BibleForums Christian Message Board
Other Categories => Controversial Issues => Topic started by: Fenris on November 03, 2024, 01:07:50 PM
-
This Tuesday.
Guesses on who's going to win?
The polls in the toss up states are very close. I don't know that I trust any of them though.
Right now I feel like Kamala has the momentum. Trump made some unforced errors and wasted precious time, and in the end it could cost him everything.
I hope that I'm wrong but this is my read.
Anyone else want to weigh in?
-
Just the opposite is the feeling out of the cities…
Trump 320+ electoral college
And popular vote +1.6%
-
Trump 320+ electoral college
And popular vote +1.6%
This result would please me.
-
To me it seems too close to call at this point. Harris is unable to propose resolutions to the problems facing the country because she's clueless. As President, she'd be like someone in the cockpit of a plane with neither pilot skills nor a flight plan. I truly hope RK is right.
-
To me it seems too close to call at this point. Harris is unable to propose resolutions to the problems facing the country because she's clueless. As President, she'd be like someone in the cockpit of a plane with neither pilot skills nor a flight plan. I truly hope RK is right.
I'm not sure that's a fair assessment.
I think Harris just needs the time to consider the problems facing the country at this point in time so she can propose some solutions to the problems and then circle back to the problems and then come up with some solutions to what the country needs at this particular point in time.
-
I think Harris just needs the time to consider the problems facing the country
The funniest part is that she's running as though she's an outsider. She's the freaking sitting VP and hasn't done a thing in four years. Not even the jobs that she was specifically given, like fixing the border.
-
The funniest part is that she's running as though she's an outsider. She's the freaking sitting VP and hasn't done a thing in four years. Not even the jobs that she was specifically given, like fixing the border.
So we have someone who was a miserable failure as VP, now running for President. I suppose that's as rational and logical as half the country signing up for a regurgitation of the mess we've had for the last 4 years. (After all, Harris said she can't think of a single thing she would do differently than Biden).
-
I'm not sure that's a fair assessment.
I think Harris just needs the time to consider the problems facing the country at this point in time so she can propose some solutions to the problems and then circle back to the problems and then come up with some solutions to what the country needs at this particular point in time.
It's also very important, as you have heard from so many incredible leaders, for us at every moment in time — and certainly this one — to see the moment in time in which we exist and are present, and to be able to contextualize it, to understand where we exist in the history and in the moment as it relates not only to the past but the future. And also to imagine what can be, and be unburdened by what has been.
I know you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you believe you heard is not what I meant.
-
The funniest part is that she's running as though she's an outsider. She's the freaking sitting VP and hasn't done a thing in four years. Not even the jobs that she was specifically given, like fixing the border.
So we have someone who was a miserable failure as VP, now running for President. I suppose that's as rational and logical as half the country signing up for a regurgitation of the mess we've had for the last 4 years. (After all, Harris said she can't think of a single thing she would do differently than Biden).
... except maybe send someone else to fix the border.
-
You say that as if the border is broked.
:-X
-
The funniest part is that she's running as though she's an outsider. She's the freaking sitting VP and hasn't done a thing in four years. Not even the jobs that she was specifically given, like fixing the border.
So we have someone who was a miserable failure as VP, now running for President. I suppose that's as rational and logical as half the country signing up for a regurgitation of the mess we've had for the last 4 years. (After all, Harris said she can't think of a single thing she would do differently than Biden).
... except maybe send someone else to fix the border.
True dat.
-
You say that as if the border is broked.
:-X
Probably 12 to 15 million "newcomers" arriving in the last 4 years can attest that it's in excellent working order.
-
Know Kamala Harris. She was DA when I was awarded a citation for intervention in a deadly assault.
She and I will never agree on certain issues, particularly concerning the Faith, though she is an outstanding public servant.
Tomorrow will be a great day for her and the nation.
-
Know Kamala Harris. She was DA when I was awarded a citation for intervention in a deadly assault.
She and I will never agree on certain issues, particularly concerning the Faith, though she is an outstanding public servant.
Tomorrow will be a great day for her and the nation.
Yes
When she is retired from public service!
At least both of us will have our votes count for the winner in our respective states!
-
she is an outstanding public servant.
Sure. Especially if you like open borders, higher crime, higher taxes, more antisemitism, a foreign policy that favors enemies like Iran over allies like Israel...
