PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: nddons on September 18, 2020, 04:55:55 PM
-
As if this election isn’t crazy enough. Fasten you’re 5 point harness.
-
Absent the political and philosophical difference: RIP.
-
I’m not surprised and a death is never something to celebrate.
We will see how long respect lasts.
-
I’m not surprised and a death is never something to celebrate.
We will see how long respect lasts.
On POA it lasted 1 reply.
-
RIP
-
As if this election isn’t crazy enough. Fasten you’re 5 point harness.
Yep, I didn't think the stakes could get any higher. This will be a fight to the death, possibly literally, of a person or the nation.
-
Just noticed - it’s RBG, not RGB. Unless you’re a TV or monitor engineer.
-
Just noticed - it’s RBG, not RGB. Unless you’re a TV or monitor engineer.
Or unless I already started Friday afternoon cocktail hour.
-
That lady put up one hell of a fight.
Not a good way to die.
Hope she found peace.
-
Hearing Liberals are pissed that she didn't retire while Obama was President and she knew she was sick.
-
That lady put up one hell of a fight.
Not a good way to die.
Hope she found peace.
My mother in law died of pancreatic cancer at age 50. Lived 9 months. There is no way this was sudden. It was hidden better than the KGB or CIA could possibly hide something. Thanks MSM.
Ironic that Trump floated his SCOTUS nominee list last week. Or not.
-
Regardless of whether they hid her illness or not, I don't think there is any honest, ethical way we can allow Trump to appoint her successor before the election. He needs to wait until after he wins.
-
Regardless of whether they hid her illness or not, I don't think there is any honest, ethical way we can allow Trump to appoint her successor before the election. He needs to wait until after he wins.
hmmm, what part of the US Constitution discusses how the Presidents roles and responsibilities are constrained by waiting for the next election?
-
hmmm, what part of the US Constitution discusses how the Presidents roles and responsibilities are constrained by waiting for the next election?
That would be the gospel according to George Sonos.
-
The USSC begins each year on the First Monday of October. The court currently sits 9 justices. With the passing of RBG, it's not out of the question, and it's within the framework of the constitution to allow the President to nominate and the senate to confirm a new justice.
RBG herself, from nomination to confirmation, was 45 days, as well as several others.
-
Here's a scenario that may help make up one's mind. Joe Biden wins in November and the Senate os flipped while the Dems hold the house. Mitch has decided to wait to act on President Trumps nominee feeling it unfair. The hew Congress is in place on January third, takes up Trump's nominee and promptly votes him/her down because Trump is a lame duck, not only that but Schumer brings forth legislation to increase the seat on the Supreme Court to thirteen which will allow President Biden to then nominate five new judges once he is sworn in.
-
Whatever happens, Trump’s nominee will be dragged through the mud. What happened to Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh will look like birthday parties in their honor compared to what they’ll put this one through.
-
Whatever happens, Trump’s nominee will be dragged through the mud. What happened to Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh will look like birthday parties in their honor compared to what they’ll put this one through.
Agreed. I do feel sorry for whoever is nominated and their family. The abuse they are about to endure will be horrendous. MSM and Big Tech will try to destroy them every moment.
-
For reference:
The time between the formal Supreme Court nomination of Sandra Day O’Connor and her final Senate confirmation was 33 days. (Aug. 19-Sep. 21, 1981).
For John Paul Stevens, the formal process took only 19 days (Nov. 28-Dec. 17, 1975).
Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s formal Supreme Court nomination was sent to the Senate on June 22, 1993. Her confirmation hearing began on July 20, and the Senate voted to confirm her on August 3. The entire process took 42 days.
Do I think this will go smoothly? Of course not. Murkowski and Pierre Delecto are already saying they will not vote to confirm anyone before the election. Susan Collins is in a fight to save her seat, so she will not do anything either.
The turtle does have a few tricks up his sleeve, and he could possibly get several dims on board to confirm.
