this right here is what drives me absolutely bonkers.

you proceed from a false premise:
that "wealth" translates to being less corruptible.

blindly ignoring what wealth actual not only IS,but what it represents to the elite class in America.

power.

so could we please STOP with how much trump is actually worth,as if it has any inherent meaning in terms of power?


i do not understand wasting time with an ideologue,or dissecting his obviously conflicting comments as somehow expressing a clear and definable philosophy.these people play in the realm of cult of personality,spectacle and magical thinking.

their adoration for a particular public figure is cultish,and has very little to do with reality but more how their idol represents an ideal that they feel very strongly about.

so are we really surprised that bob will give Alexandria ocasio cortez a nod for exposing how easy it is to corrupt the system,but then conveniently excuse his idol and give him a pass based on the flimsiest of reasons:wealth.

when it was Alexandria ocasio cortez's lightning round that exposed how it is actually EASIER for the executive branch and the president to sell their influence for money.

but to bob,and how he sees things,the very idea that trump would ever engage in a breach of morality,and break his promise to the American people...is preposterous,...because trump already has money,why would he sell his integrity?

because BOB has integrity.
because BOB would never break a promise.
this is basic projection of ones morality onto a figure they admire.
we can apply the exact same metric to those who voted for Obama.same thing.same results.

you will never get bob to admonish his hero,because that hero represents the IDEA of what bob is projecting,not the actual reality.

fundamentalists engage in the exact same magical thinking.

so how can i get mad for bob,and the other trumpsters of the world?
i pity them.
because delusional dreams always crash on the shores of the real eventually.

and that is going to be a sad day for bob.

The F-35 was doomed from the start when different branches wanted different things. Vertical takeoff, stealth shielding, etc.

Recent dogfight tests have shown it loses to earlier jets. Too many compromises hurt it's ability to be a great fighter.

I know I'm jumping back in the conversation a bit, but I'd say it's a journalist's job to ferret out the truth - something that's unfortunately both lacking and waning in the US. For the system to work as designed there should be an antagonistic relationship between the four branches of government (colloquially and importantly including the press), where each pulls against the other to make the whole system stronger. Once one (or, as it has been, three) bow to the executive - willingly or forced - corruption floods in.

The conversation - enlightning as it is - brought me back to the famous interview between Jeremy Paxman and Michael Howard (https://videosift.com/video/Classic-Repeated-Question-Avoidance-By-A-Politician) where Paxman repeats the same question 12 times in 90 seconds to try to get a straight answer. This is respect for the office and disrespect for the man who shames it.

they just want to make sure everyone knows they're now offering a new service by branching into kidnapping children and putting them in cages

On the chance your 'jokingly' isn't obvious, MLK, Ghandi and Mandela's causes ALL had support from those willing to use violence, aka better weapons would help.

Malcolm X would be the next most prominent figure beside MLK. Indian independence wasn't won with peaceful hunger strikes alone, and again lots of violence in South Africa.

Ghandi even bridged the gap to working alongside the effective army fighting for India's independence:
" I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor.
But I believe that nonviolence is infinitely superior to violence, forgiveness is more manly than punishment, forgiveness adorns a soldier."

Speaking more to the point of America today, pretty much no civil war has been fought exclusively with civilians on one side, and the government, police, army and all other branches of the state united on the other. The reason being that if that kind of unity within the government against the civilian population exists, you ALREADY have tyranny.

In America, the example would be if a president or a particular political party decided to try for tyrannical over reach, would the American public be better equipped to resist that with or without guns? In civil war, guns give power to the majority of public opinion that would need to be there otherwise. In a nation with an unarmed public, whatever the majority of soldiers side with is likely gonna win. With an armed populace, the civilian opinion matters more.

I think it's an overall modest observation, and one that really doesn't in anyway make it obvious that the modest benefit is worth the costs. That is another matter, but you can't factually claim that there isn't a meaningful difference between an armed and unarmed population when facing civil war.

Interesting how there is a jacob's ladder effect. It appears the main arc is branch-branch and the arc rises in the smoky plasma, as with a jacob's ladder.

from link:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/year-one-list-81-major-trump-achievements-11-obama-legacy-items-repealed/article/2644159

Below are the 12 categories and 81 wins cited by the White House.

Jobs and the economy

Passage of the tax reform bill providing $5.5 billion in cuts and repealing the Obamacare mandate.
Increase of the GDP above 3 percent.
Creation of 1.7 million new jobs, cutting unemployment to 4.1 percent.
Saw the Dow Jones reach record highs.
A rebound in economic confidence to a 17-year high.
A new executive order to boost apprenticeships.
A move to boost computer sciences in Education Department programs.
Prioritizing women-owned businesses for some $500 million in SBA loans.
Killing job-stifling regulations

Signed an Executive Order demanding that two regulations be killed for every new one creates. He beat that big and cut 16 rules and regulations for every one created, saving $8.1 billion.
Signed 15 congressional regulatory cuts.
Withdrew from the Obama-era Paris Climate Agreement, ending the threat of environmental regulations.
Signed an Executive Order cutting the time for infrastructure permit approvals.
Eliminated an Obama rule on streams that Trump felt unfairly targeted the coal industry.
Fair trade

