brb, i gotta go turn the windmill off
― Fuck the NRA (ulysses), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 05:16 (four years ago) link
careful, you will stop the wind if you do that
― an incoherent crustacean (MatthewK), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 06:17 (four years ago) link
Getting images of windmills stalking and hunting bald eagles until their power cable gets yanked out of the socket. Do wonder if t sees the same world as the people he supposedly governs.
On the other hand nice to see Zaucer of Zilk returning to 2000Ad wonder if that's more what the Pres sees things like. Though maybe too much colour involved.
― Stevolende, Tuesday, 24 December 2019 09:38 (four years ago) link
Just every now and then I stop and take in just how numbingly fucking stupid the guy is. One of those blowhard dickheads who blunders into a conversation and monologues to himself while everyone waits for him to leave.
― an incoherent crustacean (MatthewK), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 10:56 (four years ago) link
nyt jumps in with a timely article:
A Trump Policy ‘Clarification’ All but Ends Punishment for Bird Deaths
WASHINGTON — As the state of Virginia prepared for a major bridge and tunnel expansion in the tidewaters of the Chesapeake Bay last year, engineers understood that the nesting grounds of 25,000 gulls, black skimmers, royal terns and other seabirds were about to be plowed under.To compensate, they considered developing an artificial island as a safe haven. Then in June 2018, the Trump administration stepped in. While the federal government “appreciates” the state’s efforts, new rules in Washington had eliminated criminal penalties for “incidental” migratory bird deaths that came in the course of normal business, administration officials advised. Such conservation measures were now “purely voluntary.”The state ended its island planning.The island is one of dozens of bird-preservation efforts that have fallen away in the wake of the policy change in 2017 that was billed merely as a technical clarification to a century-old law protecting migratory birds. Across the country birds have been killed and nests destroyed by oil spills, construction crews and chemical contamination, all with no response from the federal government, according to emails, memos and other documents viewed by The New York Times. Not only has the administration stopped investigating most bird deaths, the documents show, it has discouraged local governments and businesses from taking precautionary measures to protect birds.In one instance, a Wyoming-based oil company wanted to clarify that it no longer had to report bird deaths to the Fish and Wildlife Service. “You are correct,” the agency replied.
To compensate, they considered developing an artificial island as a safe haven. Then in June 2018, the Trump administration stepped in. While the federal government “appreciates” the state’s efforts, new rules in Washington had eliminated criminal penalties for “incidental” migratory bird deaths that came in the course of normal business, administration officials advised. Such conservation measures were now “purely voluntary.”
The state ended its island planning.
The island is one of dozens of bird-preservation efforts that have fallen away in the wake of the policy change in 2017 that was billed merely as a technical clarification to a century-old law protecting migratory birds. Across the country birds have been killed and nests destroyed by oil spills, construction crews and chemical contamination, all with no response from the federal government, according to emails, memos and other documents viewed by The New York Times. Not only has the administration stopped investigating most bird deaths, the documents show, it has discouraged local governments and businesses from taking precautionary measures to protect birds.
In one instance, a Wyoming-based oil company wanted to clarify that it no longer had to report bird deaths to the Fish and Wildlife Service. “You are correct,” the agency replied.
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:03 (four years ago) link
whoops, messed up the link: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/24/climate/trump-bird-deaths.html
if everyone can please keep their posts on this thread limited to the topic of birds for the rest of the year, i'd appreciate it
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:05 (four years ago) link
and not the big bottom, newsie wewsie type
― looking for Mon in Alderaan places (Neanderthal), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:12 (four years ago) link
this administration, it's for the birds. and by that i mean, viciously against the birds.
― Doctor Casino, Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:13 (four years ago) link
frankly surprised this hasn't been media-blasted as a major triumph. old white guys with opinions hate the protection of birds passionately, as a symbol of the bleeding-heart, business-crushing red tape that so afflicted american during the era when it ceased to be great. trump should open his rallies by strangling some obscure, endangered species of owl with his bare hands, they'd eat it up.
― Doctor Casino, Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:15 (four years ago) link
Ah, the old Ozzie Osborne Gambit!
― A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:17 (four years ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7_OWYrLVOU
― j., Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:19 (four years ago) link
not too late for the DNC to take "For the Birds" as a slogan
― Simon H., Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:21 (four years ago) link
naw bernie owns birds, they'd never touch it
― Doctor Casino, Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:25 (four years ago) link
Democrats the party of pajaros anyway
― TikTok to the (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 17:30 (four years ago) link
Who really killed Caroll Spinney
― Evan, Tuesday, 24 December 2019 18:27 (four years ago) link
"you don't show the aspirin over here, do you"
― an incoherent crustacean (MatthewK), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 19:22 (four years ago) link
Ozzie Osborne
B Is For Zimluss
― don't care didn't ask still clappin (sic), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 19:33 (four years ago) link
Too many bloody marys:
You were once a US Attorney in @SDNYnews, but were never appointed US Attorney General nor served in that capacity.Why are you misrepresenting your public service? pic.twitter.com/yxTDrxxsGs— Alex Howard (@digiphile) December 24, 2019
― Jersey Al (Albert R. Broccoli), Tuesday, 24 December 2019 21:37 (four years ago) link
generally speaking, he has been an attorney in the United States, so this is true.
