Bonn1997 wrote:Apparently the 17 month old gay marriage ruling of the Supreme Court is "settled law" to Trump, but the 53 year old Roe v Wade ruling isn't settled law.

you know...i think gay rights won't be that effected by this and i believe it's b/c of one and only one reason...men are gay also. if being gay was just limited to women, they wouldn't be able to get married let alone be out and about but since men are gay as well...rules get passed.

that's why it's "settled law" to trump but telling women what to do with their body is still something men want to do.

meloshouldgo wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:Very good chance Assange is going to a be free man. Thank you Trump

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/798110156336676864

Found this online, if you are not familiar with how Assange ended up in the situation he is in.

Sweden was in a plot with the US to get Assange to Sweden to give a statement on made up allegations, once it Sweden it is much easier to extradite him to the US for face espionage charges.
That is why he is in the embassy to start with, he was tipped off about what was going to go down.
Because of the tip off, he sought asylum with Ecuador. He offered to give a statement to the Swedish police from the embassy, as there is no case against him, this would mean the case was closed but of course, this rejected by Sweden.
Because of the arrest warrant Sweden put out, if Assange left the embassy he would be arrested and shipped from the UK to Sweden so he was imprisoned in the embassy. The UN rightly declared this unlawful imprisonment.
Now Obama has is going and Clinton lost, Sweden are trying to bring their made up case to a close, which means the arrest warrant is cancelled and Assange can leave his imprisonment in the embassy.

Note - Sweden's immigration policy (very open) is causing extreme problems in the country, bringing it down.

Bringing what down?

Sweden. It is in a tough spot from having such and open door policy. Here in Germany it is somewhat difficult but the country is pretty wealthy, it can withstand it so far.

Exactly what damage was caused to Sweden?

From people here in Germany with family/friends there, I hear there is an economic weight, which is nothing shocking but a growing problem is a lack of the Muslim cultures blending with Swedish culture (again, not a big shock).
This article is kind of light but gets into the economic points. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430633/refugees-economic-impact-sweden-not-light

I have friends in Italy and the immigration going on there, is really a much bigger problem and in more ways (e.g. violence). There is now talk of Italy leaving the EU. First Britain and my guess more will follow.

You know, you can just Google this all, it is a pretty talked about thing. I mostly say that as you don't agree with anything I say.

You're an immigrant, so can you stop your passive aggressive agenda of demonizing Muslim refugees who are fleeing a horrific war that we helped create. Thanks.

The truth is a lot of European countries have aging populations and their future will depend on a large influx of immigrants to make up the shortfall. The irony is that all these anti-immigrant inbreds who complain about immigrants ruining their country and stealing their jobs and benefits will be reliant on them in their old age.

Huh? I'm an American living in Europe temporarily. By definition, I'm not an immigrant. Regardless, no reason to take that tone and name call. Passive agenda? Hey, want to guess what my ancestry is?

You do realize that not all countries in the EU are receiving immigrants right? When Sweden, Italy and Germany get the brunt of them, it is going to create problems.

But you hit the nail on the head, these same policies of bombing that Hillary voted across the board for, created this tragedy.

I also understand Germany needs people, but having an open door policy from a country your ally is bombing, that does have terrorists, is a recipe for disaster.
Please, don't make this about me via your guilt by association.

So "immigrant" now qualifies as name calling? Guess we have very different standards for the spoken language as well.

Name calling means calling someone a name. Generally that name is derogatory or used derogatorily. Considering the context here and since you mostly know nothing about me except I'm an American living in Germany, you come up with - I am an immigrant? I don't know where you were going with that except that it is false. So, jump to the next attack and skip over my points.

Nice trying to blame the victim, typical.

My grandfather was from Syria. If we are helping to bomb Syria (or if Hillary was supplying weapons to ISIS to attack Assad), then we have a problem having an open door policy with Syria.
I have nothing against Syrians, I don't hate myself, just a problem with those creating this situation.

holfresh wrote:Ivanka Trump hawking "60 minutes" bracelet for 10k..What's next national security clearance necklace and pumps?

We have bigger things to worry about. How about that semi public apology from the NY Times for their lack of journalism?

earthmansurfer wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:Very good chance Assange is going to a be free man. Thank you Trump

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/798110156336676864

Found this online, if you are not familiar with how Assange ended up in the situation he is in.

Sweden was in a plot with the US to get Assange to Sweden to give a statement on made up allegations, once it Sweden it is much easier to extradite him to the US for face espionage charges.
That is why he is in the embassy to start with, he was tipped off about what was going to go down.
Because of the tip off, he sought asylum with Ecuador. He offered to give a statement to the Swedish police from the embassy, as there is no case against him, this would mean the case was closed but of course, this rejected by Sweden.
Because of the arrest warrant Sweden put out, if Assange left the embassy he would be arrested and shipped from the UK to Sweden so he was imprisoned in the embassy. The UN rightly declared this unlawful imprisonment.
Now Obama has is going and Clinton lost, Sweden are trying to bring their made up case to a close, which means the arrest warrant is cancelled and Assange can leave his imprisonment in the embassy.

Note - Sweden's immigration policy (very open) is causing extreme problems in the country, bringing it down.

Bringing what down?

Sweden. It is in a tough spot from having such and open door policy. Here in Germany it is somewhat difficult but the country is pretty wealthy, it can withstand it so far.

Exactly what damage was caused to Sweden?

