody there either. That was just meant as a tounge-in-cheek joke at me being an unabashed conspiracist.

Last edited by Luckbox Inc; 05-08-2019 at 12:22 PM.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-08-2019 , 01:49 PM
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-08-2019 , 05:47 PM
lol
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote
05-08-2019 , 11:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsb235
According to the WashPost, Trump is now against any intervention in Venezuela, which has basically kneecapped Bolton.

The government made a bunch of arrests today, which included prominent opposition leader Zambrano, without any pushback from the US. Rubio hasn't tweeted about it, so I am guessing Trump undercut him as well.

Obviously the recent phone call between Trump and Putin had nothing to do with our sudden complete reversal.

Trump's foreign policy is basically a clown show wrapped in a sh*t show being pulled around by a dog and pony.
This was a post made in the Venezuela thread. Is the bolded actually true? If So what exactly is so disastrous about it? Genuine question.
The (ostensibly) Low Content Thread Quote

      
m