All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Si this the only way to get through to them? If so, it's a horrible way to get the message.

Jupiter man skeptical of coronavirus gets infected, changes opinion

It usually takes a come to Jesus moment for ignorant, conspiracy crazed mouth breathers like this clown to see reason. Perhaps others who shared his old mindset will realize COVID-19 is no joke, and that some invisible sky king won't protect them from the virus.

[The Cool Thatguy]

"I never thought leopards would eat MY face,' sobs man who voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party."

Poor Republicans in a nut shell

"I knew that they would screw the blacks and hispanics, but not me! Not me!"

[Tami]

DeVos Funnels Coronavirus Relief Funds to Favored Private and Religious Schools

WASHINGTON — Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is using the $2 trillion coronavirus stabilization law to throw a lifeline to education sectors she has long championed, directing millions of federal dollars intended primarily for public schools and colleges to private and religious schools.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, signed in late March, included $30 billion for education institutions turned upside down by the pandemic shutdowns, about $14 billion for higher education, $13.5 billion to elementary and secondary schools, and the rest for state governments.

Ms. DeVos has used $180 million of those dollars to encourage states to create “microgrants” that parents of elementary and secondary school students can use to pay for educational services, including private school tuition. She has directed school districts to share millions of dollars designated for low-income students with wealthy private schools.

[jetengine]

Well... I'm not sure that's much of a rebuttle. "Two threads and four months ago I acknowledged, when pressed, that he wasn't perfect so when I'm listing ALL the reasons why the north didn't vote for him, I left it out..." is a little... creatively redactive (in my opinion)

One thread (that we'd still be on if the forum hadn't fucked up) and maybe a month at best ago. But please continue your hyperbole because I don't start every conversation about Jeremy Corbyn with "The mans a **** up"

Now, if your done trolling can we focus on Boris being a **** up ? Or how about the Labour members actively conspiring to remove Corbyn in a direct spit in the face of democracy ? Or Ken Starmer shredding the Tories ? Or how about the Tories deciding that for all their hard work the Nurses and Carers will be getting a paycut because "Austerity"

[Kieran_Frost]

One thread (that we'd still be on if the forum hadn't fucked up) and maybe a month at best ago. But please continue your hyperbole because I don't start every conversation about Jeremy Corbyn with "The mans a **** up"

I'm not sure you can criticise me of hyperbole and then act like anyone is asking you to start each and every post with "the man's a f*ck up." You were listing reasons the north didn't vote for Corybn. To leave out any and all reference to Corybn not inspiring them... is bias. Plain and simple. Don't be salty just because I called out your redacted nonesense

Now, if your done trolling can we focus on Boris being a **** up ? Or how about the Labour members actively conspiring to remove Corbyn in a direct spit in the face of democracy ? Or Ken Starmer shredding the Tories ? Or how about the Tories deciding that for all their hard work the Nurses and Carers will be getting a paycut because "Austerity"

Calling anyone not agreeing with them as "trolling"... gurrrrrl. I called you on your redacted nonsense, that's not trolling. If you can't handle serious debate and discussion (and esp. people disagreeing with you) I think you'd best avoid a political thread, that is all about debating issues. In fact, if you can't handle your opinions being disagreed with, the internet in general is best to avoid. It's full of people disagreeing with you.

How is removing a guy who lost two general elections a conspiracy against democracy??? A leader should step down after losing ONE election (let alone two). He didn't. The only person spitting in the face of democratic voting was Corbyn.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

DeVos Funnels Coronavirus Relief Funds to Favored Private and Religious Schools

People should be screaming bloody murder about what Batty Betsy did. That miserable grifter screwed poor kids with that shitty move.

