Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

07-26-2017 , 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inso0
I think the play here is attempting to have some talking heads explode on national television, like a bad sci-fi movie where someone stimulates an android to the point of meltdown.

Will Rachel Maddow survive the opening monologue on her show tonight?

My favorite clip was the dem from CA who says, "We don't care who you love!" in response to the no Trans in the military thing. Even he can't keep all the oppressed minority groups straight, implying that all trans people are gay or some other "not normal" sexual orientation. It's a perfect example of what politics has become on both sides. Gotta stick to the script.

Does anyone have any actual stats on the number of people affected by this decision? Was the military ever really a "safe space" for people with gender dysphoria in the first place? I'd be shocked if it were more than a tenth of a percent of the overall military.

I think Trump had this meeting about the upcoming deadline for modifying military policy to accommodate gender reassignment surgeries, modifications to physical requirements, and policy changes for run of the mill personnel problems related to intolerant behaviors in the barracks, and while nobody was on board with making the changes, nobody actually wanted to be the guy in the room to suggest we just don't do it. Trump was probably bored with the awkward silence and just said, "**** it, I'll ban them. The media loves to hate me anyway, so it's fine" and got up and walked out of the room to find his phone.


Finally, LOL at the "Trump said God!!" people ITT. Atheist zealots are the worst kind of religious zealots from a rhetoric standpoint, AINEC.

What a truly spectacular ****show this has been so far. I can't wait for the 2020 campaign. Trump v. Chelsea Clinton.
Youre the ****ing worst
07-26-2017 , 04:11 PM
I thought the hezbolla thing was pretty funny but its likely intentional because he mentions hezbollah more times in the speech and points to that they are from within the state and that they are a menace to the lebanese people. (They attack israel and israel bombs civilians back) He says this very likely to underline that he doesnt approve of lebanon hosting this militant group. For whoever writes this speech its low hanging fruit to know that they are supported by libanese gouvernment.

Last edited by aflametotheground; 07-26-2017 at 04:41 PM.
07-26-2017 , 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inso0
I think the play here is attempting to have some talking heads explode on national television, like a bad sci-fi movie where someone stimulates an android to the point of meltdown.

Will Rachel Maddow survive the opening monologue on her show tonight?

My favorite clip was the dem from CA who says, "We don't care who you love!" in response to the no Trans in the military thing. Even he can't keep all the oppressed minority groups straight, implying that all trans people are gay or some other "not normal" sexual orientation. It's a perfect example of what politics has become on both sides. Gotta stick to the script.

Does anyone have any actual stats on the number of people affected by this decision? Was the military ever really a "safe space" for people with gender dysphoria in the first place? I'd be shocked if it were more than a tenth of a percent of the overall military.

I think Trump had this meeting about the upcoming deadline for modifying military policy to accommodate gender reassignment surgeries, modifications to physical requirements, and policy changes for run of the mill personnel problems related to intolerant behaviors in the barracks, and while nobody was on board with making the changes, nobody actually wanted to be the guy in the room to suggest we just don't do it. Trump was probably bored with the awkward silence and just said, "**** it, I'll ban them. The media loves to hate me anyway, so it's fine" and got up and walked out of the room to find his phone.


Finally, LOL at the "Trump said God!!" people ITT. Atheist zealots are the worst kind of religious zealots from a rhetoric standpoint, AINEC.

What a truly spectacular ****show this has been so far. I can't wait for the 2020 campaign. Trump v. Chelsea Clinton.
LOL Inso. Discrimination is apparently a-ok provided it's on a really small number of people.

Spoken like a straight white dude from the midwest.
07-26-2017 , 04:12 PM
https://twitter.com/ericgarland/stat...70243037249537

I'm not sure I share his take. Can Tillerson never come back and be a witness, or is he in too deep with Rosneft and Putin?

Although GG State Department.
07-26-2017 , 04:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
A lot of people highlighted his insane Youngstown bit about illegal immigrants committing knife torture, but read the full quote,


while that is both insanely not true and insanely racist, uh, my dude you sort of accidentally told on yourself there with those hypothetical ages.
I watched it live. The way he says "Young... beautiful" is so ****ing lecherous.
07-26-2017 , 04:12 PM
If the money spent on gender surgery is directed to tackling the heel spurs problem preventing so many brave heroes from serving their country then the US military will surely benefit.
07-26-2017 , 04:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirbynator
cause inso probably doesnt even realize hes admitting it in every post.

Other people dont matter if it doesnt affect him, typical.
sad

Last edited by Loki; 07-27-2017 at 07:49 PM. Reason: Removed quoted personal attack
07-26-2017 , 04:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisGunBGud
A government cannot favor any religion. Say we have 10 religions practiced in this country and 8 of them believe and worship God while the other 2 do not. How is his tweet not favoring?

God damn Pats fans.
Responding to all the posts about that tweet... tweet is lol obviously but First Amendment violation it is not. Politicians talk about god ~all the time.
07-26-2017 , 04:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Namath12
How much is the military currently spending on gender reassignment surgeries?
http://www.businessinsider.com/penta...parison-2017-7 8.4 million it seems.
07-26-2017 , 04:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inso0
My favorite clip was the dem from CA who says, "We don't care who you love!" in response to the no Trans in the military thing. Even he can't keep all the oppressed minority groups straight, implying that all trans people are gay or some other "not normal" sexual orientation. It's a perfect example of what politics has become on both sides. Gotta stick to the script.
Did you even watch the short clip?