-
As Obama loved to say, elections have consequences and the Republicans still control the Senate
-
Biden is busy saying: "The voters should pick the president and the president should pick the justice for the Senate to consider. " What he forgets is that the voters DID pick the president. Almost four years ago. Yes, elections have consequences.
-
Can’t make this stuff up....
https://mobile.twitter.com/SenSchumer/status/701953299268902912
-
Regardless of whether they hid her illness or not, I don't think there is any honest, ethical way we can allow Trump to appoint her successor before the election. He needs to wait until after he wins.
Based on a post over at Beechtalk, I have changed my mind. I think it is just fine if Trump nominates a a judge and the Senate decides whether or not to confirm them.
That is basically what happened in 2016. Obama nominated a judge but the Senate decided NOT to confirm them.
Besides, I don't believe there is a chance in hell that if the situation was reversed the Dems would not try the same thing. And if they had control of the Senate, they would succeed.
The stakes are just too high. RBG had her chance to resign while Obama was President.
-
"That's their job. There's nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year."
--Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
-
"That's their job. There's nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year."
--Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
The law, the constitution, and their own actions never seem to hem the democrats in.
-
e will see how long respect lasts.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/ginsburg-death-burn-it-down-threats
Well, that didn't take long. There are already promises to pillage, loot and burn.
-
Based on a post over at Beechtalk, I have changed my mind. I think it is just fine if Trump nominates a a judge and the Senate decides whether or not to confirm them.
That is basically what happened in 2016. Obama nominated a judge but the Senate decided NOT to confirm them.
Besides, I don't believe there is a chance in hell that if the situation was reversed the Dems would not try the same thing. And if they had control of the Senate, they would succeed.
The stakes are just too high. RBG had her chance to resign while Obama was President.
They talk politics at Beechtalk?
-
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/09/19/ruth-bader-ginsburg-made-the-case-for-filling-her-vacancy-before-the-election-back-in-2016-n944778
-
The TDS crowd doesn’t believe Trump’s response is genuine in this video (the TDS twitterati think it is staged and Trump did know she had died):
-
Based on a post over at Beechtalk, I have changed my mind. I think it is just fine if Trump nominates a a judge and the Senate decides whether or not to confirm them.
That is basically what happened in 2016. Obama nominated a judge but the Senate decided NOT to confirm them.
Besides, I don't believe there is a chance in hell that if the situation was reversed the Dems would not try the same thing. And if they had control of the Senate, they would succeed.
The stakes are just too high. RBG had her chance to resign while Obama was President.
I agree with this conclusion. Also, hell has frozen over because somebody changed their opinion based on an internet post. ;D
-
This isn't mean it's just a fact. She was an anti American Marxist and did a lot of damage.
-
Yep, I didn't think the stakes could get any higher. This will be a fight to the death, possibly literally, of a person or the nation.
For the past 5 years, SCOTUS makeup has always been the highest stake.
-
"That's their job. There's nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year."
--Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
How about a bisssss-cuit?
Bow Bow Bow
-
I agree with this conclusion. Also, hell has frozen over because somebody changed their opinion based on an internet post. ;D
Post of the day!!
-
Started to put this in the joke thread, but I figured that didn't need to get sidetracked.
Joke: Nancy Pelosi wants to impeach Trump for using his presidential authority to nominate a Supreme Court justice.
TDS is real, and destructive.
-
Started to put this in the joke thread, but I figured that didn't need to get sidetracked.
Joke: Nancy Pelosi wants to impeach Trump for using his presidential authority to nominate a Supreme Court justice.
TDS is real, and destructive.
I thought you were joking since it was too absurd to believe, but I see by the news that you aren’t.
Interesting that National Review actually had an article back in August on the history of lame duck supreme court nominations:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/history-is-on-the-side-of-republicans-filling-a-supreme-court-vacancy-in-2020/ (https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/history-is-on-the-side-of-republicans-filling-a-supreme-court-vacancy-in-2020/)
Historically, when the opposite party controls the Senate, the Senate gets to block Supreme Court nominees sent up in a presidential election year, and hold the seat open for the winner. Both of those precedents are settled by experience as old as the republic. Republicans should not create a brand-new precedent to deviate from them.
