The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
01-18-2018, 01:22 PM
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
2018: year of the hard hitting news story:
Hillary Clinton Could Still Become President if Russia Probe Finds Conspiracy Evidence
Hillary Clinton Could Still Become President if Russia Probe Finds Conspiracy Evidence
Nearly a year after President Donald Trump’s inauguration, a Harvard University professor says 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton could still become commander in chief.
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 09:37 AM
...I'm assuming she's not looking in a rear view mirror of a car for that glimpse of her hair...
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 09:49 AM
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,026
Total Cats: 6,592
I mean, is that why this doesn't seem funny to me? Because I get the fact that women, as a broad generalization, want to feel like they look pretty, regardless of who else is looking at them?
If so, I have to ask: have any of you ever actually talked to a woman before?
(I know Scott has, I've seen her. But in has case, I accept that he's being deliberately obtuse.)
In most of North America and Europe, as well as Saudi Arabia, she might be. In most of south-eastern Asia and northern Africa, she'd be using the mirror built into the sun visor.
I mean, I get it. Hair is kind of a religious thing for a lot of women, but I assume you're not speaking metaphorically here.
Serious commentary:
Some conservatives go to just as great a length to be offended by leftist speech as many liberals do to be offended by rightist speech.
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 10:30 AM
Elite Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,593
Total Cats: 1,259
I am not offended by it, but I see it as pandering by the companies that cater to this type of ****.
If Loreal really cared at all about women, they wouldn't be trying to sell **** to oppressed women, but to change attitudes that allow/propagate the oppression. (i.e. Islam and all it's fucked up values)
If Loreal really cared at all about women, they wouldn't be trying to sell **** to oppressed women, but to change attitudes that allow/propagate the oppression. (i.e. Islam and all it's fucked up values)
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 10:38 AM
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,026
Total Cats: 6,592
It's a serious question. They're a publicly traded corporation, with 90,000 employees and over $29 billion in equity. It seems to me that their primary concerns should be that their employees' paychecks clear the bank, and that their investors receive a satisfactory return on their money.
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 11:52 AM
Is Loreal supposed to care about women in countries which have oppressively theist governments?
It's a serious question. They're a publicly traded corporation, with 90,000 employees and over $29 billion in equity. It seems to me that their primary concerns should be that their employees' paychecks clear the bank, and that their investors receive a satisfactory return on their money.
It's a serious question. They're a publicly traded corporation, with 90,000 employees and over $29 billion in equity. It seems to me that their primary concerns should be that their employees' paychecks clear the bank, and that their investors receive a satisfactory return on their money.
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 11:54 AM
I feel woke.
Ann Coulter - January 17, 2018 - THE LEFT'S DIRTY LITTLE SECRET - CLEANED BY ROSA!
"I also can't help but notice that just as black Americans had won their full civil rights and were about to burst into the American economy ... Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) helped pass the 1965 immigration act that began dumping millions and millions of low-wage workers on the country to compete with them.
Obviously, the people hurt most by the mass immigration of low-skilled workers are black Americans, aka, The Only Reason We Care So Much About Racism. I refer you to the Jordan Report -- overseen by actual civil rights icon Barbara Jordan.
Far from making up for the legacy of slavery, our immigration policies solve the exact same problem that slavery solved: rich people's eternal need for cheap labor.
We don't owe immigrants anything. They aren't black Americans. We didn't do anything to the Mexicans streaming across our border. Or, for that matter, to the Haitians, Ecuadorians, Pakistanis and so on. No slavery, no Jim Crow laws, no redlining -- just billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid. (Hey, does anyone know if billions of dollars would be enough to pay for a wall?)
We certainly don't owe them more than we owe our own fellow citizens, especially our black fellow citizens, who could use our help. "
Ann Coulter - January 17, 2018 - THE LEFT'S DIRTY LITTLE SECRET - CLEANED BY ROSA!
"I also can't help but notice that just as black Americans had won their full civil rights and were about to burst into the American economy ... Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) helped pass the 1965 immigration act that began dumping millions and millions of low-wage workers on the country to compete with them.
Obviously, the people hurt most by the mass immigration of low-skilled workers are black Americans, aka, The Only Reason We Care So Much About Racism. I refer you to the Jordan Report -- overseen by actual civil rights icon Barbara Jordan.
Far from making up for the legacy of slavery, our immigration policies solve the exact same problem that slavery solved: rich people's eternal need for cheap labor.