[jetengine]

I'm not sure you can criticise me of hyperbole and then act like anyone is asking you to start each and every post with "the man's a f*ck up." You were listing reasons the north didn't vote for Corybn. To leave out any and all reference to Corybn not inspiring them... is bias. Plain and simple. Don't be salty just because I called out your redacted nonesense


Calling anyone not agreeing with them as "trolling"... gurrrrrl. I called you on your redacted nonsense, that's not trolling. If you can't handle serious debate and discussion (and esp. people disagreeing with you) I think you'd best avoid a political thread, that is all about debating issues. In fact, if you can't handle your opinions being disagreed with, the internet in general is best to avoid. It's full of people disagreeing with you.

How is removing a guy who lost two general elections a conspiracy against democracy??? A leader should step down after losing ONE election (let alone two). He didn't. The only person spitting in the face of democratic voting was Corbyn.

I'm fine with debate son, just not some johnny come lately who only appears just to snipe. The reasoning for leaving out Corbyn's lack of inspiration is readily apparent. I pointed out they wanted Brexit. He didnt. Its kind of a fundamental issue in whats been frequently described as "The Brexit Election. We dont say why Trumps a **** up every time we refer to him because (much like Corbyns lack of inspiration and agression against the smears) I shouldnt HAVE to explain it.

And it was less a case of stepping down "guuuurl" and more internal sabotage within the party to a level requiring an inquirty.

Or to put it plainly. A small group intentionally fucked the party over, dragged its name through the mud and caused alot of people to drop membership (anecdotal of course but I've seen 100+ explicitly say they've resigned their membership or refuse to vote Labour) so they could get their way. Thats not democracy. If you think it is then I'm frankly worried about you.

But hey we've got Starmer now whos....ok I guess. Need to give him more time. He's had some bad - not dealing with the members mentioned in the leaks firmer and taking Debonairre into his cabinet (she soundly put her foot in it via saying Landlords should get 125% of their renters fees if they freeze them during the covid crisis) and hes had some good - using a law from the 50s to get a televised statement pointing out how Bojo and friends have fucked up massively and shredding the fools in PMQT. Some have said he's Blair lite etc or a Red Tory which I dont buy. Even if he was I'd rather him then Boris. Dont make perfect the enemy of good ala the US elections

[PaulBullion]

https://twitter.com/sarahmucha/statu...052234244?s=20

Joe Biden commits on
@MSNBC
to not pardon Donald Trump. "Absolutely, yes. I commit," he says.

He adds later, “We never saw anything like the prostitution of that office like we see today.”

Awesome.

[jetengine]

https://twitter.com/sarahmucha/statu...052234244?s=20



Awesome.

Excellent. No Obama/Bush issues here.

[Kieran_Frost]

I'm fine with debate son, just not some johnny come lately who only appears just to snipe.

HA! "I'm fine with debate... [insert third or forth unnecessary sniping comment to show just how fine with debate I am]"

The reasoning for leaving out Corbyn's lack of inspiration is readily apparent.

Based on your following comments, I would disagree with this statement.

I pointed out they wanted Brexit. He didnt.

I'm afraid you're wrong. He has been vocally anti-EU for decades. And his problem in the last election is he refused to say "if we get in power I'm pulling the plug on Brexit" (which many, many senior members of his party called for him to say) for one reason and one reason only. He actually wasn't against Brexit. That was the issue during the Brexit campaign, Labour's "support" of staying in the EU was half-hearted because he didn't believe it. To say Corybn didn't want Brexit is to say you don't know anything about Corybn. Not really.

That was the whole hilarity of the last three years, you had the Conservatives (a party that majority supported Brexit) lead by a woman who supporting Remain, and Labour (a party that majority supporting Remain) lead by a man who supported Brexit. I mean you couldn't write the circus we found ourselves in.

Its kind of a fundamental issue in whats been frequently described as "The Brexit Election.

While it was an election dominated by Brexit, the reality is the loudest Labour calls of "but it was a Brexit Election" were those desperate to not let the blame for the worst Labour election in 100 years fall on Corybn. It was Corbyn supporters saying: "It wasn't Corybn, it was Brexit." Delusion to them. Delusion. Brexit was a factor. It was not, by any means, the only one that lead to that car-crash of a result.