― akm, Tuesday, 24 December 2019 23:33 (four years ago) link
Trump: [slurring] Robots are stealing white people's luggage.Media: Trump Luggage Attack Sets Up Clash With DemsGOP: Well, where's the Democrat plan to protect luggage?!?Dems: [Write Luggage Protection Act, which sits on McConnell's desk]Trump: A squirrel took my ice cream. pic.twitter.com/sDkbYZRzIr— Seth Masket (@smotus) December 24, 2019
― Pete Swine Cave (Eliza D.), Wednesday, 25 December 2019 01:09 (four years ago) link
Being "an officer of the court" is a long way from what most people would consider a "government official", especially since his client, not the government, pays for his services.
― A is for (Aimless), Wednesday, 25 December 2019 01:09 (four years ago) link
Good morning!
ublic support for Donald Trump‘s removal from office is the highest it has ever been, according to a new poll.
Fifty-five per cent of those asked said they were in favour of the US president’s conviction by the Senate, a figure which has shot up from 48 per cent the week before.
Meanwhile, the number of people against Mr Trump’s removal has dropped to an all-time low, according to the MSN poll.
On Christmas Day, 40 per cent were opposed to the Senate voting to convict the president, who has been impeached over his dealings with Ukraine and an alleged subsequent attempt to obstruct congress.
The gap between the two views has become much wider since last week, when there was little to divide them (48 per cent in favour of Mr Trump's removal, 47 per cent against).
The percentage of respondents who neither supported nor opposed conviction also grew.
― TikTok to the (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 27 December 2019 15:55 (four years ago) link
convict the motherfucker
― peloton for the painfully alone (m bison), Friday, 27 December 2019 16:09 (four years ago) link
this is why I keep saying "never overreact to one poll". I'm talking to you, Mr Cillizza
― looking for Mon in Alderaan places (Neanderthal), Friday, 27 December 2019 16:10 (four years ago) link
those kind of numbers are fairly unthinkable in polarized 2019, too. that's an assload of support
"an assload of support" for January title.
― a bevy of supermodels, musicians and Lena Dunham (C. Grisso/McCain), Friday, 27 December 2019 16:23 (four years ago) link
I wonder if poll numbers would differ depending on whether the question is framed as "Do you support Trump's conviction by the Senate?" vs. "Do you support Trump's removal from office?"
― 💠 (crüt), Friday, 27 December 2019 17:35 (four years ago) link
vs. "Do you support the unconstitutional Democrat Partisan Witch Hunt to cancel YOUR VOTE for President Trump?"
― 💠 (crüt), Friday, 27 December 2019 17:37 (four years ago) link
On Thursday night, the President retweeted an article from the Washington Examiner that names the person that Trump’s allies allege to be the whistleblower. This is the first time Trump has drawn public attention to the alleged whistleblower’s name.Trump’s retweet came after a Twitter account associated with his 2020 campaign, @TrumpWarRoom, replied to a tweet by the whistleblower’s attorney, Mark Zaid, criticizing Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) for her attacks against the whistleblower.“Members of Senate Whistleblower Caucus should protect #whistleblowers, not attack them,” Zaid tweeted, noting that the Director of National Intelligence’s office and the Intelligence Community Inspector General “has made it clear lawful protections exist.”“So why is Senator @MarshaBlackburn pretending to be bi-partisan Caucus Member given her many attacks?” Zaid asked.In response to Zaid’s tweet, the @TrumpWarRoom account defended Blackburn by replying: “It’s pretty simple. The CIA ‘whistleblower’ is not a real whistleblower!” It then linked to a Washington Examiner article that named the CIA officer who Trump’s allies allege to be the whistleblower.Trump then retweeted that tweet.
Trump’s retweet came after a Twitter account associated with his 2020 campaign, @TrumpWarRoom, replied to a tweet by the whistleblower’s attorney, Mark Zaid, criticizing Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) for her attacks against the whistleblower.
“Members of Senate Whistleblower Caucus should protect #whistleblowers, not attack them,” Zaid tweeted, noting that the Director of National Intelligence’s office and the Intelligence Community Inspector General “has made it clear lawful protections exist.”
“So why is Senator @MarshaBlackburn pretending to be bi-partisan Caucus Member given her many attacks?” Zaid asked.
In response to Zaid’s tweet, the @TrumpWarRoom account defended Blackburn by replying: “It’s pretty simple. The CIA ‘whistleblower’ is not a real whistleblower!” It then linked to a Washington Examiner article that named the CIA officer who Trump’s allies allege to be the whistleblower.
