Octopus Overlords

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1014995091591753728

Associated Press wrote:AP NewsBreak: The U.S. Army has moved in recent weeks to discharge dozens of immigrant recruits and reservists who enlisted through a program that promised them a path to citizenship. http://apne.ws/JOBp0kF

BUT LIBRULS HATEBTHE TROOPS!!!1!

We love the brave service men and women who protect our freedoms!

Well...except those ones. They don't count.

If true that is horseshit. They should not back out of these deals unless something disqualifying in their backgrounds come to light that they didn't disclose. I'm a big proponent of military service being a path to citizenship.

The only difference between the Trump administration and Nazi Germany is that Trump is just arresting/deporting brown people, not gassing them (at least not yet). The reach has been steadily, quietly growing. No longer limited to the borders.

Go read Erik Larson's "In the Garden of Beasts" and look at the parallels.

Rip wrote: Thu Jul 05, 2018 7:37 pm They should not back out of these deals unless something disqualifying in their backgrounds come to light that they didn't disclose.

C'mon, you remember... Don't you? They brought drugs. They brought crime. They are rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

Rip wrote:If true that is horseshit. They should not back out of these deals unless something disqualifying in their backgrounds come to light that they didn't disclose. I'm a big proponent of military service being a path to citizenship.

Womp womp

YellowKing wrote: Thu Jul 05, 2018 9:50 pm The only difference between the Trump administration and Nazi Germany is that Trump is just arresting/deporting brown people, not gassing them (at least not yet). The reach has been steadily, quietly growing. No longer limited to the borders.

Go read Erik Larson's "In the Garden of Beasts" and look at the parallels.

It really struck me last month when they started up de-naturalization task forces. They are setting up a system to potentially purge people. It'll be a trickle at first but then they likely will expand the scope gradually over time.

https://twitter.com/timkmak/status/1015222450265755649

Now that makes more sense.

If any of the people in the article were too fat, it might.

That's all it takes, I guess. A quick 140 characters and a former outrage inducing news article becomes "fake news". If you want it to be.

GreenGoo wrote: Fri Jul 06, 2018 9:40 pm If any of the people in the article were too fat, it might.

That's all it takes, I guess. A quick 140 characters and a former outrage inducing news article becomes "fake news". If you want it to be.

What I want it to be isn't relevant. It is obviously fake news.

We'll know when we see the results of the lawsuit, not some shitty twitter war between pseudo-intellectuals speculating as hard as they can in the direction they want the truth to be.

As long as someone, somewhere can rationalize an explanation that you're happy with, it becomes the truth.

You could be right, it could be a politically motivated article spinning normal discharges. And perhaps lawsuits incorporating multiple dischargees is also completely normal. I don't have a clue. This is the first I've even heard of the program.

If only there was some way to not decide ahead of time with no facts aside from opinions in support of things we want to believe are true.

I guess what I'm saying is that you're as pathetic as you ever were. Whether the article is right, whether random twitter feeds are right, just fucking wait and find out, if you really care. You pretended to care, but you didn't, not really. Once someone handed you an out that allowed you to believe the world is a lie perpetrated by people who's politics you don't like, it was easy to simply decide the article was a non-issue and walk away, conscience intact.

This is why politics is broken in the US. It is completely possible to come up with halfway plausible explanations for literally *anything*, and if you just stop there, it doesn't matter what the truth is, mouthpieces have told you the issue is either a non-issue or the biggest issue ever to face humanity ever, and now all the thinking is over and the only thing left is the knowledge that the other side is the problem.

GreenGoo wrote: Sat Jul 07, 2018 1:55 am We'll know when we see the results of the lawsuit, not some shitty twitter war between pseudo-intellectuals speculating as hard as they can in the direction they want the truth to be.

As long as someone, somewhere can rationalize an explanation that you're happy with, it becomes the truth.

You could be right, it could be a politically motivated article spinning normal discharges. And perhaps lawsuits incorporating multiple dischargees is also completely normal. I don't have a clue. This is the first I've even heard of the program.

If only there was some way to not decide ahead of time with no facts aside from opinions in support of things we want to believe are true.

I guess what I'm saying is that you're as pathetic as you ever were. Whether the article is right, whether random twitter feeds are right, just fucking wait and find out, if you really care. You pretended to care, but you didn't, not really. Once someone handed you an out that allowed you to believe the world is a lie perpetrated by people who's politics you don't like, it was easy to simply decide the article was a non-issue and walk away, conscience intact.

