ADVERTISEMENT

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

I did like to see the Massachusetts rationale for net outflows essentially being: "Not a good place for the Poors, so they're all leaving".
the south is warmer. That’s why people move here.
Which is awesome.... from January to April.
Funny, no one from the South moves up north on purpose.
They can't afford it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: carolinablue34
Looks like our relationship with the world continues to improve under Biden's leadership.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/16/france-rebukes-australia-after-it-ditches-submarine-deal-.html
Funny thing there is the primary jab at Biden is a potshot at Trump

"In the same radio interview, France’s foreign affairs chief also said that this “unilateral and unpredictable decision” reminded him of what former President Donald Trump used to do."

And i'm not saying two wrongs make a right....
 
People from the north move south for two reasons: to get away from colder weather in the fall and winter months and because it’s cheaper. That’s it.

Lol. For such a young, wet-behind-the-ears, no experienced, still-living-at-home noob, you sure act like you know everything.

I'm sure it doesn't have anything to do with our slower pace of life, our friendliness, less density, and better looking and more charming women.
 
Funny thing there is the primary jab at Biden is a potshot at Trump

"In the same radio interview, France’s foreign affairs chief also said that this “unilateral and unpredictable decision” reminded him of what former President Donald Trump used to do."

And i'm not saying two wrongs make a right....

trump-deramgement-syndrome.gif
 
This may sound like: "I just care about myself, screw everyone else". I won't bring up personal charity work here, but just say that on average, people living in red states are much more charitable in time and$ given as % of salary, than those in blue states. It is just largely a matter of whether people think government programs or private individuals do better at caring for the needy, disadvantaged. The results are clear here, too.

As someone that works for an NPO (almost 20 years) and has raised millions of dollars in my career, I will be the first to back you up here. I've stated for years that the government should get out of the "helping" profession. NPOs are far more equipped to handle working with people in need from their own communities. There is an investment on a community level that can't be duplicated from a federal level. The govt just wants to throw money at an issue without checks and balances and without ensuring that needs are really being met. Whereas a local service organization has a far more intimate relationship with disadvantaged people in their own communities. Now, as we are currently structured, NPOs couldn't meet the needs of everyone in every community. But the govt should get out of helping and instead incentivize volunteerism like they do charitable giving. I actually spoke with VA Senator Tim Kaine about this a couple weeks ago. But there would be 2 results from my structure change; (1) people would receive a better continuum of care because their relationships with those helping them is stronger and more intimate and (2) we'd really see what the American people want to support instead of forcing the American people to support things they may not be crazy about. Shouldn't the will of the people guide us here?
 
The govt just wants to throw money at an issue without checks and balances and without ensuring that needs are really being met.
My issue with this are the built in assumptions that it employs. First, is your point that they do a piss pour job of this in terms of the target, application, and efficiency. It's pandering and vote buying at its finest. Next, there is almost never any accountability. I beg people to tell me of situations where government has identified a problem, implemented a solution to that problem, solved the problem and shut down the program because they have solved it. Doesn't ever happen and the continuing solution is to always grow the program and throw more money at it. That's what government does best. My biggest issue, however, is the government has no actual money to throw. They literally produce no widgets or offer any services that create funding. Rather, they forcibly take it from everyone else who is doing so. And, even if they did, we run at a deficit. It is idiocy to simply print money out of thin air to fund programs that won't solve a problem. Someday, the piper will have to be paid.

I realize I am oversimplifying, but I don't want to get yelled at with tl;dr.
 
As someone that works for an NPO (almost 20 years) and has raised millions of dollars in my career, I will be the first to back you up here. I've stated for years that the government should get out of the "helping" profession. NPOs are far more equipped to handle working with people in need from their own communities. There is an investment on a community level that can't be duplicated from a federal level. The govt just wants to throw money at an issue without checks and balances and without ensuring that needs are really being met. Whereas a local service organization has a far more intimate relationship with disadvantaged people in their own communities. Now, as we are currently structured, NPOs couldn't meet the needs of everyone in every community. But the govt should get out of helping and instead incentivize volunteerism like they do charitable giving. I actually spoke with VA Senator Tim Kaine about this a couple weeks ago. But there would be 2 results from my structure change; (1) people would receive a better continuum of care because their relationships with those helping them is stronger and more intimate and (2) we'd really see what the American people want to support instead of forcing the American people to support things they may not be crazy about. Shouldn't the will of the people guide us here?
Anyone body else read this and feel it is a copy/paste? Or Multiple personality disorder? Cogent and making pretty good points.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: gteeitup
So the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff called his counterpart in China out of concern trump might initiate an attack against them? Lol. Has there been a more bizarre presidency ever? I’m not sure what’s worse…the fact he did it which to me should get him court martialed…or the fact that the climate around trump made him feel such a call was necessary
 
  • Like
Reactions: blazers
Funny thing there is the primary jab at Biden is a potshot at Trump

"In the same radio interview, France’s foreign affairs chief also said that this “unilateral and unpredictable decision” reminded him of what former President Donald Trump used to do."