We dont say why Trumps a **** up every time we refer to him because (much like Corbyns lack of inspiration and agression against the smears) I shouldnt HAVE to explain it.

a) people frequently mention why Trump's a f*ck up. Frequently.
b) you're trying to dodge the issue, and it's not working. You were making a list of reasons the North didn't vote for Corybn and left out anything to do with blame on Corybn because of your bias. Take this hypothetical scenario: if I was making a list of "the reasons the virus is more prolific in the UK than any other European country" and DIDN'T mention anything to do with Boris, and when questioned, said "well, actually I did talk about that in a different thread a month ago" something tells... something deep inside my mind makes me believe... you wouldn't reply with "oh, excellent point, I retract my objection, sir, have a marvelous day." Would I be right in that assumption?

And it was less a case of stepping down "guuuurl" and more internal sabotage within the party to a level requiring an inquirty.

???
You linked me to an article that can be summerised as "now I can't tell you what it actually said, but if the rumours of what it may have said are true, then gurrrrrrrrrrl, let me dish the T on the possibility of what that could maybe mean, if in-fact it is possible true." I mean...

But hey we've got Starmer now whos....ok I guess. Need to give him more time. He's had some bad - not dealing with the members mentioned in the leaks firmer and taking Debonairre into his cabinet (she soundly put her foot in it via saying Landlords should get 125% of their renters fees if they freeze them during the covid crisis) and hes had some good - using a law from the 50s to get a televised statement pointing out how Bojo and friends have fucked up massively and shredding the fools in PMQT. Some have said he's Blair lite etc or a Red Tory which I dont buy. Even if he was I'd rather him then Boris. Dont make perfect the enemy of good ala the US elections

Time will tell with him; if he can just gain back the middle ground he could stand a chance. Thank GOD Rebecca Long-whatshername didn't get in, that would have sunk Labour to have mini-Corbyn take over... which is why he clung on to power after his second failed election... and yes, I won't lie, I took quite a bit of satisfaction when that planned also failed.

[jetengine]

HA! "I'm fine with debate... [insert third or forth unnecessary sniping comment to show just how fine with debate I am]"


Based on your following comments, I would disagree with this statement.


I'm afraid you're wrong. He has been vocally anti-EU for decades. And his problem in the last election is he refused to say "if we get in power I'm pulling the plug on Brexit" (which many, many senior members of his party called for him to say) for one reason and one reason only. He actually wasn't against Brexit. That was the issue during the Brexit campaign, Labour's "support" of staying in the EU was half-hearted because he didn't believe it. To say Corybn didn't want Brexit is to say you don't know anything about Corybn. Not really.

That was the whole hilarity of the last three years, you had the Conservatives (a party that majority supported Brexit) lead by a woman who supporting Remain, and Labour (a party that majority supporting Remain) lead by a man who supported Brexit. I mean you couldn't write the circus we found ourselves in.


While it was an election dominated by Brexit, the reality is the loudest Labour calls of "but it was a Brexit Election" were those desperate to not let the blame for the worst Labour election in 100 years fall on Corybn. It was Corbyn supporters saying: "It wasn't Corybn, it was Brexit." Delusion to them. Delusion. Brexit was a factor. It was not, by any means, the only one that lead to that car-crash of a result.


a) people frequently mention why Trump's a f*ck up. Frequently.
b) you're trying to dodge the issue, and it's not working. You were making a list of reasons the North didn't vote for Corybn and left out anything to do with blame on Corybn because of your bias. Take this hypothetical scenario: if I was making a list of "the reasons the virus is more prolific in the UK than any other European country" and DIDN'T mention anything to do with Boris, and when questioned, said "well, actually I did talk about that in a different thread a month ago" something tells... something deep inside my mind makes me believe... you wouldn't reply with "oh, excellent point, I retract my objection, sir, have a marvelous day." Would I be right in that assumption?


