Welcome to Thunderdome

It isn't like intellectual curiosity has done much good for us in the last 10 years, government-wise.

Is not wanting to read something a lack of intellectual curiosity?

I'd rather watch a YouTube video on fixing my fridge than read a manual. Do I have no desire to learn something?

Trump asks where due process is for accused men.

I hate it when he says stuff that's even remotely intelligent. It means if you try to say the same or something similar it'll immediately get shit on because "Trump".

Clearly a rape apologist.

Leisher wrote: Is not wanting to read something a lack of intellectual curiosity?

I'd rather watch a YouTube video on fixing my fridge than read a manual. Do I have no desire to learn something?

Depends on the subject at hand. I'd also rather watch a "How to" video rather than read a manual. Not wanting to read a particular something isn't necessarily a lack of intellectual curiosity, but I'd say not wanting to read anything is. I've never seen any evidence that Trump has read a book in the last 10 years. You watch the first few times on a teleprompter and it was painful and obvious that reading is not his forte. I was watching a news segment with my wife the first time I saw him on teleprompter and was saying, "sound it out" out loud.

For all accusations against Bush about his being dumb, he was a voracious reader. Often in pictures of him leaving or arriving at the White House on trips, he carried his latest book. He often complained that being in office kept him from reading as much as he was used to.

Leisher wrote: Trump asks where due process is for accused men.

I hate it when he says stuff that's even remotely intelligent. It means if you try to say the same or something similar it'll immediately get shit on because "Trump".

I'm not sure I'm tracking on what you mean here. Do you think he's making a legitimate defense of Porter in this?

Vince wrote: ot wanting to read a particular something isn't necessarily a lack of intellectual curiosity, but I'd say not wanting to read anything is. I've never seen any evidence that Trump has read a book in the last 10 years.

A fair point, but we don't know that he doesn't read anything. I think it's more ridiculous that he's being criticized just because he's not doing something like the last few presidents before him. It's especially interesting coming from people who lean politically towards beliefs that are about abandoning traditions.

I think what's more important isn't how he receives briefings, but his (and other presidents') understanding of the briefings.

"Apes don't read philosophy."
"Yes they do, Otto. They just don't understand it."

Vince wrote: For all accusations against Bush about his being dumb, he was a voracious reader.

I can prove reading doesn't equate to intelligence, but I understand your point. Also, Bush being dumb was political bullshit. He had a very bad personality for job, but that awkwardness doesn't make you stupid.

Vince wrote: Do you think he's making a legitimate defense of Porter in this?

Is Porter the one accused of slapping his wife around?

Anyway, no. I'm not suggesting asking where due process has gone is a legitimate defense of anyone's particular alleged crimes. I'm saying that Trump using that phrase in the era of #metoo means whenever someone suggests maybe don't destroy a person's life over an accusation, they will inevitably be called a Trump supporter, which will distract from the point at hand.

Leisher wrote:A fair point, but we don't know that he doesn't read anything. I think it's more ridiculous that he's being criticized just because he's not doing something like the last few presidents before him. It's especially interesting coming from people who lean politically towards beliefs that are about abandoning traditions.

I suspect we are near the same ground on this. Not reading the briefings doesn't mean he's stupid and can't read, but I sure wish I had something to point to in order to actually repudiate that notion.

Leisher wrote:Is Porter the one accused of slapping his wife around?

Anyway, no. I'm not suggesting asking where due process has gone is a legitimate defense of anyone's particular alleged crimes. I'm saying that Trump using that phrase in the era of #metoo means whenever someone suggests maybe don't destroy a person's life over an accusation, they will inevitably be called a Trump supporter, which will distract from the point at hand.

Yes, Porter was one of the two men recently shitcanned from the White House for domestic abuse accusations reported by the FBI that the White House sat on for months. I think he hurts legitimate issues when he does stuff like this. He could clearly separate what he's saying from the issues he's having at the White House, but he won't because he's pretty much using the question to defend his White House (which make no mistake, is why the question was asked).

