United States Politics: ∆τ_i*ε*φ*m_i<0 where ε=4 and φ=0.25

[benji]

Trump is probably too much of a regard to realize that, but I would expect lobbyists from Lockead smacking some sense into him. Who's gonna buy F-35? Burkina Faso and Nicaragua?

Why would he listen to worse businessmen than him? Did they write The Art of the Deal? They should build those big beautiful planes in America for America. But we won't need planes because with Elon like Israel we'll have the space lasers. They tell me, sir, we can't have the space lasers but you'll see, Thanos and the rest of Titan will be scared of the winning.

[benji]

[benji]

https://x.com/BNODesk/status/1900678131825909875

[Nintex]

[benji]

[killamajig]

I was listening to the Dollop podcast biography of Benjamin Franklin. Ben started a newspaper just to slander his friend's political opponent so his friend could be reelected. 

Sorry Donnie, it's been going on for a while.

[Alpacx]

I was listening to the Dollop podcast biography of Benjamin Franklin. Ben started a newspaper just to slander his friend's political opponent so his friend could be reelected. 

Sorry Donnie, it's been going on for a while.

When I read Team of Rivals I was surprised how partisan the newspapers were. Feels like we're going back to that.

[killamajig]

Speaking of the dollop and newspapers, they have a podcast that's called the past times where they read articles and news clippings from an old newspaper.



It definitely taught me the lesson that unbiased journalism is actually a new concept. I always knew about the yellow journalism thing, but just listening to some articles that they talk about in these newspapers really opens your eyes as to what newspapers were like back then. 

Long story short, don't believe everything you read in a newspaper.

[Besticus Maximus]

Mussolini and Stalin were both editors of newspapers

[benji]

Almost every newspaper in the United States, except USA Today, was originally founded as a partisan one. I would argue that the period of "non-partisan" journalism actually was simply reflecting the partisan position of its class, reflecting a "consensus" of the Boston-DC corridor that momentarily had the say of both parties elites. The South was never part of this, as Democrats they were excluded from this view and have remained so as Republicans. By adhering to this "consensus" the press could find both LBJ and Nixon acceptable even as they represented no ideological strain in their parties. But the South wasn't alone, the media was provincial to those three major cities alone, not even their suburbs.

This corridor gained sway because of radio and then TV, which created a false sense of a non-partisan moment when this never actually represented the mass public's views, as shown by that media's inability to ever understand anywhere else and groups outside of its class. The proliferation of new media has simply been a return to the norm but people who convinced themselves of the illusion as the all-time and proper truth are simply reacting poorly to their sheltered illusions being shattered. They never realized just how partisan and ideological the media was during that period because they never questioned any of its assumptions or premises let alone had experience outside of it.

The Founders, in part because many of them were involved in the media of the time, made it a habit of reading all the papers not just those on their side. One of the funnier stories is that George Washington got so upset with a Republican paper that Jefferson was funding (with State Department funds) to criticize his administration that he actually cancelled his subscription (it was a point of pride that you didn't cancel for criticism of yourself) which led them to make sure to send him multiple free copies. (And he continued to read it and get upset.)

What the media says now about Trump is nothing compared to what the partisan media was writing against Adams and Jefferson. The HBO series included one of the more famous editorials about Adams:

[Nintex]

How did he do this

[killamajig]

this is why he's popular



Most people want these guys out of the US

[Nintex]

Fauci is going to jail

[Potato]

How much further can he embarrass himself and the entire cuntry?

[DavidCroquet]

"By order of These Great United States and with the Power of The Office of the President, I hereby re-guiltify you!"

[benji]

[killamajig]

[Alpacx]

According to Dr. Alawieh, she follows him for his religious and spiritual teachings and not his politics.”

According to court documents, in an interview with immigration officials Alawieh said she had attended the commemoration of the death of Nasrallah during her trip, while she was waiting for a visa. Nasarallah died in a Sept. 27, 2024, air strike by the Israeli Air Force on Hezbollah’s headquarters.

I think the Trump admin got this one right bros 

[killamajig]

It's almost the same story with the Hamas Columbia protester guy they say is totally innocent and just a simple protester. He was handing out Hamas propaganda to students. Someone should have told him hamas is still designated a terrorist organization by the US since October 8th 1997 and handing out terrorist propaganda might effect his immigration status.

[Nintex]

Shalom and deport
 

Also with the message that there is a new sheriff in town, the bombing on Yemen continues and could expand to Iran if they don't give up their cards.

[TylenolJones]

Is inviting an overseas sex criminal into the county going to be a weekly thing at this point?

[Alpacx]

Is inviting an overseas sex criminal into the county going to be a weekly thing at this point?

Finally a way to have trans representation at the White House during the Trump Admin.

[benji]

It's almost the same story with the Hamas Columbia protester guy they say is totally innocent and just a simple protester. He was handing out Hamas propaganda to students. Someone should have told him hamas is still designated a terrorist organization by the US since October 8th 1997 and handing out terrorist propaganda might effect his immigration status.

He's a green card holder, he has not been charged with a crime so cannot legally be detained let alone deported without due process.

[killamajig]

It's almost the same story with the Hamas Columbia protester guy they say is totally innocent and just a simple protester. He was handing out Hamas propaganda to students. Someone should have told him hamas is still designated a terrorist organization by the US since October 8th 1997 and handing out terrorist propaganda might effect his immigration status.

He's a green card holder, he has not been charged with a crime so cannot legally be detained let alone deported without due process.

I hope this is sarcasm

[killamajig]

https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/after-we-grant-your-green-card/rights-and-responsibilities-of-a-green-card-holder-permanent-resident

Your Responsibilities as a Permanent Resident
As a permanent resident, you are:

Required to obey all laws of the United States and localities;
Required to file your income tax returns and report your income to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and state taxing authorities;
Expected to support the democratic form of government (“support” does not include voting. Permanent residents cannot vote in federal, state, or local elections.); and
Required to register with the Selective Service, if you are a male age 18 through 25.

Goodbye terrorists

[benji]

No, green card holders have traditionally had to have committed a crime. The Trump Administration has essentially declared that immigrants no longer have any due process. (Well, really anybody but Obama already declared that for citizens.)

It does not violate the laws of the United States to advocate for Hamas.

[killamajig]

I would expect that support for Hamas, a terrorist org would violate this...

Expected to support the democratic form of government

[benji]

That's talking about the United States, you can't seek to overthrow the American form of government. Hamas probably would like to do that but they're more concerned locally.

In any case, that's not the Trump Administration's argument, their argument is that they can scoop up anybody who opposes US foreign policy, indefinitely detain them and deport them. (Then once they land on foreign soil, you drone strike them.)

[Nintex]

If a guest is disrespectful to the host, you can kick them out  

You wouldn't let them live in your house, why would you let them into your country.

[benji]

Well, I'm sure we can find some Democrats who would have loved to deport anyone against what they were doing in Ukraine or regarding climate change. We should always reach across the aisle for common sense bipartisan solutions.