[...]
Twenty-nine times in American history there has been an open Supreme Court vacancy in a presidential election year, or in a lame-duck session before the next presidential inauguration. (This counts vacancies created by new seats on the Court, but not vacancies for which there was a nomination already pending when the year began, such as happened in 1835–36 and 1987–88.) The president made a nomination in all twenty-nine cases. George Washington did it three times. John Adams did it. Thomas Jefferson did it. Abraham Lincoln did it. Ulysses S. Grant did it. Franklin D. Roosevelt did it. Dwight Eisenhower did it. Barack Obama, of course, did it. Twenty-two of the 44 men to hold the office faced this situation, and all twenty-two made the decision to send up a nomination, whether or not they had the votes in the Senate.
During the 1844 election, for example, there were two open seats on the Court. John Tyler made nine separate nominations of five different candidates, in one case sending up the same nominee three times. He sent up a pair of nominees in December, after the election. When those failed, he sent up another pair in February (presidential terms then ended in March). He had that power. Presidents have made Supreme Court nominations as late as literally the last day of their term. In Tyler’s case, the Whig-controlled Senate had, and used, its power to block multiple nominations by a man they had previously expelled from their party.
It is a long and well-researched article worth reading (if you need to convince someone that history doesn’t support any other position.)
-
I thought you were joking since it was too absurd to believe, but I see by the news that you aren’t.
Interesting that National Review actually had an article back in August on the history of lame duck supreme court nominations:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/history-is-on-the-side-of-republicans-filling-a-supreme-court-vacancy-in-2020/ (https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/history-is-on-the-side-of-republicans-filling-a-supreme-court-vacancy-in-2020/)
It is a long and well-researched article worth reading (if you need to convince someone that history doesn’t support any other position.)
The law, the constitution and the truth NEVER limit the behavior of a communist, I mean democrat.
-
I thought you were joking since it was too absurd to believe, but I see by the news that you aren’t.
Interesting that National Review actually had an article back in August on the history of lame duck supreme court nominations:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/history-is-on-the-side-of-republicans-filling-a-supreme-court-vacancy-in-2020/ (https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/history-is-on-the-side-of-republicans-filling-a-supreme-court-vacancy-in-2020/)
It is a long and well-researched article worth reading (if you need to convince someone that history doesn’t support any other position.)
I too thought he was joking until I looked it up and found this:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday would not rule out impeachment as an option to stop President Trump’s U.S. Supreme Court pick from being confirmed to the bench, saying Democrats will “use every arrow in our quiver” to block the eventual nominee.
In my mind, this opens up the Republicans to use every arrow in their quiver to get their pick approved asap.
-
"If anything would make the court look partisan, it would be that — one side saying, 'When we're in power, we're going to enlarge the number of judges, so we would have more people who would vote the way we want them to.' " - Ruth Bader Ginsburg, July 2019, NPR
-
I too thought he was joking until I looked it up and found this:
In my mind, this opens up the Republicans to use every arrow in their quiver to get their pick approved asap.
That’s the test. What would the democrats do in the identical situation?
They would have a nominee and hearings before the justice’s body was cold.
-
That’s the test. What would the democrats do in the identical situation?
They would have a nominee and hearings before the justice’s body was cold.
And RBG's funeral would turn into a political rally....................
-
Trump announced that out of respect to RBG he'll wait until after the services to announce his nomination to the Supreme Court. Given that, I expect the Democrats to have her lie in state for the next two months.
-
Trump announced that out of respect to RBG he'll wait until after the services to announce his nomination to the Supreme Court. Given that, I expect the Democrats to have her lie in state for the next two months.
He should have kept his mouth shut.
-
Trump announced that out of respect to RBG he'll wait until after the services to announce his nomination to the Supreme Court. Given that, I expect the Democrats to have her lie in state for the next two months.
