Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Good thing that it reminded me to look at the Washington Post, which has the following article: Sanctuary cities ruling: When a judge quotes Sean Spicer, it’s not a good sign for the White House
. AKA Using your mouth (or Twitter) has actual consequences. Such as a judge finding that the supposedy "secular" immigration ban is actually a violation of religious freedom if you keep claiming before your supporters that it is a "Muslim ban".
![]()
You bought it, you own it. It's on you.
In case you missed it: The Trump adminstration is considering cutting foreign aid and merging USAID with the State Department
. I'm sure the timing of this when the State Department is still understaffed is completely innocuous.
edited 26th Apr '17 11:10:33 AM by Krieger22
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiotNow for something funny and stupid: Trump apparently has a big red button he presses to get a coke.
http://www.metro.us/president-trump/trump-button-coke#.WQDlFhFOP0Y.twitter
Here's the original article
edited 26th Apr '17 11:28:58 AM by megaeliz
Trump to sign order on potential NAFTA withdrawal.
Wonder if he'd actually pull that trigger or has some idea of how bad it would be and is just hoping the others fold.
edited 26th Apr '17 11:25:33 AM by TheRoguePenguin
Congress is debating a bill to make the US Register of Copyrights a presidential appointment
There is Obama-era politicking involved behind it but you should know that the big media associations are the biggest backers and the EFF is among its opponents. Consider adding this to your "things to call congresspeople about" list as it's not a bill that would necessarily be voted on along partisan lines.
@Last Page: Somebody posted an article about how The Wall is a perfect metaphor for Trump's approach to policy. Well, THAT The Wall also fits eerily well
. Shame the compilation skipped "Mother"
.
EDIT:
If we're gonna talk about copyright, allow me to bring this article I posted in the Reinventing Copyright thread
.
edited 26th Apr '17 11:42:33 AM by IFwanderer
1 2 We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be. -KV![]()
I'm not sure. Can you explain what that means exactly?
So I'm not as optimistic as many of you are about 2020 but after thinking about it I think I found the perfect way for Trump to lose support. Someone from his support base has to yell at him "Pay for the wall yourself!" and it has to catch on. The one thing that he couldn't hide with his supporters yelling "7d chess" have him say "I won't" or worse "I can't".
edited 26th Apr '17 11:44:32 AM by Wildcard
IP laws have generally been pretty low priority for politicians, and that's probably not going to change anytime soon.
I imagine that's why it's generally been pretty easy for copyright lengths to be extended every so often.
I've thought that perhaps a way around that be to tax IP rents for copyrights that reach a certain age, but that would probably be even more difficult to pass let alone implement.
![]()
It might be late to say much about it in the House but it still has to be introduced in the Senate. On further thought, that might be the place to direct efforts, assuming it gets voted on and passes the house today.
![]()
![]()
The Register of Copyrights runs the Copyright office and under current law is supposed to be chosen by the Librarian of Congress which is a presidential appointee. The current Librarian of Congress is a recent Obama appointee after the last one retired; that person demoted the then-current Register who was a: not that competent and b: tended to support big-media stances on copyright law. The position is currently vacant.
Edit: This piece
(by an EFF member) explains more about what the Register's role entails.
So on purely partisan grounds, people should oppose it because it would give more power to Donald to spite an Obama appointee and fill a position with a lackey. On more general grounds, there is a strong case to be made that current copyright law is biased too far in favor of big media corporations and their lobbyists are constantly active in trying to keep things that way and/or expand their power/influence.
TBH the best we can likely hope for right now is trying to stop things getting worse. You're right that IP law reform will (and probably should) take a backseat to not letting the country go to shit.
edited 26th Apr '17 12:36:04 PM by Elle
This also makes me realize that people who are supporting that wall, in addition to just being ignorant in general, are especially ignorant of historical parallels and all that jazz.
I mean even if you were a racist and didn't want them brown people coming over, aren't there better ways to achieve that than this wall? Sure it's a big "fuck you" but in terms of being something actually useful it's pretty shitty.
No, they definitely are. These big corporations and institutions are almost incompatible with Democracy. How is democracy supposed to work when you have a private sector that is trying to usurp the public sector from being in control of the government?
They keep Democrats as a whole within the center because leftwing policies are a threat to their profit margins and control. Same with other companies like pharmaceutical companies , Big Oil, trans-national corporations etc.
Who do you think pushed for TPP, NAFTA, helped destroy the unions, kill most labor newspapers (mostly leaving corporate media in control of the narrative) etc.
Who wants public education defunded so more for profit schools can be built? (I mean even Obama was good with it.)
I mean the 70's/80's backlash against the Civil Rights Movement was largely an attack manipulated by big business using racist sentiments.
Again, I've pointed out that the masses hardly have any influence on public policy. The guys on top make the policy for us to choose between.
So we're given false choices between A and B where option A is something a lunatic would go for. Maybe they'll be nice and throw in an option C.
Whether a politician is explicitly bought off by a particular company or not doesn't matter because politicians have to listen to their donors or else lose which means bending to their will and making business friendly policies even to the detriment of everyone else. We're not paying most of their campaign finances after all.
edited 26th Apr '17 1:17:34 PM by MadSkillz
Pai's going forward with a plan to gut net neutrality
there is a link there that you to contact your representatives.
edited 26th Apr '17 1:24:27 PM by MorningStar1337
P U R E I D E O L O G Y
Senate Democrats have reintroduced a bill that would ban conversion therapy nationwide
.
Not the prime candidate in 2012 but he was in 2008. He set records with the amount of funds Wall Street gave him.-shrugs-
Just cause he was Wall Street's candidate doesn't mean he's evil or something. It is what it is.
I mean yes, he's a very likeable person but he wasn't exactly a progressive more like a center-right politician in many areas.
edited 26th Apr '17 1:42:41 PM by MadSkillz
*gestures at the very same Overton Window differences between Europe and the US Internet Leftists love to bring up*
The American "Left": Who needs Stalin apologism to have fun?
GOP legislators and their staff would be exempt from cuts to Obamacare present in their new health plan
... until one GOP legislator noticed.
It's just one man. Show of hands for those surprised that the GOP would be nakedly self centered over this too?
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiotAnd before anyone starts harping on again about Obama being a progressive , has anyone actually read the Audacity of Hope?
Obama praises Reagan. Obama likes Reagan. He wants to be a Reaganite Republican.
Here's an article by Time Magazine on Obama and his love for his role model:
Does he want to be Reagan? No, but it's still troubling.
edited 26th Apr '17 1:52:16 PM by MadSkillz
You can't simply say "look, they get money from big corporations! They're bought and paid for!" Big corporations donate to everyone. You have to actually demonstrate that they're bought and paid for, which you've consistently failed to do.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
The last guy who did got banned. Also there was that one weirdo Donetsk People's Republic apologist once.
edited 26th Apr '17 1:52:09 PM by Krieger22
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot

![[up] [up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png)
SHIT!!!! I'M SORRY!!! GUYS, BACKTRACK FROM WHAT I SHARED PLEASE, LET'S NOT SQUABBLE AGAIN OVER THIS PLEASE!
The only good fanboy, is a redeemed fanboy.