This is why politics is broken in the US. It is completely possible to come up with halfway plausible explanations for literally *anything*, and if you just stop there, it doesn't matter what the truth is, mouthpieces have told you the issue is either a non-issue or the biggest issue ever to face humanity ever, and now all the thinking is over and the only thing left is the knowledge that the other side is the problem.

I hear you. Hard to trust those NPR dudes on twitter.

Rip wrote:

GreenGoo wrote: Sat Jul 07, 2018 1:55 am We'll know when we see the results of the lawsuit, not some shitty twitter war between pseudo-intellectuals speculating as hard as they can in the direction they want the truth to be.

As long as someone, somewhere can rationalize an explanation that you're happy with, it becomes the truth.

You could be right, it could be a politically motivated article spinning normal discharges. And perhaps lawsuits incorporating multiple dischargees is also completely normal. I don't have a clue. This is the first I've even heard of the program.

If only there was some way to not decide ahead of time with no facts aside from opinions in support of things we want to believe are true.

I guess what I'm saying is that you're as pathetic as you ever were. Whether the article is right, whether random twitter feeds are right, just fucking wait and find out, if you really care. You pretended to care, but you didn't, not really. Once someone handed you an out that allowed you to believe the world is a lie perpetrated by people who's politics you don't like, it was easy to simply decide the article was a non-issue and walk away, conscience intact.

This is why politics is broken in the US. It is completely possible to come up with halfway plausible explanations for literally *anything*, and if you just stop there, it doesn't matter what the truth is, mouthpieces have told you the issue is either a non-issue or the biggest issue ever to face humanity ever, and now all the thinking is over and the only thing left is the knowledge that the other side is the problem.

I hear you. Hard to trust those NPR dudes on twitter.

What you may or may not be missing and why the regular discharge reasoning is only marginally relevant, is that within the regular discharge of recruits policies are set for priorities at various times. when we need lots of troops, tattoos, asthma, fat kids, slow kids. When when we don't need more troops, only the finest cuts of meat. It's not that the military is picking and choosing, it's the potentiality of a new filter that is potentially a nationalist policy from the top that is just anti immigrant and racist. Maybe it's not, but Green Goo's point is still generally intact. The idea of filtering for race or immigration status seems pretty counter to previous precedent. And while you were rightly suspicious, someone makes a tangential justification and you breath a big sigh of relief.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Eligible recruits are required to have legal status in the U.S., such as a student visa, before enlisting. More than 5,000 immigrants were recruited into the program in 2016, and an estimated 10,000 are currently serving. Most go the Army, but some also go to the other military branches.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ap-newsbreak ... itics.html

Hard to use 40 getting denied out of the thousands that are serving and getting what they were supposed to as some sort of anti-immigrant claim. If it is some anti-immigrant push it is a woefully weak one.

If only there was a way to not accept confirmation bias as fact.

But alas, that's impossible, apparently.

Have new facts come to light? No? Then why are you arguing like they have?

I don't give a crap if you believe the original story. ALL news should be met with a critical eye. The goal for most people in this post-fact world should be to gather as much information as possible and think critically.

The answer to false news is more information, not a closed mind and believe as knowledge.

Why am I wasting time. As a forum member you're a complete write-off.

GreenGoo wrote: Sat Jul 07, 2018 11:51 am
Why am I wasting time. As a forum member you're a complete write-off.

Probably because without Rip all you have left to do is debate the degree to which Trump sucks. Debating can be frustrating, but it also can be fun. While Rip tends towards the frustrating side, your only other choice here on most topics is agreement. Which isn’t fun.

I'm sure rip thinks he is contributing for the same reason. Hell, I used to think that.

Experience has taught me that conflict is not debate. Contrary opinions are not valid simply because they are contrary.

Rip is not a conservative voice, he is an antiforum voice. That makes him a bad person. Not because of his politics, but because of his desire to sow conflict without reason. Yes, I'm aware he often veils it in a thin veneer of "viewpoint". Over a decade of experience shows this is nothing but a facade. The contrary opinion is more important than the policy opinion.

I wasn't arguing the validity of Rip's arguments, I was arguing that arguing is fun!

Or maybe that conflict is necessary to avoid boredom.

Something like that. Mostly I was trying to be funny. Though with a hint of truth. Reading through the R&P forums it is mostly people ramping up in agreement, with occasional delving into debate in a very few subjects. Though, to be fair, there aren't many places where honest debate doesn't go down in flames, so maybe debate on degree of agreement is the future.

GreenGoo wrote: Sat Jul 07, 2018 11:51 am If only there was a way to not accept confirmation bias as fact.

But alas, that's impossible, apparently.