The “RBG Funeral Tour” will now be held through January 19th, 2021.
-
He should have kept his mouth shut.
He can't. That's his biggest problem.
-
He can't. That's his biggest problem.
Meh. I’m not worried about this. By saying that, he took the high road, and knows when the funeral is scheduled. If the Dems drag this out for politics, Trump will just go ahead and announce even before the scheduled funeral. Not worried about Trump or HIS optics.
-
Meh. I’m not worried about this. By saying that, he took the high road, and knows when the funeral is scheduled. If the Dems drag this out for politics, Trump will just go ahead and announce even before the scheduled funeral. Not worried about Trump or HIS optics.
I am not saying that this statement was controversial, but he didn't have to say anything and often takes the bait of leftists and responds in a embarrassing, childish manner. That's his blind spot. However, that's not a reason to decide not to vote for him. The good far outweighs the bad.
-
I am not saying that this statement was controversial, but he didn't have to say anything and often takes the bait of leftists and responds in a embarrassing, childish manner. That's his blind spot. However, that's not a reason to decide not to vote for him. The good far outweighs the bad.
I think you underestimate Trump. He doesn't take the bait; his seemingly embarrassing, childish statements/tweets ARE the bait, and the left falls for it every time.
He said he would announce Friday or Saturday regardless of when the funeral would be held.
-
(shamelessly stolen from the interweb...)
-
-
(https://babylonbee.com/img/articles/article-7051-1.jpg)
Ninth Circuit Court Overturns Death Of Ruth Bader Ginsburg
-
I think you underestimate Trump. He doesn't take the bait; his seemingly embarrassing, childish statements/tweets ARE the bait, and the left falls for it every time.
He said he would announce Friday or Saturday regardless of when the funeral would be held.
I agree with you somewhat, but at times he is his own worst enemy with optics then the hostile Media spins it.
-
I agree with you somewhat, but at times he is his own worst enemy with optics then the hostile Media spins it.
It’s probably both good and bad. But even when he doesn’t say anything stupid, the media twists anything he does say or just makes up lies.
-
I thought RBG was Jewish? Shouldn't she be buried by now?
-
I thought so. It would have been Sunday, if her family was observant. Apparently they’re not.
-
I thought so. It would have been Sunday, if her family was observant. Apparently they’re not.
.gov honoring her with a Lying in State is more important to them than following religious doctrine.
It also shows the commies are trying to delay Trump from announcing his pick for her replacement.
-
I thought so. It would have been Sunday, if her family was observant. Apparently they’re not.
Saturday and Sunday were holidays so she should have been buried on Monday and lying in repose would be against tradition.
-
Saturday and Sunday were holidays so she should have been buried on Monday and lying in repose would be against tradition.
Only Saturday (Rosh Hashanah and Shabbat). Sunday would have been fine. :) EDIT: Ooops, many celebrate day 2 - yep, earliest day might have been Monday.
-
I thought RBG was Jewish? Shouldn't she be buried by now?
I am not sure about her, but many U.S. Jews are Secular Progressives that worship big government, not their faith. It may be a Bolshevik thing because many are Russian and Eastern European.
-
I am not sure about her, but many U.S. Jews are Secular Progressives that worship big government, not their faith. It may be a Bolshevik thing because many are Russian and Eastern European.
In other words, Jewish in name only. No wonder they hate Israel and love the Palestinians and vote Democrat.
-
In other words, Jewish in name only. No wonder they hat Israel and love the Palestinians and vote Democrat.
I am not sure about her, but many U.S. Jews are Secular Progressives that worship big government, not their faith. It may be a Bolshevik thing because many are Russian and Eastern European.
Truth; actually quite common. It strikes me as wanting to hang with the “cool guys” - Ivy League types whose core group is well-heeled wealthy WASPs. Makes no sense, since traditionally that bunch looked down on Jews, and lately has supported Palestine.