???
You linked me to an article that can be summerised as "now I can't tell you what it actually said, but if the rumours of what it may have said are true, then gurrrrrrrrrrl, let me dish the T on the possibility of what that could maybe mean, if in-fact it is possible true." I mean...



Time will tell with him; if he can just gain back the middle ground he could stand a chance. Thank GOD Rebecca Long-whatshername didn't get in, that would have sunk Labour to have mini-Corbyn take over... which is why he clung on to power after his second failed election... and yes, I won't lie, I took quite a bit of satisfaction when that planned also failed.

Read the document. Its ridiculously apparent there was serious fuckery going on. Especially considering the people that it claims started this treacherous business (and yes, its treachery, a few fucking over the party they work with because they dont like their leader isnt how this **** works) arent exactly media darlings one can score points off of by taking down.

But to be frank my point stands regarding the north, inso much as voting Tory was dropping an artillery strike on themselves whether Brexit, **** ups on Corbyns part, media smears, whatever. Their main issues are poverty and an overfocus on London and southern areas. So they voted for the party thats promored ten years of Austerity and lets the North rot.

[InformationGeek]

To quote a friend, "I wish I wasn't living in an Onion article."

“I call it the super duper missile.”

An actual quote by the sitting president of the United States.

[Kieran_Frost]

Read the document. Its ridiculously apparent there was serious fuckery going on. Especially considering the people that it claims started this treacherous business (and yes, its treachery, a few fucking over the party they work with because they dont like their leader isnt how this **** works) arent exactly media darlings one can score points off of by taking down.

TRUE OR FALSE: the article quotes specifically what's in the leaked document, word for word

...

But to be frank my point stands regarding the north, inso much as voting Tory was dropping an artillery strike on themselves whether Brexit, **** ups on Corbyns part, media smears, whatever. Their main issues are poverty and an overfocus on London and southern areas. So they voted for the party thats promored ten years of Austerity and lets the North rot.

If your point still stands, why did you feel a need to add the bolded part back in when this whole discussion started because of it's absence?

[jetengine]

If your point still stands, why did you feel a need to add the bolded part back in when this whole discussion started because of it's absence?

Because that will stop you apparently, cause instead of focusing on the concept of "North made a BAD choice" its "Nah man you gotta preface it else im gonna call you a zealot"
Now are we gonna move on and talk about the actual matter at hand or are you going to continue this pointless diatribe ? Call me partisan or whatever I frankly dont care anymore.

The north voted for Bojo. He let them rot during the floods and now their Covid number is higher then London's. Even if Labour let you down during the Blair era its still not a great move to vote for the party that historically treats you like ****. Especially for Boris Johnson who hates your stereotypical working class northener.

[Kieran_Frost]

Because that will stop you apparently, cause instead of focusing on the concept of "North made a BAD choice" its "Nah man you gotta preface it else im gonna call you a zealot"

You keep trying to act like that was your stance all along; and that's simply not true. As untrue as saying Corbyn was against Brexit. Like blood from a stone. We'd have gotten over this three posts ago if you just owned it; rather than all this deflection and goal-post moving. Own your mistakes. Embrace them. We are all humans, we all make mistakes. It's okay. We won't shatter like glass if we admit it. We have enough dodging and swerving from politicians, do we really need to emulate that here too?

Now are we gonna move on and talk about the actual matter at hand or are you going to continue this pointless diatribe?

It's only "pointless" because you can't goal-post move your way out of it. SPEAKING OF WHICH... you told me not once, but twice to "read the article" as if it was fact, not opinion (or gossip... which is all it was) and I asked you a very simple question about it.

TRUE OR FALSE: the article quotes specifically what's in the leaked document, word for word

Now I assume you haven't answered because the answer is "FALSE", but... again... deflection, avoidance, etc. Which I'm sure you will label as pointless and trolling to even mention, but hey, call me a stickler for the truth.

Call me partisan or whatever I frankly dont care anymore.

I always dislike this sentiment. If you didn't care you'd not respond. Period. A post that says "I don't care anymore" shows only one thing: they still care enough to post that...