Vince wrote: I suspect we are near the same ground on this.

Agreed.

Vince wrote: I think he hurts legitimate issues when he does stuff like this.

Exactly.

Russia plans to meddle again and both Russia and China want to attack our satellites.

I get buying FB ads, and really don't give a shit about it.

However, attacking and/or destroying satellites has to be considered an act of aggression right?

Trump (or the USDA depending on whose story you're reading) wants to cut down heavily on food stamps and replace them with delivered meals.

"Advocates for the poor" say this is bad because poor people are:

working hard to achieve economic mobility without the critical assistance they need to not fall further into poverty

And delivering them meals instead of giving them a SNAP card denies them that opportunity how exactly?

Isn't this person basically saying, "They need the ability to spend that SNAP money on other things"?

Utility tends to be maximized when people make their own purchasing decisions. And we already have a bunch of companies with a food distribution network. And why would we want the government in the meal delivery business?

TheCatt wrote: Utility tends to be maximized when people make their own purchasing decisions.

True, but it's also been proven that a large segment of these folks are prone to misusing these funds.

TheCatt wrote: And we already have a bunch of companies with a food distribution network.

I don't think SNAP card holders are their target market.

TheCatt wrote: And why would we want the government in the meal delivery business?

I don't want the government in that business, but aren't they already in that business?

I'm not necessarily defending Trump or attacking his plan. However, I do think our welfare programs are a dumpster fire and need improvement. They should be designed to get people off of them, not make them comfortable living that way forever.

Trump's lawyer says they paid Stormy Daniels with Trump's personal money even though her story wasn't true.

It's a mystery why people hate lawyers...

Leisher wrote: True, but it's also been proven that a large segment of these folks are prone to misusing these funds.

Then add a few more restrictions. But I think fraud is a minority of the $ spent. Outright fraud is estimated at 1%, I'm guessing misuse is another 1-9%. (I couldnt find any good data on the latter).

Leisher wrote:I don't think SNAP card holders are their target market.

I mean grocery stores. Not Blue Apron, etc.

Leisher wrote: but aren't they already in that business?

No? They just provide $. And, I guess maybe some government cheese, but I honestly dont know much about that.

Leisher wrote: Trump's lawyer says they paid Stormy Daniels with Trump's personal money even though her story wasn't true.

It's a mystery why people hate lawyers...

That's 100% believable.

Trump approval up since tax bill passed.



37.5% on bill signage, 41.4% now. Disapproval down from 57% to 53%.

TheCatt wrote: Then add a few more restrictions. But I think fraud is a minority of the $ spent. Outright fraud is estimated at 1%, I'm guessing misuse is another 1-9%. (I couldnt find any good data on the latter).

I'm fine with that. Although, I strongly dispute these fraud and misuse numbers. I've known too many folks who work at convenience stores and grocery stores who detail what those things get used for to believe misuse is that low. Hell, you can trade your SNAP cards for crack. Those numbers wouldn't even appear because the drug dealers eventually use the card properly.

TheCatt wrote: No? They just provide $.

That's what I was implying. If they can do it cheaper, shouldn't it be explored as an option? Beggars can't be choosers.

Leisher wrote: If they can do it cheaper, shouldn't it be explored as an option?

Have you met our government? I can't tell if you're just fucking with me now.

TheCatt wrote:

Leisher wrote: If they can do it cheaper, shouldn't it be explored as an option?

Have you met our government? I can't tell if you're just fucking with me now.

A little of this, a little of that. Kind of like you do in the NCAA thread.

Listen, I have ZERO faith our government can run a program correctly. Less than zero. However, I know the welfare programs are broken and need to be fixed.

I think any immediate condemnation of new ideas is bullshit because welfare has been around a long time, and its track record for getting people off of it, which is the ultimate goal, is pretty shitty.

I think welfare in this country and prisons are in the same situation. They're too comfortable. You shouldn't be comfortable. You should be forced to improve yourself to get out.