-
Truth; actually quite common. It strikes me as wanting to hang with the “cool guys” - Ivy League types whose core group is well-heeled wealthy WASPs. Makes no sense, since traditionally that bunch looked down on Jews, and lately has supported Palestine.
Kind of like Romney who wants to chum it up with the same democrats who called him sexist, a criminal tax cheat, and in favor of animal cruelty.
Yea, I don’t get that either.
-
Trying to explain why people vote liberal: Hopelessly convoluted and frustrating. Not sure it can be done. I mean, they vote against their own interests and willingly hate themselves and their country!
It’s a masterful and effective marketing job by the leftists/globalists, and almost would be admirable if the results weren’t so sinister and destructive to human flourishing.
-
Trying to explain why people vote liberal: Hopelessly convoluted and frustrating. Not sure it can be done. I mean, they vote against their own interests and willingly hate themselves and their country!
It’s a masterful and effective marketing job by the leftists/globalists, and almost would be admirable if the results weren’t so sinister and destructive to human flourishing.
It is convoluted and also counterproductive to their ultimate well being, success and quality of life. It is beyond comprehension to anyone with a modicum of logic and rationality. Then we have to realize that Progressives (Democrats, new liberals, Marxists, Globalists, etc) have very little logic nor rationality, or just are power hungry at all cost.
-
Kind of like Romney who wants to chum it up with the same democrats who called him sexist, a criminal tax cheat, and in favor of animal cruelty.
Yea, I don’t get that either.
If you don't understand, isn't it probable that your assumptions about him are wrong? I mean, if you think he is doing something illogical, doesn't it stand to reason that if really is illogical, then he would think so too? The conclusion then is that you are missing something.
My mother used to go to church with one of his cousins and met him once. She described him as kind, gentle, thoughtful, and dedicated to what he does. I infer that he doesn't hold a grudge and is probably ready to reach out to anyone, even those whose behavior is so much worse.
-
If you don't understand, isn't it probable that your assumptions about him are wrong? I mean, if you think he is doing something illogical, doesn't it stand to reason that if really is illogical, then he would think so too? The conclusion then is that you are missing something.
My mother used to go to church with one of his cousins and met him once. She described him as kind, gentle, thoughtful, and dedicated to what he does. I infer that he doesn't hold a grudge and is probably ready to reach out to anyone, even those whose behavior is so much worse.
No, people who behave illogically are doing so within a complicated internal system of self justification designed to maintain their personal constructs at all costs. They’re not aware of the illogic for more than a millisecond before it is absorbed into the construct. Right and wrong are fluid. Feelings are the only reality.
My liberal friend said in 2012 about Obama, “I know he’s a terrible president but I have to vote for him.” What kind of person feels BOUND by some invisible force to vote for someone whom they admit in the same breath is terrible? An illogical one. It makes no sense, but to continue to function within her perceived reality, she had to comply with insanity.
So your Mom met Romney once and she could ascertain that he was kind, thoughtful, gentle and dedicated? I have no real reason to doubt that, but he IS a politician and a backslapper and panderer too, so meh.
-
No, people who behave illogically are doing so within a complicated internal system of self justification designed to maintain their personal constructs at all costs. They’re not aware of the illogic for more than a millisecond before it is absorbed into the construct. Right and wrong are fluid. Feelings are the only reality.
My liberal friend said in 2012 about Obama, “I know he’s a terrible president but I have to vote for him.” What kind of person feels BOUND by some invisible force to vote for someone whom they admit in the same breath is terrible? An illogical one. It makes no sense, but to continue to function within her perceived reality, she had to comply with insanity.
So your Mom met Romney once and she could ascertain that he was kind, thoughtful, gentle and dedicated? I have no real reason to doubt that, but he IS a politician and a backslapper and panderer too, so meh.
Exactly. I met Trump once and he was nice to me. That doesn't mean he can't be a total jerk behind closed doors. And the "Progressives (Marxists) do justify insanity with mental gymnastics. Spot on!