Made good on his campaign promise to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Opened up the North American Free Trade Agreement for talks to better the deal for the U.S.
Worked to bring companies back to the U.S., and companies like Toyota, Mazda, Broadcom Limited, and Foxconn announced plans to open U.S. plants.
Worked to promote the sale of U.S products abroad.
Made enforcement of U.S. trade laws, especially those that involve national security, a priority.
Ended Obama’s deal with Cuba.
Boosting U.S. energy dominance

The Department of Interior, which has led the way in cutting regulations, opened plans to lease 77 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling.
Trump traveled the world to promote the sale and use of U.S. energy.
Expanded energy infrastructure projects like the Keystone XL Pipeline snubbed by Obama.
Ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to kill Obama’s Clean Power Plan.
EPA is reconsidering Obama rules on methane emissions.
Protecting the U.S. homeland

Laid out new principles for reforming immigration and announced plan to end "chain migration," which lets one legal immigrant to bring in dozens of family members.
Made progress to build the border wall with Mexico.
Ended the Obama-era “catch and release” of illegal immigrants.
Boosted the arrests of illegals inside the U.S.
Doubled the number of counties participating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement charged with deporting illegals.
Removed 36 percent more criminal gang members than in fiscal 2016.
Started the end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program.
Ditto for other amnesty programs like Deferred Action for Parents of Americans.
Cracking down on some 300 sanctuary cities that defy ICE but still get federal dollars.
Added some 100 new immigration judges.
Protecting communities

Justice announced grants of $98 million to fund 802 new cops.
Justice worked with Central American nations to arrest and charge 4,000 MS-13 members.
Homeland rounded up nearly 800 MS-13 members, an 83 percent one-year increase.
Signed three executive orders aimed at cracking down on international criminal organizations.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions created new National Public Safety Partnership, a cooperative initiative with cities to reduce violent crimes.
Accountability

Trump has nominated 73 federal judges and won his nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
Ordered ethical standards including a lobbying ban.
Called for a comprehensive plan to reorganize the executive branch.
Ordered an overhaul to modernize the digital government.
Called for a full audit of the Pentagon and its spending.
Combatting opioids

First, the president declared a Nationwide Public Health Emergency on opioids.
His Council of Economic Advisors played a role in determining that overdoses are underreported by as much as 24 percent.
The Department of Health and Human Services laid out a new five-point strategy to fight the crisis.
Justice announced it was scheduling fentanyl substances as a drug class under the Controlled Substances Act.
Justice started a fraud crackdown, arresting more than 400.
The administration added $500 million to fight the crisis.
On National Drug Take Back Day, the Drug Enforcement Agency collected 456 tons.

Helping veterans

Signed the Veterans Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act to allow senior officials in the Department of Veterans Affairs to fire failing employees and establish safeguards to protect whistleblowers.
Signed the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act.
Signed the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act, to provide support.
Signed the VA Choice and Quality Employment Act of 2017 to authorize $2.1 billion in additional funds for the Veterans Choice Program.
Created a VA hotline.
Had the VA launch an online “Access and Quality Tool,” providing veterans with a way to access wait time and quality of care data.
With VA Secretary Dr. David Shulkin, announced three initiatives to expand access to healthcare for veterans using telehealth technology.
Promoting peace through strength

Directed the rebuilding of the military and ordered a new national strategy and nuclear posture review.
Worked to increase defense spending.
Empowered military leaders to “seize the initiative and win,” reducing the need for a White House sign off on every mission.
Directed the revival of the National Space Council to develop space war strategies.
Elevated U.S. Cyber Command into a major warfighting command.
Withdrew from the U.N. Global Compact on Migration, which Trump saw as a threat to borders.
Imposed a travel ban on nations that lack border and anti-terrorism security.
Saw ISIS lose virtually all of its territory.
Pushed for strong action against global outlaw North Korea and its development of nuclear weapons.
Announced a new Afghanistan strategy that strengthens support for U.S. forces at war with terrorism.
NATO increased support for the war in Afghanistan.
Approved a new Iran strategy plan focused on neutralizing the country’s influence in the region.
Ordered missile strikes against a Syrian airbase used in a chemical weapons attack.
Prevented subsequent chemical attacks by announcing a plan to detect them better and warned of future strikes if they were used.
Ordered new sanctions on the dictatorship in Venezuela.
Restoring confidence in and respect for America

Trump won the release of Americans held abroad, often using his personal relationships with world leaders.
Made good on a campaign promise to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
Conducted a historic 12-day trip through Asia, winning new cooperative deals. On the trip, he attended three regional summits to promote American interests.
He traveled to the Middle East and Europe to build new relationships with leaders.
Traveled to Poland and on to Germany for the G-20 meeting where he pushed again for funding of women entrepreneurs.


see link above for more complete

But they broke that tree branch!

*fear

What I was thinking...
But then maybe the grid isn't there to filter small debris but to stop big things from going down there like branches and small children ....