And i'm not saying two wrongs make a right....
Funny thing there is that you missed who the post was aimed at and the point of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heelicious
So the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff called his counterpart in China out of concern trump might initiate an attack against them? Lol. Has there been a more bizarre presidency ever? I’m not sure what’s worse…the fact he did it which to me should get him court martialed…or the fact that the climate around trump made him feel such a call was necessary
Why the court martial? That's why these "unofficial back channels" exist. I think some people are being extremely naïve if they think this is the first time top military officials have talked to each other to make sure nothing crazy happened. The military is more likely to keep the peace than any president could ever be. Well, except for Carter. I don't think he would have gone to war if the British were attacking.
 
Why the court martial? That's why these "unofficial back channels" exist. I think some people are being extremely naïve if they think this is the first time top military officials have talked to each other to make sure nothing crazy happened. The military is more likely to keep the peace than any president could ever be. Well, except for Carter. I don't think he would have gone to war if the British were attacking.
Ole Harry Legs Joe fought in the revolutionary war. He single-handedly beat down a whole brigade of British soldiers led by Sir CornPop. True story
 
  • Haha
Reactions: tarheel0910
Why the court martial? That's why these "unofficial back channels" exist. I think some people are being extremely naïve if they think this is the first time top military officials have talked to each other to make sure nothing crazy happened. The military is more likely to keep the peace than any president could ever be. Well, except for Carter. I don't think he would have gone to war if the British were attacking.
Well - it is court martial worthy, IMO. Will be interesting to see if Milley survives this. "military officials talk to each other". Sure. But DJTs Sec of Defense Miller said explicitly that Milley did not inform him (Miller) or DJT of any of these calls to China, or of his (Milley's) communications to military leaders that they take an oath not to do any military actions without discussing with him (Milley) first.

Milley has no military authority to take action or block action. None. He is nowhere on the chain of command that includes DJT, and Sec of Defense. Milley is just top military advisor but can't direct any actions or inactions. Removing, overriding military actions or inactions from the civilian (elected) leadership of president, Sec of Defense, congress, is clearly unconstitutional.

If Milley did this to defy Obama or Biden he'd be in jail by now. But anything goes against Orange Man, the only president in memory who didn't start another war during his presidency. What are the chances DJT was going to do some crazy military action? Basically zero. Even if he wanted to, there are checks and balances, he couldn't just do it unilaterally. But Milley didn't have the right or authority to do what he did to guard against it.

It seems the intelligent consensus is if he had issues with DJT, he should have just stepped away, resigned in good conscience. Not undercut, defy, borderline coup against the sitting Commander in Chief.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
Well - it is court martial worthy, IMO. Will be interesting to see if Milley survives this. "military officials talk to each other". Sure. But DJTs Sec of Defense Miller said explicitly that Milley did not inform him (Miller) or DJT of any of these calls to China, or of his (Milley's) communications to military leaders that they take an oath not to do any military actions without discussing with him (Milley) first.

Milley has no military authority to take action or block action. None. He is nowhere on the chain of command that includes DJT, and Sec of Defense. Milley is just top military advisor but can't direct any actions or inactions. Removing, overriding military actions or inactions from the civilian (elected) leadership of president, Sec of Defense, congress, is clearly unconstitutional.

If Milley did this to defy Obama or Biden he'd be in jail by now. But anything goes against Orange Man, the only president in memory who didn't start another war during his presidency. What are the chances DJT was going to do some crazy military action? Basically zero. Even if he wanted to, there are checks and balances, he couldn't just do it unilaterally. But Milley didn't have the right or authority to do what he did to guard against it.