-
If you don't understand, isn't it probable that your assumptions about him are wrong? I mean, if you think he is doing something illogical, doesn't it stand to reason that if really is illogical, then he would think so too? The conclusion then is that you are missing something.
My mother used to go to church with one of his cousins and met him once. She described him as kind, gentle, thoughtful, and dedicated to what he does. I infer that he doesn't hold a grudge and is probably ready to reach out to anyone, even those whose behavior is so much worse.
Ok Carnac the Magnificent.
(https://media2.giphy.com/media/3LgblSD8qfnMs/giphy.gif)
For someone who “doesn’t hold a grudge and is probably ready to reach out to anyone, even those whose behavior is so much worse,” he sure doesn’t seem to extend that grace to Donald Trump, does he?
So maybe he’s a hypocrite too.
I campaigned for that “kind, gentle, thoughtful and dedicated” man in 2012, along with his sidekick and Lucifer’s favorite politician, Paul Ryan.
Given his serious Trump Derangement Syndrome, I’m embarrassed to have ever done so. He has defiled the very traits that I attributed to him as being one of the nicest men ever to run for President. He has since become a vengeful, nasty little man, who is willing to side with his former enemy to combat his president.
Here’s when I campaigned for him. How far he’s fallen.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200924/e39a2857aef07a7fb970115fe7915333.jpg)
-
Agreed, Stan. And remember the luscious photos of Romney meeting with President-Elect Trump, pandering for a Cabinet position? And that after his scathing letter condemning Trump as an unfit candidate? The pictures of Donald Trump smiling while giving Mittens lunch and a handshake and hope ... magnificent trolling.
-
Agreed, Stan. And remember the luscious photos of Romney meeting with President-Elect Trump, pandering for a Cabinet position? And that after his scathing letter condemning Trump as an unfit candidate? The pictures of Donald Trump smiling while giving Mittens lunch and a handshake and hope ... magnificent trolling.
I’ve come to believe over the last 3 years that Trump is a better man than Romney ever hoped he would be. And I’m not talking about better politician. He’s not. But he’s a better man.
-
I’ve come to believe over the last 3 years that Trump is a better man than Romney ever hoped he would be. And I’m not talking about better politician. He’s not. But he’s a better man.
[/quote
I agree with that completely,
But I believe John McCain (may he rest in peace) was even worse.
-
I’ve come to believe over the last 3 years that Trump is a better man than Romney ever hoped he would be. And I’m not talking about better politician. He’s not. But he’s a better man.
[/quote
I agree with that completely,
But I believe John McCain (may he rest in peace) was even worse.
I totally agree. Vengeful little man should have retired long ago, but I believe he wanted to die while in office, as many politicians do. Lying in state and all that crap.
-
I’ve come to believe over the last 3 years that Trump is a better man than Romney ever hoped he would be. And I’m not talking about better politician. He’s not. But he’s a better man.
You and I must have a very different definition of better.
Trump makes a pretty good president, a great real estate investor, a lousy politician and an even worse man. He is belligerent and demeaning to anyone who disagrees with him, he almost should be a Democrat.
-
You and I must have a very different definition of better.
Trump makes a pretty good president, a great real estate investor, a lousy politician and an even worse man. He is belligerent and demeaning to anyone who disagrees with him, he almost should be a Democrat.
Trump’s party affiliation has included Democratic:
1987: Republican
1999: Independence Party of New York
2001: Democratic Party
2009: Republican Party
2011: Changed to unaffiliated with any party
2012: Republican Party
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Donald_Trump#Self-described (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Donald_Trump#Self-described)
-
For context, JFK would have been considered a conservative or republican by today’s standards.
I know many moderate democrats who are now without a party. These folks were Democrats, but not the leftist progressive nature that has hijacked the party.
-
You and I must have a very different definition of better.
Trump makes a pretty good president, a great real estate investor, a lousy politician and an even worse man. He is belligerent and demeaning to anyone who disagrees with him, he almost should be a Democrat.