There aren't many trumpkins here, but they almost always manage to lie, misrepresent facts and attack strawmen, whilst also being the least informed posters.
07-26-2017 , 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Our House
Why don't you deplorables ever talk about the people who get hurt by Trump's BS? Scoring political points? **** you, really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirbynator
cause inso probably doesnt even realize hes admitting it in every post.

Other people dont matter if it doesnt affect him, typical.
No, because I understand that the US Military serves a specific purpose, and fixing society's social hangups isn't it.

I understand and acknowledge that it's ****ty for transgender people to feel like they can't be themselves and have to hide behind a "don't ask don't tell" curtain, but I'm sure we'll come around eventually. 2017 isn't that time, and it's a waste of military time and resources to fight that fact.

Actions have consequences, and you can't ignore those consequences just because you feel like they shouldn't occur. The bottom line is likely that the very tiny number of trans people in the military aren't adding enough value to justify the cost of keeping them. So this happens.

Now, if they can't come up with some actual data to explain the decision and this was just a "**** you" to chicks with dicks, then I'm with you guys. But you aren't asking for data. You're just knee-jerk reacting because this checks a number of boxes on Politically Charged Bingo.

Last edited by Loki; 07-27-2017 at 07:50 PM. Reason: Removed quoted personal attack
07-26-2017 , 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inso0
Actions have consequences, and you can't ignore those consequences just because you feel like they shouldn't occur.
You're probably not the best person to try teaching that lesson to others.

By all means though, keep prattling on about how it's a great and fine idea to throw out 1% of our military personnel over $10 million, because lord knows we can't afford any wasted money from the $600 billion we toss the military every year.
07-26-2017 , 04:26 PM
LOL yeah the **** right. This is def a data based decision. You are profoundly disingenuous.

Last edited by Loki; 07-27-2017 at 07:53 PM.
07-26-2017 , 04:29 PM
If we held a 2+2 Trumper v nonTrumper LSAT competition, what would the average score difference be?
07-26-2017 , 04:30 PM
especially because the data was run *last year* that showed the outlay to be minimal.
07-26-2017 , 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aflametotheground
I thought the hezbolla thing was pretty funny but its likely intentional because he mentions hezbollah more times in the speech and points to that they are from within the state and that they are a menace to the libanese people. (They attack israel and israel bombs civilians back) He says this very likely to underline that he doesnt approve of libanon hosting this militant group. For whoever writes this speech its low hanging fruit to know that they are supported by libanon gouvernment.
Is the implication here that Trump is trying to tie liberals to Lebanon or are you just misspelling it repeatedly?
07-26-2017 , 04:31 PM
The I Don't Even Own a Television podcast has an amazing review of one of Scott Adams's books, some of you guys ITT might enjoy it.
07-26-2017 , 04:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
The I Don't Even Own a Television podcast has an amazing review of one of Scott Adams's books, some of you guys ITT might enjoy it.
07-26-2017 , 04:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShouldI


oh
07-26-2017 , 04:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshfan
Did you even watch the short clip?

There aren't many trumpkins here, but they almost always manage to lie, misrepresent facts and attack strawmen, whilst also being the least informed posters.
No, I got montage'd on the radio and now I feel like a bit of a jerk. Someone was reading tweets and playing soundbytes. I'll leave it up though so 3 years from now someone can use it for a LOL Inso0.

Don't worry though, I'm sure only conservatives take things out of context.
07-26-2017 , 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inso0
2017 isn't that time, and it's a waste of military time and resources to fight that fact.
If the resources are such a problem, why aren't they going after bigger fish in the military??
07-26-2017 , 04:36 PM
I ****ed up but Dems do it too.
07-26-2017 , 04:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inso0
Don't worry though, I'm sure only conservatives take things out of context.
Don't blame liberals for your failures. Give "actually knowing enough to call liberals out" a try, maybe you'll learn something in the process.

Last edited by Loki; 07-27-2017 at 07:54 PM.
07-26-2017 , 04:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inso0
No, because I understand that the US Military serves a specific purpose, and fixing society's social hangups isn't it.

I understand and acknowledge that it's ****ty for transgender people to feel like they can't be themselves and have to hide behind a "don't ask don't tell" curtain, but I'm sure we'll come around eventually. 2017 isn't that time, and it's a waste of military time and resources to fight that fact.

Actions have consequences, and you can't ignore those consequences just because you feel like they shouldn't occur. The bottom line is likely that the very tiny number of trans people in the military aren't adding enough value to justify the cost of keeping them. So this happens.

Now, if they can't come up with some actual data to explain the decision and this was just a "**** you" to chicks with dicks, then I'm with you guys. But you aren't asking for data. You're just knee-jerk reacting because this checks a number of boxes on Politically Charged Bingo.
If they used actual data to support decisions regarding the military it would be about 1/6th the size it is now. It basically exists solely as a way for Americans to feel good about themselves and as a stimulus package for congressional districts with large defense contractors.

So yeah, I think they could let the trans people in too. Especially while considering that there are something like 15,000 in there already and last time I checked the USA hadn't been invaded and overthrown by Botswana.
07-26-2017 , 04:39 PM
it would benefit unit cohesion if all soldiers shared the same religious faith, so if a small % get cut loose who cares?

      
m