It seems the intelligent consensus is if he had issues with DJT, he should have just stepped away, resigned in good conscience. Not undercut, defy, borderline coup against the sitting Commander in Chief.
I think the wings of each party are just being naïve about this. The left is getting happy thinking this is something that has never happened before. Like it's something historical to show that Trump was a horrible president. The right is ready to string him up thinking it's something historical and shows that people were out to get Trump. Neither is really true. All modern presidents need a babysitter when it comes to the military. The only thing historical here is that someone actually went on the record about it.
 
I think the wings of each party are just being naïve about this. The left is getting happy thinking this is something that has never happened before. Like it's something historical to show that Trump was a horrible president. The right is ready to string him up thinking it's something historical and shows that people were out to get Trump. Neither is really true. All modern presidents need a babysitter when it comes to the military. The only thing historical here is that someone actually went on the record about it.
You may be right. I dont know.
I’m looking at it from the vantage point that maybe Trump wanted china to think he might attack and one of his generals is going behind his back and contradicting him
 
Anyone body else read this and feel it is a copy/paste? Or Multiple personality disorder? Cogent and making pretty good points.

You’re a noob here so I reckon you deserve a pass on this. But I’ve brought this up many times in the past…before you were poasting here…when the board was better. Yep, I’ve been in an executive role with a local NPO for 15 years and before that, was in a development role. I’ve been quick to tell people that I’ve helped more black families out of poverty than Barack Obama has in his career. It’s also why I have my finger on the pulse of the issues with poor, black families unlike many of you that form your opinion by listening to CNN. Again, this is your last pass. From this point forward, try to keep up.


My issue with this are the built in assumptions that it employs. First, is your point that they do a piss pour job of this in terms of the target, application, and efficiency. It's pandering and vote buying at its finest. Next, there is almost never any accountability. I beg people to tell me of situations where government has identified a problem, implemented a solution to that problem, solved the problem and shut down the program because they have solved it. Doesn't ever happen and the continuing solution is to always grow the program and throw more money at it. That's what government does best. My biggest issue, however, is the government has no actual money to throw. They literally produce no widgets or offer any services that create funding. Rather, they forcibly take it from everyone else who is doing so. And, even if they did, we run at a deficit. It is idiocy to simply print money out of thin air to fund programs that won't solve a problem. Someday, the piper will have to be paid.

I realize I am oversimplifying, but I don't want to get yelled at with tl;dr.

All accurate. And I’ve also discussed some of these things and suggested a new tax code to implement that would help us be more efficient. Ready? Taxes should be “a la carte”; meaning, if I have to pay $50k in taxes, I get to pick where my taxes go. Some items would get a mandatory percentage of all taxes - military, infrastructure, etc. But otherwise, taxpayers would decide what line items in the federal budget they want their money to go towards. We do that in my industry. When someone makes a contribution to my org, they get to tell me how they want that money used. And when I solicit, I solicit for specific needs. Sometimes I’m successful in garnering interest for a specific project and other times I’m not. But the donor leaves that transaction feeling good about their contribution; better than they might feel if I told them, “well, we’re not sure how your money is going to be used yet. We’ll figure it out. Thanks!” What if more people felt good about paying taxes? Can you imagine? And as stated above, certain wasteful programs would go away because it would be shown to be something the American people don’t want to fund.

Pretty radical and I know it would never happen but it’s an interesting thought.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Hark_The_Sound_2010
All modern presidents need a babysitter when it comes to the military. The only thing historical here is that someone actually went on the record about it.
Babysitting seems like a good term for what has and should happen in the past. And based on past interviews, I think DJT was dumb as a sack of hammers regarding military equipment, operations, strategy, even operational protocol.

But this wasn't babysitting. Babysitting would be advising the Sec of Defense, and COC, in the room at the same time, discussing the issues. And informing SoD and CoC of the calls to China.

But Milley included or informed SoD and CoC in none of the calls, or the directives (oath request) Milley made to military leaders and commanders. It was total subversion, going behind the backs of chain of command. Without informing them at all. Insubordination.

Its a "my boss DJT is crazier than a shthouse rat, so all Constitutional and military laws, rules, and norms are off. I need to go rogue unilaterally, for the good of the country" mindset and action. That is a very dangerous new standard / precedent that cannot stand, IMO.
 
You’re a noob here so I reckon you deserve a pass on this. But I’ve brought this up many times in the past…before you were poasting here…when the board was better. Yep, I’ve been in an executive role with a local NPO for 15 years and before that, was in a development role. I’ve been quick to tell people that I’ve helped more black families out of poverty than Barack Obama has in his career. It’s also why I have my finger on the pulse of the issues with poor, black families unlike many of you that form your opinion by listening to CNN. Again, this is your last pass. From this point forward, try to keep up.