Maybe we just have a very different definition of a man.
-
Would you prefer a man that has some flaws but can get things done or someone that has been around 47 years, is really nice but hasn't gotten shit done?
-
Trump’s party affiliation has included Democratic:
1987: Republican
1999: Independence Party of New York
2001: Democratic Party
2009: Republican Party
2011: Changed to unaffiliated with any party
2012: Republican Party
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Donald_Trump#Self-described (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Donald_Trump#Self-described)
Democrat has meant something different through the years.
Even Reagan was a Democrat at one time.
Today's active (mainstream) Democrat is a communist/socialist. That is why Bernie was able to garner such a large following in the Democrat primaries/ caucus.
-
Democrat has meant something different through the years.
Even Reagan was a Democrat at one time.
Today's active (mainstream) Democrat is a communist/socialist. That is why Bernie was able to garner such a large following in the Democrat primaries/ caucus.
Someone like Kennedy would never get a chance to run today. Far too moderate and middle.
-
Someone like Kennedy would never get a chance to run today. Far too moderate and middle.
too articulate
too white
too catholic (I know, that's really debatable)
prior military service (with valor, unlike johnny live-shot kerry)
-
too articulate
too white
too catholic (I know, that's really debatable)
prior military service (with valor, unlike johnny live-shot kerry)
Also put lots of money into science and NASA, wouldn't happen today.
-
Also put lots of money into science and NASA, wouldn't happen today.
Lots of money into science, but only the CORRECT science that advances a particular political agenda.
-
Also put lots of money into science and NASA, wouldn't happen today.
Little known fact is that JFK felt the Apollo project had become a massive pork barrel and waste of tax payer dollars and he was going to propose a joint venture with the Russians to get to the moon.
-
Little known fact is that JFK felt the Apollo project had become a massive pork barrel and waste of tax payer dollars and he was going to propose a joint venture with the Russians to get to the moon.
I never heard that, and that would surprise the hell it of me. The Cold War was quite hot in the 1960’s, and I think the fundamental purpose of the space program was the militarization of space, not just pure scientific exploration. I’d be shocked if he would have ceded some of our progress in space to the Soviet Union.
I’m not doubting you, just surprised.
-
Little known fact is that JFK felt the Apollo project had become a massive pork barrel and waste of tax payer dollars and he was going to propose a joint venture with the Russians to get to the moon.
I have heard that except without the Russia part. He was going to just put a stop to it, from what I've heard. However, as Stan noted, the Cold War was probably at its hottest during Kennedy with the Russian Missile crisis in Cuba , the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam involvement, etc.
-
Little known fact is that JFK felt the Apollo project had become a massive pork barrel and waste of tax payer dollars and he was going to propose a joint venture with the Russians to get to the moon.
What do you base this on?
JFK was killed in 1963, Gemini hadn't even flown yet, nevermind Apollo. Heck, the contractors just began the design work.
-
The problem was that we were just too efficient. Our nukes only needed small rockets. Russian nukes needed large rockets. When we shifted to lofting stuff into space we didn't have any rockets big enough to do the job and had to start from scratch. Russians already had the large rockets and a bit of a head start there.
-
The problem was that we were just too efficient. Our nukes only needed small rockets. Russian nukes needed large rockets. When we shifted to lofting stuff into space we didn't have any rockets big enough to do the job and had to start from scratch. Russians already had the large rockets and a bit of a head start there.
Our Germans were better than their Germans. ;D
-
Our Germans were better than their Germans. ;D
There's a hell of a lot of truth there.
-
Our Germans were better than their Germans. ;D
About 5 years ago there was a TV series called Manhattan about the Manhattan project. It was really good.
In the show Oppenheimer was a real asshole.
Edit: quick check showed he was an American, not a German.
-
About 5 years ago there was a TV series called Manhattan about the Manhattan project. It was really good.
In the show Oppenheimer was a real asshole.
Edit: quick check showed he was an American, not a German.
To accomplish what they did, the boss sort of has to be an asshole.