Have new facts come to light? No? Then why are you arguing like they have?

I don't give a crap if you believe the original story. ALL news should be met with a critical eye. The goal for most people in this post-fact world should be to gather as much information as possible and think critically.

The answer to false news is more information, not a closed mind and believe as knowledge.

Why am I wasting time. As a forum member you're a complete write-off.

The facts are quite simple.

The Pentagon said Friday that there has been no policy change since last year, when Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said no one could enter basic training without completion of a background investigation.

Delayed entry people get rejected all the time. I know six off the top of my head that failed to get security clearances for the sub nuclear program that were denied because they were guaranteed that. In couple of those they were later allowed in using billets that didn't require as rigorous clearance. But all of the were white midwestern boys. The clearances care not about color of skin but about the ability to pass the requirements. I myself had to get a weight waiver.

Fitzy wrote: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:47 pm I wasn't arguing the validity of Rip's arguments, I was arguing that arguing is fun!

Arguing is fun, but only if it involves honestly held positions. Without an honestly held position, a side is free to constantly change their position so that it always looks like they're winning.

a) I don't give a crap about your personal experiences. Who in their right mind would? Even you must question your own stories based on the precedent you've set with past ones.
b) Of fucking course the government is not going to come out and say they are purging ethnicities they don't like. WTF.
c) I used to believe the government at least tried to be semi-honest about things. Your shitheel has seen to it that the government is as bad as government haters always thought.
d) Waiting to hear whether the lawsuit has merit or not. The courts might just be the last bastion of honesty left in your country. Luckily shitheel is working hard in that area. Worked out great for Poland.

I seriously do *NOT* want to hear about how you're sure everything is fine because in the past people were kicked out of the program (no fucking shit) and the government says there is no problem so there is no problem.

Either the story will develop or it won't. It won't be refuted by a twitter feed or the government itself. That's like asking a thief if he stole anything and freeing him based on his testimony.

Listen, I don't give 2 shits if you think the story has merit or not. Stop throwing shade at it without new facts. I personally have no idea if the story has merit or not. I know one thing for fucking certain, I won't be taking Rip's posts at proof that it doesn't.

If there are no new developments and/or the lawsuit is found to be without merit, so be it. Shame on the original article writer and his/her editor(s). If there are new developments and/or the lawsuit is found to have merit, well, all the pentagon protestations in the world won't mean jack.

So sick of cases being true or lies based on peoples' feelings or how many people voice their opinions about it. It's George Zimmerman and Trayvon Johnson every fucking day.

I'm sorry, this is abuse.

Want the denials by Trump administration to be believed? Maybe they should stop lying 80% of the time.

Want Trump's every action not to be reviewed for racism? Tell him to stop saying racist shit, appointing known racists to leadership positions, and taking targeted actions that affect non-white people.

Obama had every action evaluated and criticized for 8 years. Trump is getting no worse, and better treatment than he deserves.

If Trump and the Republicans think the news is so unfair and fake, perhaps they/FOX shouldn't have polluted the waters over inane bullshit or elected an incompetent idiot who deliberately upsets and divides people.

U.S. Opposition to Breast-Feeding Resolution Stuns World Health Officials

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/08/heal ... trump.html

Yes the USA cares more about money in the pockets of formula makers than the well being of its babies. Gee who would have guessed that one. Probably everybody.

A resolution to encourage breast-feeding was expected to be approved quickly and easily by the hundreds of government delegates who gathered this spring in Geneva for the United Nations-affiliated World Health Assembly.

Based on decades of research, the resolution says that mother’s milk is healthiest for children and countries should strive to limit the inaccurate or misleading marketing of breast milk substitutes.

Then the United States delegation, embracing the interests of infant formula manufacturers, upended the deliberations.

American officials sought to water down the resolution by removing language that called on governments to “protect, promote and support breast-feeding” and another passage that called on policymakers to restrict the promotion of food products that many experts say can have deleterious effects on young children.

In the end after America tried to blackmail other countries into not saying anything it was the Russians who saved the day.DOH!

The showdown over the issue was recounted by more than a dozen participants from several countries, many of whom requested anonymity because they feared retaliation from the United States.

Health advocates scrambled to find another sponsor for the resolution, but at least a dozen countries, most of them poor nations in Africa and Latin America, backed off, citing fears of retaliation, according to officials from Uruguay, Mexico and the United States.

“We were astonished, appalled and also saddened,” said Patti Rundall, the policy director of the British advocacy group Baby Milk Action, who has attended meetings of the assembly, the decision-making body of the World Health Organization, since the late 1980s.