From people here in Germany with family/friends there, I hear there is an economic weight, which is nothing shocking but a growing problem is a lack of the Muslim cultures blending with Swedish culture (again, not a big shock).
This article is kind of light but gets into the economic points. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430633/refugees-economic-impact-sweden-not-light

I have friends in Italy and the immigration going on there, is really a much bigger problem and in more ways (e.g. violence). There is now talk of Italy leaving the EU. First Britain and my guess more will follow.

You know, you can just Google this all, it is a pretty talked about thing. I mostly say that as you don't agree with anything I say.

All you have is anecdotal evidence from people who share your POV. The article you linked makes no case for burden caused by immigration it critiques another article that I can't read without a subscription.

I have provided links to studies completed by republican sponsored groups in Texas showing illegal immigrants are not dragging the economy down instead they are net contributors, their contribution maybe slight but it's still positive. Yet you and Briggs etc keep talking about this "problem".

The problem is I do Google things and I read more than what agrees with my POV and I only post things that are actual studies done by actual professionals. I don't post opinion pieces by biased political agenda driven bloggers as evidence. We have very different standards for what we accept as facts.

Do all the scholarly article reflect your point of view? What a coincidence! If not, maybe bring up some of them.

What is wrong with anecdotal evidence? (It is evidence you know.) What is wrong with an educated and well written article? So it doesn't agree with your "scholarly" article (that my article even references?.)

The scholarly article, btw, does claim there is a negative effect, only that it isn't so large. I'm all for helping people, but we need to be responsible when
having an open door policy (essentially) with nations that harbor terrorists (and that we or our allies happen to be bombing.)

If this election taught us anything, one of those things is we can't trust mainstream media and we should be open to more sources.
Analogously, I see nothing wrong with anecdotal reports to add to these scholarly articles.

And, in general, I have a tendency to let direct experience be the greatest teacher, not articles (though I give them some weight too.)

So, what is the difference in our opinions here? Do you agree with open borders and not checking those coming in? (Instead of getting lost in the details)
I find that dangerous, having a background in justice, scholarly articles or not, it seems to be a dangerous way forward.
Nothing wrong with vetting those entering your country, especially in times of war.

There's nothing wrong with any article, but it needs to be treated like an opinion. What's wrong is low information voters start treating articles as facts.

I don't look at the mainstream media for data I look at Federal Reserve electronic data for large country level economic indicators - actual evidence of how successful a past presidency was.

We are trying to establish different ideas by posting different articles and data, the only issue I have with any of this are two:

- An article is posted that reflects the opinions of the author and someone expects me to treat it like an established fact

- I present actual data to counter what one of these articles claim and I get <crickets> in response.

That makes it hard to have a discussion.

gunsnewing wrote:I'll gladly pay more taxes and take a pay cut if people will stop burning our flag. The same flag that is delivered to parents doorstep in place of their child who died fighting for his country.

Funny thing is everyone was perfectly fine with Hillary winning. Trump won and protesting isn't gonna change that.

Not everyone was fine with Hillary winning

Bonn1997 wrote:

Welpee wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:Ivanka Trump hawking "60 minutes" bracelet for 10k..What's next national security clearance necklace and pumps?

We have bigger things to worry about. How about that semi public apology from the NY Times for their lack of journalism?

You do realize saying he had an 8% chance of winning means they thought he had a chance of winning. So what are they suppose to apologize for, saying he had a small chance of winning? That's why they call it an "upset." Should the media apologize for thinking the Giants weren't going to beat the Patriots (twice) in the super bowl?

Again, stick to the Fox News talking points and stop trying to make up your own? You're not very good at it.

Exactly. There was an article on 538 about this, though. When most people hear a probability is less than 20%, they interpret it as being 0% and believe the event won't happen. That's not the pollster's fault though.
Regardless, 538 and RCP were closer than the other sites and are better sources for anything statistical. They were also closer this time than in 2012.

But of course, this is yet another window into the thinking of the average Trump supporter. Not into nuance or details or digging for context. Just headlines and surface semi-facts. The scary part our president-elect is just like them.

http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.753161

Trump Effect: Jewish and Muslim Organizations Form New Alliance

Less than a week after an election that left many minority and religious groups in the United States feeling disenfranchised, two important organizations – one Jewish and the other Muslim – announced an unusual alliance on Monday.

The American Jewish Committee and the Islamic Society of North America have teamed up to form a new national group of leading Jewish and Muslim Americans: The Muslim-Jewish Advisory Council.

In a press release, the AJC said that the new group “brings together recognized business, political and religious leaders in the Jewish and Muslim American communities to jointly advocate on issues of common concern.”

Read more on Trump and American Jews: President Trump has shattered Jews' American idyll (Chemi Shalev) | 'You deserve to be gassed': Hate crimes skyrocket after Trump win (Debra Nussbaum Cohen) | To the Trump voter who just told me to leave the country (Bradley Burston) | Rabbis and congregants take to New York streets to protest (Jennie Kamin)

The co-chairs of the 31-member council are Stanley Bergman, CEO of the Henry Schein healthcare company, and Farooq Kathwari, president and CEO of the Ethan Allen furniture company.

Among its initial “action items,” the press release said, will be to “develop a coordinated strategy to address anti-Muslim bigotry and anti-Semitism in the U.S.” and to “protect and expand the rights of religious minorities” in the country.

“Our two communities share so much in common and should find ways, where possible, to work together for the benefit of the entire country,” said Bergman.

The council members include religious and lay leaders from both communities. Among the most prominent names on the membership list is Joseph Lieberman, the former senator who was the Democratic vice presidential candidate in 2000.