-
What do you base this on?
JFK was killed in 1963, Gemini hadn't even flown yet, nevermind Apollo. Heck, the contractors just began the design work.
This video is about 27 minutes long and worth watching the entire thing, but the source of my assertion comes from her monologue about 13 to 18 minutes into the video. She goes over her credentials at the beginning of the video and is a big fan of space flight (hence the Youtube channel.)
-
Would you prefer a man that has some flaws but can get things done or someone that has been around 47 years, is really nice but hasn't gotten shit done?
My comment is not about a comparison against someone else, it's about a comparison against what I'd like period. I'd love to have a president who isn't a complete asshole, but that is far from the highest criteria.
-
My comment is not about a comparison against someone else, it's about a comparison against what I'd like period. I'd love to have a president who isn't a complete asshole, but that is far from the highest criteria.
Just curious, as I know nothing about you. Have you ever worked in a real blue collar job like construction, utility company or the like?
-
Just curious, as I know nothing about you. Have you ever worked in a real blue collar job like construction, utility company or the like?
I’ve worked hourly jobs, retail and warehouse work. Navy for 4 years. Are those blue collar?
-
... Navy for 4 years. Are those blue collar?
(it wasn't my question but...) officer or enlisted?
-
I’ve worked hourly jobs, retail and warehouse work. Navy for 4 years. Are those blue collar?
I reckon the Navy may have exposed you to folks with the demeanor of Trump. He comes out of the construction business dealing with plenty of tough character who probably swear like a "sailor" In a lot of ways he's a mean SOB to work with, but we've also seen his quiet caring side. I think he knows which side to turn on when.
-
Enlisted, early 90s. I turned wrenches and hit things with hammers.
Not a lot of people like Trump on submarines, they tend to get weeded out. The closest one was one CO who was made some really bad personnel decisions and was relieved early. Like Trump, he was great at his job, but a complete failure with people. The last straw was when the pregnant wife of a senior petty officer was in the hospital, would eventually lose the baby and nearly die herself and the Captain said he couldn’t be spared because there was a squadron inspection coming.
The few real jerks I did encounter were petty little men who I tried to avoid.
-
(https://i2.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/tb25-3.jpg?w=638&ssl=1)
-
Speaking of the 9th Circuit - of its 29 active judges, 10 are now Trump appointees, 7 are Obama appointees, 3 are G. W. Bush appointees, and 9 are Clinton appointees. (See link below.) So the meme may become out of date soon.
The shift away from the left seems to have been missed by some, though the recent ruling by the 9th Circuit that found the California ban on ammo magazines over 10 bullets to be unconstitutional should have clued in some that a shift was underway (it isn’t only the Supreme court that the Trump administration imprint is happening on.) The ruling was only by a panel of 3 judges while the 3rd Circuit court has ruled that such “large magazine” bans are constitutional, so the issue is likely bound for the SCOTUS to resolve.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit)
-
Speaking of the 9th Circuit - of its 29 active judges, 10 are now Trump appointees, 7 are Obama appointees, 3 are G. W. Bush appointees, and 9 are Clinton appointees. (See link below.) So the meme may become out of date soon.
The shift away from the left seems to have been missed by some, though the recent ruling by the 9th Circuit that found the California ban on ammo magazines over 10 bullets to be unconstitutional should have clued in some that a shift was underway (it isn’t only the Supreme court that the Trump administration imprint is happening on.) The ruling was only by a panel of 3 judges while the 3rd Circuit court has ruled that such “large magazine” bans are constitutional, so the issue is likely bound for the SCOTUS to resolve.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit)
Ever hear or recognize humor? Or do you fact check everyone's jokes and memes? ::)
-
Ever hear or recognize humor? Or do you fact check everyone's jokes and memes? ::)
He annoys me too sometimes. But then again, it is good sometimes to have an adult in the room.
Yeah, it was a joke, but most of the liberal news is a joke and half the people in the country take that shtit seriously.