To answer  the question in your title, it is not ok and enough is enough.  Time for us to continually practice our 2nd amendment rights by concealed carry. 

a) Kill the unemployables outright
b) Tax the employable people and give the unemployables a basic income
c) Have the unemployables starve to death and secure yourself against uprising by using deadly force
d) Regulate industry and force them to hire otherwise unemployables, even though automation is cheaper (i.e. Tax the corporations).


Capitalists favor (c) and (d).

It accomplishes the same thing in the end.

First, welcome.
Second; You are so full of shit.

She has a point.  The occasional missile strike or bomb drop is no substitute for a cogent military strategy.  I am glad to see the Taliban and their ilk get theirs, and I am all for giving the military latitude, so long as they aren't butchering civilians.  But what is he actually aiming at?

Given that its the Cheeto Jesus, that is a very hard call indeed.  But dropping bombs is easy.  Wining wars is quite a bit harder.  How long have we been in Afghanistan?  It has been called the Graveyard of Empires for good reason.

So what you and Lizzy want are for us to announce our battle plans for the world to see so they can change their tactics. Perfect. Nothing like announcing a surge and simultaneously announcing your withdrawal date like Obama announced to the world.

I just googled Elizabeth Warren and strategy and got nothing prior to the past few weeks. Surely such a strategist was asking the same ducking questions of Obama over the last 8 years, wasn't she? 

Come to think of it, I don't recall you demanding that Obama set forth his strategy either.

Are you kidding me?  The Dems will scream like stuck pigs if Trump gets to nominate either or both of Kennedy's and Ginsburg's replacements.

I predict that Dems will try to invoke and expand the Biden Rule and say Trump has no right to get a nominee confirmed with "only" three years left in his term.

Get the popcorn out for this one.

Trump Unicorns.

Trump Derangement Syndrome victim

Academics seem to always redefine history to suit their corrupt concept of political correctness, then add a dash of smug stupidity in an attempt to shut down either intelligent refutation, or simple truth.
Steingar appears to be all in on both.
The triple- zero IQ is working overtime.

Faculty lounge bong is firing 24/7.

I head an interesting theory that Putin was pulling all the strings even back to the chemical attack which allowed the US to make an impressive yet relatively inconsequential attack in Syria to help appease both the war mongers who dominate both governmental leaderships as well as squash the Russian ties critics all while bolstering Trump's position in the world standing.

Hmmmmmm....

Kind of like pro wrestling, where one guy will get the other "over".  Their fights are fake, and the conflicts are made up, mostly, but they are often an outgrowth and exaggeration of real issues between the wrestlers.

I'd say this is plausible, though I've no idea if it's true.  Putin may benefit from having Trump (hence the U.S.) seen as strong again.  Maybe better to have two world bullies with an uneasy peace together, than be the only one, with all the little guys plotting how to get the better of you. After all, history has shown that when the U.S. and Russia are allies no one can defeat us.

But to admit this is not to say there's any chance Putin "hacked" the election.  That's ludicrous. I think he's much happier dealing with Trump than he would have been Hillary, but he didn't bring this about.  The fault of the election is 100% the Democrats. They put up a horrid candidate and they abandoned much of their key demographic (rust belt).  Putin had nothing to do with any of that.