All accurate. And I’ve also discussed some of these things and suggested a new tax code to implement that would help us be more efficient. Ready? Taxes should be “a la carte”; meaning, if I have to pay $50k in taxes, I get to pick where my taxes go. Some items would get a mandatory percentage of all taxes - military, infrastructure, etc. But otherwise, taxpayers would decide what line items in the federal budget they want their money to go towards. We do that in my industry. When someone makes a contribution to my org, they get to tell me how they want that money used. And when I solicit, I solicit for specific needs. Sometimes I’m successful in garnering interest for a specific project and other times I’m not. But the donor leaves that transaction feeling good about their contribution; better than they might feel if I told them, “well, we’re not sure how your money is going to be used yet. We’ll figure it out. Thanks!” What if more people felt good about paying taxes? Can you imagine? And as stated above, certain wasteful programs would go away because it would be shown to be something the American people don’t want to fund.

Pretty radical and I know it would never happen but it’s an interesting thought.
tl;dr
 
Babysitting seems like a good term for what has and should happen in the past. And based on past interviews, I think DJT was dumb as a sack of hammers regarding military equipment, operations, strategy, even operational protocol.

But this wasn't babysitting. Babysitting would be advising the Sec of Defense, and COC, in the room at the same time, discussing the issues. And informing SoD and CoC of the calls to China.

But Milley included or informed SoD and CoC in none of the calls, or the directives (oath request) Milley made to military leaders and commanders. It was total subversion, going behind the backs of chain of command. Without informing them at all. Insubordination.

Its a "my boss DJT is crazier than a shthouse rat, so all Constitutional and military laws, rules, and norms are off. I need to go rogue unilaterally, for the good of the country" mindset and action. That is a very dangerous new standard / precedent that cannot stand, IMO.
There's already people coming out saying that this was misrepresented or possibly just a flat out lie, so it appears that my initial reaction of this being a nothingburger is correct. But if congress wants to investigate it, that's there right. I just don't think there is a huge issue here. Probably best for him to just resign though. That way people can just move on to the next thing to be outraged about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: heelmanwilm
Did y'all see Biden's latest gaffe? He was on a Zoom press conference with the Prime Minister of Australia and forgot the PM's name and referred to him as "the fellow down under."

The Prime Minister just smiled and gave him a Vegimite sandwich.

 
Did y'all see Biden's latest gaffe? He was on a Zoom press conference with the Prime Minister of Australia and forgot the PM's name and referred to him as "the fellow down under."

The Prime Minister just smiled and gave him a Vegimite sandwich.

Funny stuff, but not surprising from him. I'm not sure how this doesn't happen more often though. Not sure how presidents can remember or even pronounce some of these people's names. It's like, good afternoon Prime Minister As'dljf'asij'gjaj. I hope you and your wife Sjf'ajlgjoajlk are doing well.
 
I think the wings of each party are just being naïve about this. The left is getting happy thinking this is something that has never happened before. Like it's something historical to show that Trump was a horrible president. The right is ready to string him up thinking it's something historical and shows that people were out to get Trump. Neither is really true. All modern presidents need a babysitter when it comes to the military. The only thing historical here is that someone actually went on the record about it.
/thread
 
Babysitting seems like a good term for what has and should happen in the past. And based on past interviews, I think DJT was dumb as a sack of hammers regarding military equipment, operations, strategy, even operational protocol.

But this wasn't babysitting. Babysitting would be advising the Sec of Defense, and COC, in the room at the same time, discussing the issues. And informing SoD and CoC of the calls to China.

But Milley included or informed SoD and CoC in none of the calls, or the directives (oath request) Milley made to military leaders and commanders. It was total subversion, going behind the backs of chain of command. Without informing them at all. Insubordination.

Its a "my boss DJT is crazier than a shthouse rat, so all Constitutional and military laws, rules, and norms are off. I need to go rogue unilaterally, for the good of the country" mindset and action. That is a very dangerous new standard / precedent that cannot stand, IMO.
Milley isn't really denying this rogue stuff, so imo his credibility is shot and he needs to be replaced, esp given the outcome in Afghanistan.

At same time I appreciate him trying to protect world peace.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT