Peter Thiel Is Joining Donald Trump's Transition Team (theverge.com) 820
Peter Thiel's time spent campaigning for Donald Trump during the election season has paid off. According to a statement released today, Donald Trump has named Thiel to the executive committee of his presidential transition team. The Verge reports: Thiel, who donated $1.25 million to Trump's campaign late in the election cycle, mostly stood alone among colleagues in his support for Trump, who was publicly disdained in the Valley. Thiel's support came at a cost to businesses like startup accelerator Y Combinator, which soon attracted negative publicity for having Thiel as a part-time adviser. Thiel also brought criticism to Facebook, where he is a board member, although Mark Zuckerberg defended his place at the company. Thiel further angered First Amendment supporters by bankrolling the Hulk Hogan lawsuit that brought down Gawker. Thiel said before the election that he would find some way of working with the Trump administration, and although his final role is unclear, his appointment to Trump's executive committee signals the relationship will indeed continue.
he bet on the winner (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
he reaps the rewards.
What sort of rewards? Did that story about Thiel feeding off the blood of the young (injections supposedly for longevity) turn out to be the utter bullshit it sounds like or is he really that weird and creepy?
Re:he bet on the winner (Score:4, Informative)
is he really that weird and creepy?
I have met Peter a few times, and listened to him talk many times. He is certainly weird, but I don't think he is creepy. He has a lot of original idea and insights, although many of them are ... well, weird ... like his idea to start an independent libertarian utopia on an ocean platform [wikipedia.org]. He is a self-described libertarian, so I was surprised to see him endorse Donald. But the American people voted for change, and if Peter lands a spot in Trump's administration, it certainly won't be business as usual.
Re:he bet on the winner (Score:5, Funny)
like his idea to start an independent libertarian utopia on an ocean platform [wikipedia.org].
Would you kindly vote Trump?
Re: (Score:3)
A Utopia need perfect people. The Salem witch trials demonstrates what happens when a little Utopia finds a few people who are not perfect in their midst. One person's Utopia is another's nightmare, so it's hell for anyone who isn't perfect, such as every child ever
Re:he bet on the winner (Score:5, Insightful)
if Peter lands a spot in Trump's administration, it certainly won't be business as usual.
When is the last time a Republican Administration had an openly gay man in a senior role?
Peter would make a decent tech adviser to Trump. For all the people bitching that Trump is a raciest, homophobic, bigot... well, you're not paying attention...
Re: (Score:3)
So Trump's cozying up to Evangelicals, conservative Catholics and other social conservatives with pretty strong guarantees of a Supreme Court willing to rip up abortion and gay rights didn't happen?
Re:he bet on the winner (Score:5, Interesting)
The debate on abortion in the US is legally messy. There's one faction that campaigns for abortion on demand without restriction, one side that campaigns for a total ban with maybe the narrowist exception to save life. The majority of people don't actually support either position, but because of the importance of the Roe case it's not possible to campaign for a compromise: The pro-choice faction needs to defend Roe at all costs, and they know that if they lose it the pro-life faction will sieze the chance to rush straight to the opposite extreme in many states. There is no possibility for anything in between.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The term "pro-life" angers me greatly. The vocal pro-lifers are nothing of the sort. I believe there is a very strong overlap between being "pro-life" and supporting the death penalty.
Also, most of those "pro-life" people don't care about life after birth. If the child dies in poverty, they don't care. That's not pro-life.
"Pro-life" means "Control". It's about control, not just of birth but of the sex lives of young people.
Re: (Score:3)
You can't get elected otherwise, most people are idiots and have no idea of the issues...
Hoping for it to be otherwise is to live in delusion.
Smart people read between the lines and figure out what they are really saying, then pick the person who covers the important issues in a broad and general sense.
If you want some measure of detail beyond that, donate a million dollars and you'll get it. Otherwise, you pick the one who paints a general picture and hope for the best.
Re: he bet on the winner (Score:5, Insightful)
Less emotionally, abortion rights are really about people having an inherent right to personal autonomy. There's no one reasonably suggesting a ban on tubal ligation or snipping the vas deferens in man's testes, and yet gametes are just as capable of forming a human life as is a zygote or a fetus. So really, all the anti-abortion types just pick their own artificial moment when some cells are a human life, declare that point the point where the state should use its vast powers to prevent interference.
If you're going to declare that a batch of cells that will eventually become a fully formed human must be protected as legal persons, then why not sperm cells and ova? Why aren't anti-abortion types demanding an end to surgeries that remove the fallopian tubes?
Re: (Score:3)
u wot? He got sued successfully for not letting black people rent his properties.
In the 1970s, and it wasn't "successfully", he never went to trial, never admitted any guilt.
In any case, it was the 1970s, that was another time (quite common back then, he wasn't unique there), or would YOU like to be judged on what you did 40 years ago?
Re: (Score:3)
Its purpose has long since passed. Originally there was not direct voting for President.
The whole electoral college system and winner-take-all state behavior severely distorts the election. Because of this setup, the candidates typically only focus on the swing states and completely ignore the needs and wants of other states which might have significant votes that just won't reach a majority in that state. For example, because of this Republicans will ignore the wants and needs of states like California and
Re:he bet on the winner (Score:4, Insightful)
Bully? Remind me who were the ones screaming people down with accusations of "racist, misogynist, nazi, hitler", etc to anyone who dared to disagree with them? Logical debate was not permitted. It always devolved into name calling and outrageous comparisons to hitler or the kkk.
The marxists that make up today's left-wing movement absolutely despise the American system and the constitution. They detest free speech and free elections and would just prefer to use government force to cram their ideals down everyone else's throats. They are always demanding more and more power be given to the federal government, not caring about the abuses of power it results in, because they believe it will be THEIR power to use against their opponents. With their loss of this election, they are are slowly realising why such power is not to be granted. Their opponents now wield this power, and they are terrified of it being used against themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:he bet on the winner (Score:5, Interesting)
Remind me who were the ones screaming people down with accusations of "racist, misogynist, nazi, hitler",
True - as one of the people who feared the election of Trump as a very bad thing indeed, I have to admit that people on my side did tend to do that, and that was wrong.
The marxists that make up today's left-wing movement absolutely despise the American system and the constitution. They detest free speech and free elections and would just prefer to use government force to cram their ideals down everyone else's throats. They are always demanding more and more power be given to the federal government, not caring about the abuses of power it results in, because they believe it will be THEIR power to use against their opponents. With their loss of this election, they are are slowly realising why such power is not to be granted. Their opponents now wield this power, and they are terrified of it being used against themselves.
- but as this illustrates, your side engage in exactly the same tactics. And that is why American politics is broken: there is no honest and open-minded debate to be found, at least not in public. It is tempting to point the finger at lack of education or blinkered religion, both of which probably contribute, in some way, but I have met people who were both illiterate and deeply religious, but still managed to teach me a thing or two about open-mindedness and being willing to listen.
I don't know the solution - I don't think any of you guys do either - but I think it is very likely that the way to the future, from where we are now, can go two ways: either towards ever deeper conflict between two almost exact halves of the population, perhaps ending in civil war, or people can decide that they have to start reaching out to their "enemies" and seek compromise and understanding. There is still time to make the better choice, but the longer you continue down the path of division, the harder will it be to heal the wounds.
So, why don't we start the process here and now? It isn't really all that hard - it is of course necessary to state your viewpoints and your grievances, but it is also your duty to be willing to listen to the other side and try to take on board some of it. Let me give you an example: I think the Trump is an absolutely appalling twit - based on the way he appears to insult without thinking, and apparently lies without shame and so on. This is my subjective view of him, and I may be wrong. I absolutely understand and accept the anger that is felt by his supporters; they happen to be mostly male, white and working class, but the gross indecency of the ever growing inequality in the US is unversal and hurts all except the few that richer - one of whom happens to be Trump, by the way. So, there you have it - it may only be a small, symbolic gesture by one individual, but that is all any of us have to give, and it is genuine; I really do want the situation to improve, and I really am willing to give Trump the chance to prove himself, but it won't matter unless everybody else is willing to do the same.
Re: he bet on the winner (Score:4, Insightful)
He's already planning to bring coal burning back, push the Keystone Pipeline through, picked Ebell, and it's been less than a week.
Amazing how little it takes to scare you. Keystone XL pipeline should have been approved a decade ago and coal burning hasn't been shown to be a big deal, let us note once again! And appointing someone not particularly environmentally friendly who still has to survive passage through the Senate. Oh dear, he'll be gassing six million Jews next.
Maybe you should learn how to manage your fear rather than justifying bullying behavior on the basis of unreasonable fear.
Oh boy, not this shit again (Score:5, Insightful)
Coal burning isn't a big deal because we regulated the fuck out of it. It's not profitable when they coal burners can't externalize their costs by dumping crap into the air and water. That's what shut down coal burning.
He won't gas jews, but I am worried about my daughter's access to reproductive services. She's got some fairly serious congenital health issues that might someday require an abortion of a non-viable fetus to save her life. This is a surprisingly common occurrence that Mike Pence believes his God forbid's. If you think I'm speaking hyperbole then you don't know the horror of child birth left in God's hands. Educate yourself.
Re:Oh boy, not this shit again (Score:5, Interesting)
My sister similarly has major health issues and relies on a number of provisions of Obamacare in order to stay alive. Losing insurance for her would be a death sentence. Several provisions of Obamacare are helping to keep her alive and a productive member of society:
- Nobody can be turned away due to pre-existing conditions.
- All medications must be covered (minus deductible) though some may require petitioning.
- No lifetime limits on care
As it is, my family has to help subsidize her care since the monthly deductible on one of her medications is $500/month and she's on a teacher's salary that doesn't pay a lot. Without insurance her medication jumps to $5000/month.
My mother also at one time had to have a procedure similar to an abortion when the fetus died and had to be extracted. If they're so anti-abortion, why not work on ways to make it much less needed by offering more birth control and pre-natal healthcare to women? To me it just seems that they want to make women second-class citizens by legislating their bodies rather than help make it so the procedure is needed far less. People like Pence also seem to go out of their way to make it harder for wanted children by fighting against programs like CHIP.
Re:Oh boy, not this shit again (Score:5, Informative)
"If they're so anti-abortion, why not work on ways to make it much less needed by offering more birth control and pre-natal healthcare to women?"
Because the opposition to abortion doesn't exist in isolation. It has to coexist with other ideological commitments, and two of them are in opposition to this action.
There's a libertarian ideology which overlaps with abortion opposition. This one doesn't actually care about abortion either way, but it strongly opposes any form of government-imposed intervention. This one says that the government should not have the power to dictate what medical services an insurance company or healthcare provider should be required to provide: This is a transaction between a service provider and customer.
There's also a religious ideology. This one opposes abortion, but it also opposes contraception - something seen as an enabler of sinful fornication. From the religious perspective, non-marital sex is an inherently immoral action: Even if contraception reduced the number of abortions greatly, you'd only be exchanging one evil for another.
There are many ideologies competing, and individuals often subscribe to multiple ones which partially conflict - this means there must be some form of compromise or reconciliation to make them fit together.
We do volunteer to help women and that's Catholic (Score:4, Informative)
> There's also a religious ideology. This one opposes abortion, but it also opposes contraception - something seen as an enabler of sinful fornication. From the religious perspective
Specifically, that's the old-school CATHOLIC view. Most religious people don't hold that view, and the Pope himself is moving toward a more moderate position.
> "If they're so anti-abortion, why not work on ways to make it much less needed by offering more birth control and pre-natal healthcare to women?"
We do, and we get even more "bang for the buck" helping women who are already pregnant not just with traditional "pre-natal care" (aka doctors), but a whole range of services helpful to someone who is worried about their ability to have and raise a child. The center my wife and I volunteer at provides classes covering everything from pre-natal nutrition and exercise through what to do when your baby won't stop crying, and where to go next to get support in raising a school-age child. We provide diapers, toys, and a "mom's night" when we have childcare and the new moms can get a break. Almost everyone who volunteers there would be considered "religious", though that term isn't my favorite.
Anyway, a lot of us take Matthew 25:40 (and Matthew 25:35-40) seriously, and a there are many ways to "love your neighbor" when your neighbor is a pregnant teenager who is scared and broke.
Re: (Score:3)
The meaning of the story is actually very clear when you read it in context. The 'spilling seed' wasn't the issue: It was about levirate marriage. Under Jewish law of the time, if a man were to die married but childless then his wife (like all his other property) is inherited by his brother (In event of multiple brothers, properly is divided - but one of them gets the wife or wives). This is not optional on either part: The brother *has* to marry the wife, like it or not. Onan inherited a wife in this way (
Re: (Score:3)
- Nobody can be turned away due to pre-existing conditions.
- All medications must be covered (minus deductible) though some may require petitioning.
- No lifetime limits on care
In all fairness, Trump* has stated that he wants to keep some of those things:
http://www.ontheissues.org/201... [ontheissues.org]
*I didn't vote for him, and it's obviously hard to take what he says at face value.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Then why are my tax dollars being used for drug treatment programs for people who chose to use drugs? No one forced them to shoot heroin, snort cocaine or smoke weed. Let them pay for it themselves.
Re: (Score:3)
Because it is not about junkies, it is about crime prevention. Far better and cheaper if a junkie in a need of the next fix won't have to rob and maybe kill someone to get the money.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So then, war on drugs?
Far better and cheaper if a junkie in a need of the next fix won't have to rob and maybe kill someone to get the money.
Far better and cheaper to let them kill themselves than waste money on people who are smarter than all the experts and ignore the Mt. Everest-sized evidence about the dangers of drug use.
Re: (Score:3)
So then, war on drugs?
It's not a war on drugs, it's a war on personal freedom. Remember that at all times. They're not going after the big pharma drugs that kill people. If truth be told, they're not really going after the illegal drugs that kill people, either. It's just profitable theater.
Re: (Score:3)
Big pharma used. Comment can be ignored.
But then you didn't, so why did you continue? Answer, you know that's not a valid reason to stop. Snarky bullshit used. What's your point?
"Big pharma" is responsible for keeping billions of people alive.
And medical misprescription is one of the largest killers in America, maybe the largest depending on who you ask but definitely in the top five. One hand giveth...
It was "big pharma" who finally wiped out small pox and rinderpest.
Today, virtually all of the basic research is done at universities, partially with public money. Big Pharma then goes through certification processes for which they have lobbied and which are shady as fuck, and
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, that was a part of my point. The other part was that helping drug users lowers the amount of muggings and burglaries, which is a good thing.
Re:Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be f (Score:5, Insightful)
Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be fine
Unless you live in Texas (down to one operating abortion clinic, last I heard) or anywhere else in the country that feels as though the rights of cells outweighs the rights of a living breathing human being.
You kid yourself if you don't think this particular issue is going to come up in an administration that is 100% controlled by the Republicans. That isn't a Trump bash or a poke at the republicans. It is an observation based on facts stated by those particular people. Bible Belt Republicans were licking their chops, looking at Roe v Wade as soon as the election results started coming in.
Re: (Score:3)
This is the huge difference between reality and imaginary dangers. This pipeline has huge concrete benefits, while the supposed dangers of slightly higher consumption of che
Re: (Score:3)
There is no Plan(et) B
SHUT UP ALREADY! (Score:3)
Within 24 hours of being the confirmed President Elect the leaders of both Canada and Mexico willingly made it public that they are willing to renegotiate NAFTA. US Stocks have soared with the same, more gains than at any other time in history.
Prior to the election 3 of 4 Americans said that the Country was headed in the _WRONG_ direction. 4 out of 5 Americans said that our Justice system was broken. In California, a State where the Democratic candidate won and voter intimidation is high only 3 out of 5
Re: he bet on the winner (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd encourage you to go visit a country like India or China, live near a coal burning plant for a year
I'll note that I've lived near a coal plant for about five years. But it was in the developed world with actual pollution controls.
Look at Germany - they've got enough solar and wind power to supply _all_ their needs.
For two costs: 1) doubled their electricity prices, and 2) having to import major power when solar and wind didn't supply their needs.
Re: he bet on the winner (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh noes! He's going to allow pipes to carry oil instead of those so much more environmental methods such as trucks and trains!
Get your head screwed on, pipelines beat the alternatives, and saying no to them doesn't do what you think it does (because I'm betting you think it means people won't be able to buy oil).
Re: he bet on the winner (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: he bet on the winner (Score:5, Insightful)
He's already planning to bring coal burning back
Coal isn't dying because of politics. It is dying because of cheap shale gas. Coal is not coming back.
Re: he bet on the winner (Score:5, Informative)
How many years before the gas runs out- 5 years, 10 years?
Most estimates are that America has at least enough to last a century at current usage rates.
As more areas are explored, and recovery techniques are improved, that estimate is likely to grow.
There are plenty of good reasons to stop using fossil fuels, but "we are running out" isn't one of them.
Re: (Score:3)
Fossil fuels don't 'run out' as such. It just gets more expensive over time, as the cheapest to access deposits are the first to be extracted. Eventually you have to go from 'stick a pipe in the ground' to deep wells, then expensive offshore driling, then more-expensive fracking wells that have to be relocated at regular intervals, then even-more-expensive shale processing... until you eventually come to a point where it's so expensive to get more out, you might as well just go with renewables anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
"getting shot when they point guns at the police" - there seem to be more minorities getting killed, NOT pointing guns than white guys who DO
Crony Capitalism (Score:4, Insightful)
A little conflict of interest here with his company Palantir Technologies and its half a billion dollars in defense contracts.
Re: Crony Capitalism (Score:5, Insightful)
Why? Corruption is the standard in Washington. I wait for the day when Trump voters find out that Trump is also part of a rich elite. That they will stay poor and have no jobs. Lower taxes is BTW only good for people who earn that.much that they have to pay them.
Re: (Score:3)
I wait for the day when Trump voters find out that Trump is also part of a rich elite. That they will stay poor and have no jobs.
This is the problem with stupid people, they are too stupid to work this out, and will never work it out as he'll continue to shout loudly that it's someone else's fault. We have a rich elitist 1%er telling the working class that he's on their side, and they fell for it hook line and sinker. It takes a special kind of stupid to get sucked into that one.
Re: Crony Capitalism (Score:3)
What has this to do with my argument. In case your police is not capable enough, they need more men/women and better training. In case robberies in Chicago have to do with inequality and lack of work, you need to educate people and fix tour economy. Low taxes will not help with that.
Re: (Score:2)
He'll be appointed Press Secretary or Minister of Information is my guess.
pay to play (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, my bad, that was the other side's policy. I got confused there for a second.
Do you mean the "furniture for pardon" program implemented during the Clinton presidency? Or the more popular "cash for pardon", also implemented by Clinton? Or maybe the more recent "donate to the Clinton Foundation to meet the secretary of state" program? There's also the classic "sell uranium to the Russians as long as they contribute to the Clinton Foundation" program.
You'll have to be more specific.
Re:pay to play (Score:5, Insightful)
How about the $750,000 speech Bill Clinton gave for Ericsson 9 days before telecom equipment was left off a list of items prohibited by Iran sanctions [nbcnews.com]. Just a coincidence probably.
Re:pay to play (Score:5, Insightful)
You're willfully missing the point.
Clinton is questionable as hell, and that is why she wasn't elected.
Trump promised (or technically implied so, maybe there is a literal swamp he'll be draining somewhere) to clean things up. Now, he is putting people into government that were throwing money at him. Sure, they're a transition team and all that, but so much for a clean break. Screaming Clinton this, Clinton that doesn't make Trumps hypocrisy any better.
Get used to that being the continued response (Score:5, Insightful)
Humans are sadly very tribal so the Trump supporters are going to be unwilling to admit he's not what they wanted him to be. One common denial tactic you'll see is a redirection where someone points out that Trump or his people do something bad, is to point out a time that the other team, Secretary Clinton in particular, did something similar. To them that justifies it in the sense "We are still in the right because the other guy would have been even worse." It is a way to deflect acknowledging criticism.
You saw the same thing with supporters of President Obama. When he was criticized for things that went against campaign promises, such as offering government transparency, supporters inevitable dredged up President Bush. Basically since President Bush had done something they would argue was worse, that would excuse what President Obama did.
Same shit, different side. Expect to see plenty of it as there is essentially no way at all that Trump can keep most of his promises. Many that see them selves as on that "team" won't want to acknowledge criticism as valid, so they'll deny it when they can, or use redirection like this when they can't.
Re: (Score:3)
Clinton is questionable as hell, and that is why she wasn't elected.
No not really. She seems no more questionable than many, many other politicians, certainly less so than Trump. And bear in mind that the Republicans have had it out for her for decades. Everything with a sniff of dirt has been dragged out in public and pounded on. Given that level of scrutiny, few people would look as clean as a whistle.
It's the transition team, people. (Score:2)
It's the transition team, people.
You very, very rarely go from "transition team" to "cabinet position". It's a somewhat meaningless post, other than access to give advice. Who thinks Trump will be taking most of the advice he gets, rather than acknowledging it, then ignoring it and doing what he wants to do anyway?
Re:It's the transition team, people. (Score:5, Informative)
Trump chose his vice-president to lead his transition team.
This is a guy who, as governor of Indiana, when facing a breakout of AIDS in the rural community due to drug use, chose "prayer" as his only solution.
This is a guy who signed a bill with a government mandate that families hold funerals for miscarried or aborted fetuses.
This is a guy who as governor, instructed law enforcement to investigate women who miscarried to make sure they weren't aborting their fetuses.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That's the Vice President
Sorry he wasn't your pick but the electorate didn't have a problem with him.
Re:It's the transition team, people. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hyperbole (Score:4, Insightful)
The thing that frightens me about Christians more than most religions is that their God punishes _them_ for _my_ sins. Think about Sodom & Gomorrah or the Floods. Think about how many baby's God killed. Sure, they're with God now, but they're still dead.
To many Christians who take the bible literally my sinning represents an existent threat to them. Not just their "way of life" but their actual lives. This makes Christianity powerful, because there is a powerful incentive to spread the faith by any means necessary. It's one of the reasons it's as successful as it is. But if your a non-believer and you notice it then it's downright terrifying...
Re: (Score:3)
None of what you said is remotely close to the majority of Christians believe, you are utterly clueless. Maybe you need to stop think Christians are all like Westboro cult.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's the transition team, people. (Score:4, Interesting)
Good. I want the Republicans to go all in: have Roe v. Wade overturned, ban abortion, eliminate the fillibuster, repeal the ACA, lower taxes on the top earners while shifting the tax burdern to the lower and middle classes, have gay marriage overturned, everything. Make things as painful as possible for as many people as possible. Most people, it seems, only respond to pain; make them feel it.
Re: (Score:3)
You know whats sad - most "conservatives" I know would still manage to find a way to blame it on the democrats.
Re: (Score:2)
Good. I want the Republicans to go all in: have Roe v. Wade overturned, ban abortion, eliminate the fillibuster, repeal the ACA, lower taxes on the top earners while shifting the tax burdern to the lower and middle classes, have gay marriage overturned, everything. Make things as painful as possible for as many people as possible. Most people, it seems, only respond to pain; make them feel it.
You must be the guy in front of me with the license plate holder that said "Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones but Whips and Chains Excite Me". (The actual plate was 'N2LTHR').
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Good. I want the Republicans to go all in
Lots of liberals said the same thing back in 1980 when a B-movie actor was elected president.
He was re-elected in 1984 with one of the biggest landslides in history.
Over the past year, many people have underestimated Donald Trump ... "he will flame out before the Iowa Caucus", "he can't survive Super Tuesday", "he can't win over moderate Republicans in the upper midwest", "he is leading the Republican Party into the wilderness", "he doesn't stand a chance against Hillary". So far, they have all been wrong.
Re:It's the transition team, people. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I take it you haven't seen the so-called Pied Piper memo?
It wasn't Daddy's money and influence propelling Trump over the past year, it was Hillary's. As disturbing as that revelation was to me, I can only imagine how Trump took it. He must feel like the victim of the world's most elaborate troll.
Re: (Score:3)
I love you people. You're every bit as entertaining as the idiots who ran around screaming about Obama when he was elected. Have a little faith in the system, it's worked for over two centuries. Obama shoved bad shit through when first elected and the backlash was he had to work with a Republican majority in Congress. If Trump starts going all right wing he'll wind up drowning in Democrats. I expect to see him undo the worst of Obama's policies and then hopefully he'll sit down with ALL of Congress and
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you talking to the Dems or the Republicans? Is there some alternative universe where Republican congresscritters worked cooperatively with the Democratic president and settled their differences with studied debate instead of wondering where he was born? I must have missed that memo.
Re: (Score:3)
Isn't it strange how the people who scream "small government" and "freedom" go out and employ extra people just so that they can poke their noses into the most private places.
Re:It's the transition team, people. (Score:5, Informative)
mandate that families hold funerals for miscarried or aborted fetuses
This was so crazy that I had to look it up. Turns out "hold a funeral" is "dispose of remains properly" -- the bill required that fetal remains be either interred or incinerated. Generally speaking that would be the responsibility of the healthcare facility in custody of the remains.
Tell me straight, is "require families to hold a funeral" truly the most accurate and reasonable way you could come up with to indicate the nature of the bill, or is it a purposeful deception?
Re:It's the transition team, people. (Score:4, Insightful)
mandate that families hold funerals for miscarried or aborted fetuses
This was so crazy that I had to look it up. Turns out "hold a funeral" is "dispose of remains properly" -- the bill required that fetal remains be either interred or incinerated. Generally speaking that would be the responsibility of the healthcare facility in custody of the remains.
Tell me straight, is "require families to hold a funeral" truly the most accurate and reasonable way you could come up with to indicate the nature of the bill, or is it a purposeful deception?
This is what happens when you believe what you read at Media Matters. In this case, MM was blindly copying from Esquire:
http://mediamatters.org/resear... [mediamatters.org]
Cause that's what it boils down to in practise... (Score:4, Informative)
The law in case [in.gov] requires treatment of what is nothing but medical waste as if it were a dead body. [iowa.gov]
Throughout the law in case, legislators explicitly removed ANY limitation of gestation time or any choice from the pregnant women on the matter - making it a law that 1-week, 2-week or 20-week abortion MUST be treated the same as a body of a grown human being.
It MUST be issued a burial transit permit and it MUST be either buried in a graveyard (i.e. interred) or cremated - at the expense of the clinic or the parent(s).
It cannot be disposed of as what it is - medical waste. As was the case prior to that law.
Furthermore, law requires informing the parent(s) of the "fetus" about "counseling that may be available concerning the death of the miscarried fetus".
Which is treating a removed cyst as if it is a dead human. And if the human is dead due to a surgery, that means someone killed it.
I.e. Abortion is murder.
Also, parent(s) are required to sign off on the "final disposition of the miscarried fetus" - i.e. the burial.
Thus, the law DOES require families to hold funerals (as only licensed funeral facilities may conduct burials of human bodies) - if they chose not to have the burial of the "fetus" taken care of by the clinic.
In which case, the clinic must bare the costs of the procedure - IF they can even find someone willing to do the "interment or cremation". [theatlantic.com]
Cause while on one side there is an active campaign against anything abortion related in that state, on the other there is no money in it for the funeral homes.
For either of those reasons, they tend to refuse to provide burial services to clinics.
"We're all figuring it out," said Patti Stauffer, the vice president of policy at Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky. So far, she hasn't had much luck finding potential funeral homes and cemeteries - a lot of the businesses she's called have told her no. "It's not like we have hundreds of people that are interested in working with us," she said.
That doesn't mean implementing the law won't be logistically challenging, though. "There's going to be a lot of man hours involved," said Curtis Rostad, the executive director of the Indiana Funeral Directors Association. "I think a lot of funeral homes are going to be doing a lot of man hours to do this, for not a lot of income."
Which in practice leaves clinics with a single solution - to shift the burden of the burial of the "fetus" onto the patient.
"Fetus" must be treated as a dead body...
Clinics can't find a business partner to do it for them...
But a patient can simply walk into a funeral home with their burial transit permit and their bag of medical waste and have the "fetus" interred or cremated. Yay!
I.e. Either the parent(s) must take the "body" to a funeral home and have it buried at their own expense - OR the clinics will be forced to have parents take the body to a funeral home and have it buried at their own expense.
Or clinics can simply close. That's an option too.
Just like coat hangers and falling off a stool are an option.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a guy who, as governor of Indiana, when facing a breakout of AIDS in the rural community due to drug use, chose "prayer" as his only solution.
This could be awkward, aren't Christians traditionally the enemies of vampires [thedailybeast.com]?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, he's still less batshit insane than either Clinton or the rest of the Republican presidential candidates (except for Kasich).
That is truly damning by faint praise, but there you have it. The best and the brightest....
Re:It's the transition team, people. (Score:4, Insightful)
Pence is Trump's impeachment insurance.
Trump's the first republican to hold a pride flag on stage. http://m.washingtontimes.com/n... [washingtontimes.com]
On Sunday, at a rally in Colorado, Mr. Trump proudly held up a rainbow flag with the words “LGBT for Trump” written on it to a cheering crowd of thousands. It was an historic moment for gay equality and the Party of Lincoln as the 2016 GOP nominee for President of the United States held high the flag for gay equality. No other Republican Presidential nominee in history has embraced the LGBT community in such a loud and proud way.
He's also said trans could use what ever bathroom they wanted and Caitlyn Jenner took Trump up on bathroom offer. http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/28/... [cnn.com]
Re: It's the transition team, people. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's the transition team, people. (Score:5, Funny)
The hiring of the *homophobic bigot* Peter Thiel just goes to show how awful they are.
He's also sexist, since he won't have sex with women.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, since when does anyone care who is on the transition team? The transition team disappears in a few weeks. They don't make policy.
Try not to wet your pants every day between now and the inauguration.
Peter Thiel and Hulk Hogan (Score:5, Insightful)
"Thiel further angered First Amendment supporters by bankrolling the Hulk Hogan lawsuit that brought down Gawker"
I'm pretty sure the only people who felt angered at this as a first amendment issue were the folks at Gawker.
Everyone else was pretty happy to see the Silicon Valley Version of TMZ (Thirty Mile Zone) go away, and quit outing the sexual orientation of businessmen whose only possible reason for being considered "public persons" was having been promoted as such by Gawker in the first place.
Peter Thiel and Hulk Hogan: I personally cheered for the verdict in this case, and am glad Thiel backed it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure you'd be OK with someone offering to pay any lawsuits naming you as a defendant, and that this wouldn't result in lots of people suing you hoping to make a buck.
The good and the bad (Score:2)
I'm sure you'd be OK with someone offering to pay any lawsuits naming you as a defendant, and that this wouldn't result in lots of people suing you hoping to make a buck.
I'd take the good with the bad. There's a cop I'd like to take to court for violating my rights - can I get someone to pay for my lawsuit too?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sure you'd be OK with someone offering to pay any lawsuits naming you as a defendant, and that this wouldn't result in lots of people suing you hoping to make a buck.
That depends. Did I turn around and refuse multiple court orders and have a past history of engaging in SLAAP like-behavior to stop people from suing me for ruining their name?
Re:Peter Thiel and Hulk Hogan (Score:4, Insightful)
Would you be OK with a defendant in a lawsuit for which you had legitimate cause tying you up in court until your money ran out?
Let's ask Gawker shall we? They did that multiple times, to numerous people that they slandered.
Re: (Score:3)
There are also people who say Thiel is no longer "gay" because they disagree with him.
Yes, really. The article isn't hard to google.
This is very common with people who engage in identity politics. If you wander off the plantation, you're a non-person. This is very true if you're anything but white, in which case you're just scum anyway. Oh and if you're Asian, you might be Schrodinger's minority, oppressed today, part of the white-capitalist-patriarchy tomorrow. Thiel isn't the only case, he's just the most recent high profile case. Those on left who engage in this type of bullshit said the same thing about Clarence Thomas, Ben Car
First Amendment what? (Score:2)
Both Peter Thiel and Donald Trump are thin-skinned rich white guys who bully anyone that they think insults their thin-skinned specialness.
Both have shown clearly they are FOR free speech when that speech is FOR them, and AGAINST free speech when that speech is against them.
That means they are neither pro free speech, the first amendment, or basic human rights.
It is not surprising that a narcissistic misogynist xenophobic racist bully would enlist others like him to a transition team.
Trump's history is full
Re: (Score:2)
Trump's history is full of contracts where he refuses to pay and unilaterally changes how much he'll pay after he gets the product. If this sounds familiar it's the same as what Darth Vader did with Lando Calrissian when he took Han Solo's carbomite-frozen body to Jabba the Hutt.
Trump glaring menacingly at liberals: "I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."
Just the echoes (Score:2)
Both Peter Thiel and Donald Trump are thin-skinned rich white guys who bully anyone that they think insults their thin-skinned specialness.
Both have shown clearly they are FOR free speech when that speech is FOR them, and AGAINST free speech when that speech is against them.
That means they are neither pro free speech, the first amendment, or basic human rights.
It is not surprising that a narcissistic misogynist xenophobic racist bully would enlist others like him to a transition team.
Trump's history is full of contracts where he refuses to pay and unilaterally changes how much he'll pay after he gets the product. If this sounds familiar it's the same as what Darth Vader did with Lando Calrissian when he took Han Solo's carbomite-frozen body to Jabba the Hutt.