We don't owe immigrants anything. They aren't black Americans. We didn't do anything to the Mexicans streaming across our border. Or, for that matter, to the Haitians, Ecuadorians, Pakistanis and so on. No slavery, no Jim Crow laws, no redlining -- just billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid. (Hey, does anyone know if billions of dollars would be enough to pay for a wall?)
We certainly don't owe them more than we owe our own fellow citizens, especially our black fellow citizens, who could use our help. "
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 12:09 PM
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,026
Total Cats: 6,592
"I also can't help but notice that just as black Americans had won their full civil rights and were about to burst into the American economy ... Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) helped pass the 1965 immigration act that began dumping millions and millions of low-wage workers on the country to compete with them. "
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 12:52 PM
As a man, I also like to look good regardless of who is looking at me. It makes me feel better about myself.
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 02:52 PM
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
I just found out my project is fully funded, so I get to come into the office, pretty much alone while all my coworkers have to stay home and waste vacation hours.
POLITICAL NARRATIVE: “The Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the presidency. They could fund the government if they wanted to. A shut down will be their fault should one occur.” REALITY: This is one of the most intellectually dishonest narratives being pushed at the moment, for the simple fact that it’s not true. Republicans only have 51 seats in the Senate, and passing the continuing resolution to fund the government requires 60 votes...
...BECAUSE DEM...OCRATS ARE FILIBUSTERING IT.
In the House, Republicans (along with some Democrats) passed the required appropriations bills last September, as well as a continuing resolution yesterday to keep the government open.
But in the Senate, Democrats have filibustered every single appropriations bill as well as the continuing resolution. And without 60 votes, Republicans cannot stop a shut down. Even if every Republican voted to end the filibuster, they’d still need 9 Democrats to join with them to reach 60 votes. And so far, only 1 Democrat, West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, has indicated he will vote yes.
Now, you can fault Republicans for not yet giving Democrats what they want on DACA (even though it isn’t due until March), or you can fault President Trump for inflaming the immigration issue with his “sh*thole” comment, or you could even blame both sides for the divisive tone that’s making it harder to legislate.
But to say a shut down would be the Republicans’ fault since they hold congress and the presidency and could pass a government funding measure if they wanted to is completely false. A shut down would, literally, be the direct result of a Democratic filibuster.
...BECAUSE DEM...OCRATS ARE FILIBUSTERING IT.
In the House, Republicans (along with some Democrats) passed the required appropriations bills last September, as well as a continuing resolution yesterday to keep the government open.
But in the Senate, Democrats have filibustered every single appropriations bill as well as the continuing resolution. And without 60 votes, Republicans cannot stop a shut down. Even if every Republican voted to end the filibuster, they’d still need 9 Democrats to join with them to reach 60 votes. And so far, only 1 Democrat, West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, has indicated he will vote yes.
Now, you can fault Republicans for not yet giving Democrats what they want on DACA (even though it isn’t due until March), or you can fault President Trump for inflaming the immigration issue with his “sh*thole” comment, or you could even blame both sides for the divisive tone that’s making it harder to legislate.
But to say a shut down would be the Republicans’ fault since they hold congress and the presidency and could pass a government funding measure if they wanted to is completely false. A shut down would, literally, be the direct result of a Democratic filibuster.
Reply
0
0
01-19-2018, 03:29 PM
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
#justsaynotowhites #blackpower #diverstiyisgod #dontstealmydredlocks #meritisracist #givemefreethingsitsonlyfair #yourwelcometosharemyloincloth
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The BBC is under fire and stirring controversy, yet again, after promoting another racially discriminatory traineeship.
The media organization funded by the British public is seeking a “Trainee Multi-Media Journalist” with willingness “to try new things” and “excellent understanding of relevant social media platforms.”
Oh, and they can’t be white.
The application section of the job description clearly states that the “traineeship is only open to candidates from a black, Asian or non-white ethnic minority background.”
The BBC even boasted about its racial discrimination policy on Twitter.
The media organization funded by the British public is seeking a “Trainee Multi-Media Journalist” with willingness “to try new things” and “excellent understanding of relevant social media platforms.”
Oh, and they can’t be white.
The application section of the job description clearly states that the “traineeship is only open to candidates from a black, Asian or non-white ethnic minority background.”
The BBC even boasted about its racial discrimination policy on Twitter.
Reply
0
0