“What happened was tantamount to blackmail, with the U.S. holding the world hostage and trying to overturn nearly 40 years of consensus on best way to protect infant and young child health,” she said.

In the end, the Americans’ efforts were mostly unsuccessful. It was the Russians who ultimately stepped in to introduce the measure — and the Americans did not threaten them.

If the GOP got hit in the wallet that would probably hurt them.

https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1 ... 8826306565

Rep. Jim Jordan wrote:Now @CNN is contacting all 100+ of our former staff and interns asking for dirt on me. Getting desperate! How can you ever trust such #fakenews?

Um... I'm pretty sure contacting as many sources as possible is how real journalism works.

Holman wrote: Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:56 pm https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1 ... 8826306565

Rep. Jim Jordan wrote:Now @CNN is contacting all 100+ of our former staff and interns asking for dirt on me. Getting desperate! How can you ever trust such #fakenews?

Um... I'm pretty sure contacting as many sources as possible is how real journalism works.

Man, how can you trust someone who talks to people and learns stuff?

Unnamed sources: Fake News!

Few named sources: Fake News!

Lots of named sources: Fake News!

Fitzy wrote: Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:17 pm Unnamed sources: Fake News!

Few named sources: Fake News!

Lots of named sources: Fake News!

One loud-mouthed orange source - Must be true!

OMFG

Uralasbest, a Russian asbestos mining firm, recently touted on Facebook that it has begun stamping shipments with President Trump’s face and a message: “Approved by Donald Trump, 45th President of the United States.”
[...]
The vast majority of asbestos products still cleared for use in the United States were imported from Brazil, which recently banned the material late last year. The rest of asbestos products were imported from Russia.

Obama stars in new anti-gerrymandering video for Eric Holder's organization

There's been a lot of talk on the forum lately about the sick state of our democracy. Rather than manning the barricades, we should do whatever we can to address gerrymandering. It's the cancer that's eating away at our core. Above all else, and regardless of party affiliation, anyone who really wants our democracy to succeed and flourish should become a single-issue voter on gerrymandering. Vote in your state elections and don't vote for anyone who won't commit to work to address this issue.

Kurth wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am Obama stars in new anti-gerrymandering video for Eric Holder's organization

There's been a lot of talk on the forum lately about the sick state of our democracy. Rather than manning the barricades, we should do whatever we can to address gerrymandering. It's the cancer that's eating away at our core. Above all else, and regardless of party affiliation, anyone who really wants our democracy to succeed and flourish should become a single-issue voter on gerrymandering. Vote in your state elections and don't vote for anyone who won't commit to work to address this issue.

That sounds good in theory, but it is a difficult topic to tackle. As 538 demonstrated, the maps can change a lot depending on what your priorities are and not everything that looks like gerrymandering actually is.

stessier wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:30 am

Kurth wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am Obama stars in new anti-gerrymandering video for Eric Holder's organization

There's been a lot of talk on the forum lately about the sick state of our democracy. Rather than manning the barricades, we should do whatever we can to address gerrymandering. It's the cancer that's eating away at our core. Above all else, and regardless of party affiliation, anyone who really wants our democracy to succeed and flourish should become a single-issue voter on gerrymandering. Vote in your state elections and don't vote for anyone who won't commit to work to address this issue.

That sounds good in theory, but it is a difficult topic to tackle. As 538 demonstrated, the maps can change a lot depending on what your priorities are and not everything that looks like gerrymandering actually is.

The solutions aren't necessarily simple, but that doesn't mean that gerrymandering isn't a problem that needs to be addressed (nor that one can't improve upon the current system).

Also, I do think that we need to address a lot more electorally than just gerrymandering. I would say the big needed reforms are:

(1) Ranked-choice voting (hey, third parties can actually compete without annihilating their policy preferences as soon as they start to gain traction!)
(2) Automatic voter registration (other anti-voter suppression measures may be 80%+ as good, but this is the main thing).
(3) Gerrymandering reform

Fortunately, all three can (and for the most part must) be addressed at the state level, which is good since Congress isn't in the business of fixing things at the moment, and likely won't be for some time. Also something that people can do who live in essentially one-party states, since passing reforms like these in those states will help spread the reforms, which will help motivate people and pressure legislators in more purple-ish states.

El Guapo wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:44 am

stessier wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:30 am

Kurth wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am Obama stars in new anti-gerrymandering video for Eric Holder's organization

There's been a lot of talk on the forum lately about the sick state of our democracy. Rather than manning the barricades, we should do whatever we can to address gerrymandering. It's the cancer that's eating away at our core. Above all else, and regardless of party affiliation, anyone who really wants our democracy to succeed and flourish should become a single-issue voter on gerrymandering. Vote in your state elections and don't vote for anyone who won't commit to work to address this issue.