Those who voted for Trump for President are in for a few nasty surprises when he does the same things to our allies, to our treaties, to his own campaign promises, and to the people of this land. Unfortunately, so are the rest of us.
E
Relax everyone. This is just the echoes of the Clinton campaign dying down.
Clinton ran a campaign of spite and malice, she created a tidal wave of hatred and loathing, the waves of which are still sloshing around the tub.
It'll take about two weeks (from the election). People will see Trump acting presidential, that he isn't a monster, and that his plans are sensible and good for the country.
In the mean time, just let them work it out of their system.
Maybe it'll make their transition quicker.
Go to sleep, my... (Score:2)
you are a fucking idiot
There there, it's all right.
Go to sleep now, it'll all be better in the morning, about a week and a half from now.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Cleaning the swamp? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been hearing a lot of talk about "Give Trump a chance", and "let's judge him when he gets to office" by people who voted against him, but are practical enough to want a good leader.
However, this seems to be a pattern with Trump - using donors or people who already agree with him in key positions and advisors. His economic team [wsj.com] consists of big donors, and discredited hacks like Stephen Moore and Larry Kudlow (this is non-partisan; even economic advisors of previous republicans presidents [typepad.com] don't agree with Moore). He takes an climate-change skeptic (Myron Ebell) to lead the EPA transition.
Yet, I haven't heard a peep from most people who supported Trump about this. The "blue collar" crowd who supported him was about people sick of "Establishment politics", and instead wanted someone "looking out for the working class". Trump's isolationist and trade-war leaning policies, and embrace of supply-side economics have a proven record of hurting workers. Together with clear cronyism (to be fair, this was obvious before the election), I'm surprised that the "blue collar" crowd isn't even slightly upset.
Trump's supporters seem to still be in the post-game high - "Our team won!"; are they going to hold him to his (crazy) campaign promises? Are they going to expect him to loosen libel laws, build a wall, bring back sweatshop factory jobs? A co-worker remarked "Trump's victory speech was a step towards healing", instead of realizing that the stirred up crazy is still out there; he doesn't get credit for not being as crazy enough to follow through on his campaign promises.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Cleaning the swamp? (Score:4, Informative)
So you think poisoning the environment is somehow going to help society?
Muslim, immigrant woman: 'I voted for Trump' (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/... [cnn.com]
Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter and co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement, first made her self-described "confession" in a Washington Post column on Thursday. Since it published, she told Costello, she has received a torrent of abuse on social media. It's a symptom, Nomani insisted, of an increasingly hostile "liberal honor brigade."
And that is what the left doesn't understand... and it is one of the reasons Clinton lost...
Liberals, self-proclaimed "tolerant" people, attack anyone who doesn't hold their values.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't wait to watch the intellectual contortions you put yourself through as you and your fellow Trump supporters being to realize what it is you actually elected.
TPP is dead (Score:4, Informative)
I've heard that TPP [wsj.com] and TTIP [bloomberg.com] are already going through their death throes thanks to Trump.
You are incorrect.
TPP is dead [breitbart.com].
Donald Trump’s victory in Tuesday’s presidential election has prompted President Barack Obama to abandon the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement, the Wall Street Journal reported late Friday.
According to the Journal, the White House had hoped to push the deal forward in the lame-duck session of Congress, assuming Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton had won the election. Her loss has already changed the political landscape:
Also of note since Trump won: Canada has said [breitbart.com] it's willing to renegotiate NAFTA, Mexico said it's willing to renegotiate NAFTA, stock market has hit new highs, money previously allocated by the government for the purpose of building the wall has been found, and two of Trumps scandals (the underage rape, and the muslim hajib thing) were found out as complete fabrications.
I'm waiting to hear the liberals on Slashdot spin the death of TPP as a bad thing because it was due to Trump.
Re: (Score:3)
How exactly was that different from the other candidate? I'm shocked she didn't throw Bill under the bus in her run at the position.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe if you believe the media and the monster they declare Trump to be.
How many GOP presidential candidates, or candidates from either party, have taken pictures such as this?
http://www.inquisitr.com/3702676/donald-trump-surprise-president-elect-supports-lgbt-community-holds-rainbow-flag-at-colorado-rally-lgbt-for-trump/ [inquisitr.com]
Trump has shown over the last 2 years that he has a backbone of steel. I wasn't expecting that from him but the man is tough as they come, and as soon as the campaign was over he started showing his true leadership.
Of course we won't hear about it on TV or in the newspapers because the liberal media will spend their time in FUD mode. At first it was "the markets are gonna crash because Trump" until the next day the markets open on an uptick, then it was all about the "massive demonstrations against Trump" o
Re: (Score:3)
Trump will see the break up of the US in ways the Southern Confederates could only dream about.
You mean when the Democrats were fighting to keep slaves and the Republicans freed them?