I like how he mentioned the inability of the CDC, due to regulations, to gather a comprehensive database on gun violence. As that seems to be an oft to ignored law. Undo that law, let the CDC gather all the various data points into one set, and then let that set be used for analysis. A gun used to commit a robbery, rape or other violent crime? That needs to be reported to the CDC database, along with any details known such as gun source, legality etc. A gunshot victim gets treated at a hospital or clinic, that gets reported to the CDC database along with cause, which in most cases is accidental. Suicide by gun, homicide by gun, mass shooting, all get put into that database. That data then can be used by all sides to support their cause, perhaps it will show that many of the proposed regulations would have little effect. I suspect, however, the fact that the gun lobby fights so hard to prevent the CDC from gathering the data for others to use, means they fear it will be far less favorable to their side.

I personally would be happy enough for now though for this step to be taken. So that we aren't making choices based on incomplete data and conjuncture.

I personally support the right to own a gun for hunting and self-defense. I'm not sure how an AR-15 or something like that would be useful in either case, short of an unrealistic scenario of a zombie apocalypse... and before the right-wingnuts suggest self-defense of in case of a military invasion, or from some odd right-wing fantasy of our own military, let me remind you of how well even better weapons and training worked out for the Branch Davidians. Admittedly, a military invasion scenario of either type is more likely than a zombie or otherwise apocalypse, but exceedingly low... Now if Trump gets us into WW3, and we lose power for years, and it becomes survival of the fittest, then there may be an argument, the solution to that, of course, is don't get the world into that situation with idiots like him at the wheel.

I think we could draw from this. How about all US citizens that want to purchase a gun have to take a comprehensive exam that test knowledge not just of the 2nd amendment, but also the entire constitution, branches of government, federalist vs anti-federalist arguments, all supreme court cases directly involving challenges to the 2nd amendment, etc. Throw in a federally mandated mental health check from an accredited shrink and voila, guns are taken from the hands of those fighting erectile disfunction and put in the hands of those that actually care about the nation.

PS: don't go off on a tangent about how then only the bad guys will have guns and then we'll all get murdered like, all the time. That's a bs argument and you know it.

Um...that's legislative, judiciary, and executive.
Also, all 3 of those branches DO have oversight, although granted it is weak and highly politically influenced oversight at this point.

That said, public third party oversight of the police is hardly the kind of power that easily corrupts. Any abuse would be easy to spot and halt with some simple and clear rules. Many jurisdictions already have this, and I've never once heard of the powers being used for personal vendettas against a force or officer....or being abused at all for that matter. Usually they only have the power to suggest prosecutions or other actions (I think they need the power to fire officers at the least), and even that's unacceptable to the police.
The other option, the one you seem to prefer, is to allow the police to have all the corrupting power with absolutely no checks (except those they randomly self impose when it suits them) and no possibility of justice because the entire legal system is in cahoots and thoroughly corrupted, meaning any built in safeguards and oversight are made moot.

Funny to me that you start your post with "no need to politicize this with Obama/Trump or whatever" and end by politicizing it with Obama/Trump and whatever.

To me, this is just rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. I understand why some Christians and Christian organizations are trying to fight these culture wars, but it is completely futile. What difference does it make which flag is flying when the culture has basically completely rejected biblical Christianity. The moral decline that is happening is the bad fruit that comes out of that. If you chop off the fruit and branches, they will just grow back because you haven't dealt with the root system.

The extreme right IS growing it's base off the people the extreme left are alienating. It is NOT enough for the left to just hope to similarly grow it's base by those alienated by the extreme right. That didn't work so well for Hillary. "Growing it's base" is code for gaining power and support, aka more people that can act and vote. The Dems need to do more to draw in extra voters, the current trend of doubling down harder in condemnation of anyone that didn't vote Hillary is exactly the opposite of what they need to be doing. That's chasing away voters that need to be won over. Go back to those same voters with some of the olive branches I mentioned, or come up with some others, but at least make a blasted effort to grow your base out too or else your shrinking your own base while the right extremists are growing...

Fair enough, but I thought my longer explanation by examples made my meaning more clear. Making calls that people should not be allowed to deny membership into private clubs/groups based upon behaviors and choices is going to dive away people you need to get the support of.

IMO the Dems need to stop calling out the flying spaghetti monster club for denying membership to people who eat spaghetti. Spaghetti eaters still have their right to eat spaghetti, they just don't need to join a club of people who think that's immoral. Save the outrage for the FSM branches that deny membership to those without noodley appendages, as that has now crossed over from a choice/behavior and into something immutable.

If we can agree on that in principle, let me then step forward to the real example.

Stop telling Christians that not accepting non-christians as members or leaders in their churchs is immoral or intolerant or bigotry or evil. Most of the major religions in the world on some lesser or greater extent declare each other immoral. Live and live is enough, you don't need to demand they accept membership or leadership candidate from other religions with beliefs or practices they consider incompatible with their own. Oh, and if the Dems really want bonus points here, who you choose to have sex with and how you choose to do it can be included in this.