That sounds good in theory, but it is a difficult topic to tackle. As 538 demonstrated, the maps can change a lot depending on what your priorities are and not everything that looks like gerrymandering actually is.

The solutions aren't necessarily simple, but that doesn't mean that gerrymandering isn't a problem that needs to be addressed (nor that one can't improve upon the current system).

I agree, but because it isn't simple, neither is evaluating candidates positions. Just saying "I will fix gerrymandering" is not good enough. Seeing how well the electorate handles complex subjects, I'm not holding out a lot of hope.

stessier wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:54 am

El Guapo wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:44 am

stessier wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:30 am

Kurth wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am Obama stars in new anti-gerrymandering video for Eric Holder's organization

There's been a lot of talk on the forum lately about the sick state of our democracy. Rather than manning the barricades, we should do whatever we can to address gerrymandering. It's the cancer that's eating away at our core. Above all else, and regardless of party affiliation, anyone who really wants our democracy to succeed and flourish should become a single-issue voter on gerrymandering. Vote in your state elections and don't vote for anyone who won't commit to work to address this issue.

That sounds good in theory, but it is a difficult topic to tackle. As 538 demonstrated, the maps can change a lot depending on what your priorities are and not everything that looks like gerrymandering actually is.

The solutions aren't necessarily simple, but that doesn't mean that gerrymandering isn't a problem that needs to be addressed (nor that one can't improve upon the current system).

I agree, but because it isn't simple, neither is evaluating candidates positions. Just saying "I will fix gerrymandering" is not good enough. Seeing how well the electorate handles complex subjects, I'm not holding out a lot of hope.

Right, but that just means that you (that is, reform groups) need to figure out the most reasonable solution, and then go state-by-state pitching people on that system (using digestible soundbites / narratives).

Easy peasy.

stessier wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:02 amEasy peasy.

I mean, obviously it's the work of years (possibly decades), but that doesn't mean that it's not worth doing. There are already examples. Arizona's commission-based system was messy in its rollout, but it seems to have worked well (as covered by the 538 podcast).

Kurth wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am Obama stars in new anti-gerrymandering video for Eric Holder's organization

There's been a lot of talk on the forum lately about the sick state of our democracy. Rather than manning the barricades, we should do whatever we can to address gerrymandering. It's the cancer that's eating away at our core. Above all else, and regardless of party affiliation, anyone who really wants our democracy to succeed and flourish should become a single-issue voter on gerrymandering. Vote in your state elections and don't vote for anyone who won't commit to work to address this issue.

Any hope of fixing gerrymandering ended with Kennedy's retirement.

Fireball wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:35 pm

Kurth wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am Obama stars in new anti-gerrymandering video for Eric Holder's organization

There's been a lot of talk on the forum lately about the sick state of our democracy. Rather than manning the barricades, we should do whatever we can to address gerrymandering. It's the cancer that's eating away at our core. Above all else, and regardless of party affiliation, anyone who really wants our democracy to succeed and flourish should become a single-issue voter on gerrymandering. Vote in your state elections and don't vote for anyone who won't commit to work to address this issue.

Any hope of fixing gerrymandering ended with Kennedy's retirement.

Kennedy punted on gerrymandering before retiring - I think if he were inclined to fix gerrymandering, he would have done it in that case.

This still leaves state-level fixes, although what I do worry about with Kennedy retiring is that the new majority is going to be inclined to strike down gerrymandering reforms as unconstitutional.

El Guapo wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:25 pm

Fireball wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:35 pm

Kurth wrote: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am Obama stars in new anti-gerrymandering video for Eric Holder's organization

There's been a lot of talk on the forum lately about the sick state of our democracy. Rather than manning the barricades, we should do whatever we can to address gerrymandering. It's the cancer that's eating away at our core. Above all else, and regardless of party affiliation, anyone who really wants our democracy to succeed and flourish should become a single-issue voter on gerrymandering. Vote in your state elections and don't vote for anyone who won't commit to work to address this issue.

Any hope of fixing gerrymandering ended with Kennedy's retirement.

Kennedy punted on gerrymandering before retiring - I think if he were inclined to fix gerrymandering, he would have done it in that case.

This still leaves state-level fixes, although what I do worry about with Kennedy retiring is that the new majority is going to be inclined to strike down gerrymandering reforms as unconstitutional.

That, and the fact that most states can't be fixed without legislative action, which is unlikely.