Donald Trump and US politics

"

soneka101 wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8RkQeVXgAEYar-.jpg

It's not even April 1st, and the WH already pulled a prank!

I get the irony but it's sad that a lot of people won't take sexual assault awareness seriously because of Trump bragging on tape about how women let them do everything because he's the shit. Sad!

"

pneuma wrote:

There's nothing actually wrong with concepts like 'trigger warning', 'safe space', 'social justice', and so on. The problem is that their proponents went batshit crazy with them and used them as swords instead of shields.

I don't really know of a way to keep the good (voluntary covenants defending abused people) while getting rid of the bad (censoring people and wishing them harm).

If you care about the concepts behind the words, I'd recommend abandoning the words, coming up with untainted terms, then make sure nobody shits the bed again. Replacing 'safe space' with 'support group', for instance.

Disagree. "Safe space" and "support group" are very different concepts. One is a group of people; the other is a place. I have no problem with support groups such as the safety-pin brigade; I have a problem with public property being marked as a no taboo zone. (Privately owned safe spaces are okay.)

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

soneka101 wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8RkQeVXgAEYar-.jpg

It's not even April 1st, and the WH already pulled a prank!

I get the irony but it's sad that a lot of people won't take sexual assault awareness seriously because of Trump bragging on tape about how women let them do everything because he's the shit. Sad!

If it was any other time in the year I wouldn't make jokes, but April 1st? Too much coincidence.

And to be honest I think April is a bad choice for sexual assault awareness, since there is a controversy when it comes to sexual assault and false reports... I mean, the first day of the month is a day known for people making up shit...

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

pneuma wrote:

There's nothing actually wrong with concepts like 'trigger warning', 'safe space', 'social justice', and so on. The problem is that their proponents went batshit crazy with them and used them as swords instead of shields.

I don't really know of a way to keep the good (voluntary covenants defending abused people) while getting rid of the bad (censoring people and wishing them harm).

If you care about the concepts behind the words, I'd recommend abandoning the words, coming up with untainted terms, then make sure nobody shits the bed again. Replacing 'safe space' with 'support group', for instance.

Disagree. "Safe space" and "support group" are very different concepts. One is a group of people; the other is a place. I have no problem with support groups such as the safety-pin brigade; I have a problem with public property being marked as a no taboo zone. (Privately owned safe spaces are okay.)

What's an example of a public safe place?

All the ones I can think of are at best semi-public like libraries or college campuses (privately owned and maintained for a public good).

"

soneka101 wrote:

I mean, the first day of the month is a day known for people making up shit...

Seems pretty perfect for the awareness, then. 29 times out of 30 it's legit, but not always. It's just as important for courts to hear the case as it is for them to be impartial. False reporting isn't a victimless crime by any stretch.

All I do is sit back and watch the chaos now

"

pneuma wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

pneuma wrote:

There's nothing actually wrong with concepts like 'trigger warning', 'safe space', 'social justice', and so on. The problem is that their proponents went batshit crazy with them and used them as swords instead of shields.

I don't really know of a way to keep the good (voluntary covenants defending abused people) while getting rid of the bad (censoring people and wishing them harm).

If you care about the concepts behind the words, I'd recommend abandoning the words, coming up with untainted terms, then make sure nobody shits the bed again. Replacing 'safe space' with 'support group', for instance.

Disagree. "Safe space" and "support group" are very different concepts. One is a group of people; the other is a place. I have no problem with support groups such as the safety-pin brigade; I have a problem with public property being marked as a no taboo zone. (Privately owned safe spaces are okay.)

What's an example of a public safe place?

All the ones I can think of are at best semi-public like libraries or college campuses (privately owned and maintained for a public good).

Public universities are publicly owned. I mean, hell, in the Ninth Circuit ruling upholding the TRO against Trump's first immigration EO, the standing of the plaintiffs, the states of Washington and Minnesota, was established by pointing to their role as executors of public universities, responsible for the funding and decisions thereof and therefore entitled to sue on the behalf of public university interests.

I'm against public schools, and would prefer any and all government subsidies to take the form of vouchers payable directly to each citizen, not to socialized business firms. Schools are inherently a very politically charged institution, because determining what and how to teach raises serious ethical and epistemological questions. If all schools are private, you don't even get into the ethical dilemma of whether a university chancellor has the right to control certain forms of speech on government-owned land under their management.

"

Xavderion wrote:

That's my Jeb!

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/01/opinion/sunday/in-trump-country-shock-at-trump-budget-cuts-but-still-loyalty.html

"

Moreno was sitting at a table with his boss, Rocky Payton, the factory’s general manager, and Amy Saum, the human resources manager. All said they had voted for Trump, and all were bewildered that he wanted to cut funds that channel people into good manufacturing jobs.

“There’s a lot of wasteful spending, so cut other places,” Moreno said.

Payton suggested that if the government wants to cut budgets, it should target “Obama phones” provided to low-income Americans. (In fact, the program predates President Barack Obama and is financed by telecom companies rather than by taxpayers.)

"But I voted for him so he would screw OTHER people, why is he doing this to me?"

"

soneka101 wrote:

"But I voted for him so he would screw OTHER people, why is he doing this to me?"

I hope you realize that article contains basically zero actual news and is manufactured liberal feel-good propaganda, right? "Fiscal conservatives like spending cuts more when it doesn't effect them" isn't some amazing revelation.