Trump then retweeted that tweet.
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, 27 December 2019 17:41 (four years ago) link
if trump wins re-election, they're going to try to put the whistleblower on trial for treason, aren't they
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, 27 December 2019 17:42 (four years ago) link
the whistleblower has reportedly been assigned multiple personal bodyguards to escort them to and from work, especially during periods when president fuckface escalates his public attacks on them
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, 27 December 2019 17:43 (four years ago) link
So just look for the person with multiple bodyguards, duh.
O wait, Trump has multiple bodyguards. #thingsthatmakeyougohmmm
― Hereward the Woke (Ye Mad Puffin), Friday, 27 December 2019 17:57 (four years ago) link
didn't they have to do the same thing for Christine Ford
― frogbs, Friday, 27 December 2019 17:57 (four years ago) link
― El Tomboto, Friday, 27 December 2019 18:23 (four years ago) link
Also it’s time for me to repeat my stance against performative “if/when Trump wins in 2020” handwringing. It’s worse than saying nothing. Every time you want to do that you just be giving another dollar to ActBlue instead, or something.
― El Tomboto, Friday, 27 December 2019 18:27 (four years ago) link
Seriously. If you're that sure Trump is gonna win, do everything you can to win Dem seats in state legislatures, which in their own way matter as much as who's President.
― Guayaquil (eephus!), Friday, 27 December 2019 18:29 (four years ago) link
(You know what, also do that if you're not that sure Trump is gonna win.)
― Guayaquil (eephus!), Friday, 27 December 2019 18:30 (four years ago) link
i can understand that, but thinking about possible future outcomes is a pretty basic instinct. then again, i suppose one must imagine sisyphus happy
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:13 (four years ago) link
humblebrag but i also believe it's in my capacity to worry about the future and help my favored candidates to win all at the same time, all while making coffee
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:14 (four years ago) link
final point: focusing on the positive outcomes while suppressing negative thoughts has about as much chance as the local "only GOOD news!" start-up newspaper/pamphlet that finds its way into your junk mail every 8-10 years
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:16 (four years ago) link
i guess on that final point it's a little different, because in this case it's like if the "only GOOD news!" start-up had the capability to ban the negative news :D
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:17 (four years ago) link
― El Tomboto, Friday, December 27, 2019
otm`
― TikTok to the (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:22 (four years ago) link
xxxpost I don't think Tom's talking about suppressing negative thoughts, because all of us would fail at that. But rather publicly expressing the thought that 2020 is already quite possibly lost, reacting to a negative stimuli that doesn't technically exist yet.
mostly because it can actually spur some folk into hyperanxiety and frankly, if the worst possible outcome does occur, now you've suffered twice.
I think ultimately if the last three years have taught us anything, it's that our ability to predict the future, even with people who act predictably, has been somewhat below average.
though you're good people and I feel your posts are just the understandable exasperation and need to scream into the void that many in this thread feel ,myself included. :)
― looking for Mon in Alderaan places (Neanderthal), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:22 (four years ago) link
Only two presidents in my lifetime have lost reelection; incumbency is on his side. But every time I read Sanders, Warren, etc. assuring us "we" can win if we get POC out to vote I think of this thread and how many more times we POC have to save your fucking asses from your own despair.
― TikTok to the (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:23 (four years ago) link
Yup, the one upside (if you can call it that) of Trump's election is that more than ever I'm convinced that basically anything is possible.
― bold caucasian eroticism (Simon H.), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:24 (four years ago) link
xpost because while i know those of us ITT aren't really the type, I do know a lot of people who absorb their environments and react to the nihilistic reads by saying "well, guess I shouldn't bother getting involved, it's a lost cause anyway". if enough people say "fuck it, what's the point", it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and then it's "1 for Martin, 2 for Martin"
Alfred otm. the more we embrace the fact that we CAN win, the more likely we'll be spurred to act and turn out ourselves, as well as inspiring others to do the same.
there will be no confident certainty going into election night 2020, no matter what the polls say, and in our case, that's probably for the better.
― looking for Mon in Alderaan places (Neanderthal), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:26 (four years ago) link
1) i didn't express anything about 2020 being quite possibly lost. actually, i strongly believe that the democrats - ANY democrat - is going to win. and if we don't, i'll fucking go ballistic and ruin the lives of everyone i know who isn't 100% against trump.
2) still, let it be decreed on ilx: no more negative thoughts about post-2020. got it everyone? we're drawing the line!
in addition, for those of you who drive: no more left turns. you're gonna have to make three right turns in a row from now on, that's just the way it is
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:26 (four years ago) link
my statements on that weren't regarding anything that you wrote, just "in general" in regards to what we often see in this suite of threads from a variety of posters.
― looking for Mon in Alderaan places (Neanderthal), Friday, 27 December 2019 19:28 (four years ago) link
― But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Friday, December 27, 2019 2:26 PM bookmarkflaglink
I've seen that episode of Gary Shandling!