-
Kind of academic now, but I can't help wondering what it was that so many liked about the candidate who fell at the first hurdle in the 2020 primaries but ended up at the top of the ticket because Biden insisted on having a black woman as his running mate. Because nothing says "quality candidate" quite like the one who nobody wanted but who gets pushed to the top anyway for nothing more than having enough melanin and a double-X chromosome.
I often think of the British Conservative party, loosely comparable to the Republicans. For a time they were derided as the nasty party, the place where old racists, misogynists and homophobes went to vote. But the Conservative party has brought the UK three female Prime Ministers (although admittedly Liz Truss is perhaps best forgotten), a non-white Prime Minister, and has recently elected the first black woman to lead a major party. All this without insisting on women-only shortlists, DEI candidates or anything else, merely letting candidates stand and letting the people vote. No other British party has managed to get anyone other than a white man into 10 Downing street.
-
The USA is filled with about 45% narcissists who care only about whether someone likes them or not, so if a large enough slice of culture convinces them that they will be liked if they promise to like a crustacean, then the insecure narcissists will begin a campaign to shame anyone that shames shellfish.
-
Ah, there is jubilation among conservatives today, (but weeping and wailing in the realm of the left). While not a slam dunk, Trump pulled ahead of Harris early in the race and maintained his lead to win handily. Having secured the White House and Senate, (and hopefully the House), the Republicans are poised to begin the work of righting our course and getting our house in order. I'm so thankful that the progressive agenda has been disrupted, and hope when the dust settles, we can begin to unite as a country, and have some sense of normalcy restored.
-
On a purely selfish note, this gives me a four year time frame in which:
1. the law firm will buy all of my stock in 48 equal payments starting January 1, with the outstanding balance earning a healthy 8% per year.
2. on January 1, 2029, they make their final lump sum payment to me.
3. that gives me four years to work as much and where I want, to invest as I want, to buy the land the Mrs. and I want, and to design and build our "final home."
4. To transition from full time lawyering back into full time ministry.
I like the next four years.
-
I like the next four years.
Sounds awesome, RK. I'm very happy for you!
-
Kind of academic now, but I can't help wondering what it was that so many liked about the candidate who fell at the first hurdle in the 2020 primaries but ended up at the top of the ticket because Biden insisted on having a black woman as his running mate.
I suppose in the end she really wasn't liked by that many at all. She ran as "I'm not Trump" and didn't get votes from people who were looking for something more.
-
Kind of academic now, but I can't help wondering what it was that so many liked about the candidate who fell at the first hurdle in the 2020 primaries but ended up at the top of the ticket because Biden insisted on having a black woman as his running mate.
I suppose in the end she really wasn't liked by that many at all. She ran as "I'm not Trump" and didn't get votes from people who were looking for something more.
And it appears that she invited 14 million of Joe’s friends to her BBQ from 4 years and none of them either showed up or RSVP’d
How strange….
How rooooooddddd.
-
I suppose in the end she really wasn't liked by that many at all. She ran as "I'm not Trump" and didn't get votes from people who were looking for something more.
Yeah, I agree that her major selling point was not being Donald Trump. She was mainly chosen as Biden's running mate because she was an ethnic female with an education. In the end, over half of all voters chose a qualified "felon" over an empty pantsuit.
-
Trump has started out putting his best foot forward in selecting Susie Wiles as his Chief of Staff--the first woman ever appointed to that prestigious position. She was instrumental in the success of Trump's campaign strategy and will certainly be a major asset to his administration. (So much for Mark Cuban's allegation that Trump doesn't like strong, intelligent women around him).
-
She’s a real sweet lady and an absolutely head knocker as to discipline and process.
This is a lady you want running the trains and as she says, “keeping the riff raff away from the Boss.”
-
I find I'm deriving a perverse pleasure watching the meltdowns and lamentations on the left following Trump's win. I sort of feel guilty, and sort of don't. :)
-
I find I'm deriving a perverse pleasure watching the meltdowns and lamentations on the left following Trump's win. I sort of feel guilty, and sort of don't. :)
Someone I loosely know on Facebook recently posted that he literally doesn't know if he will survive the next four years. He somehow survived the first four years of Trump's presidency so I'm not sure why he feels he's in such mortal danger now. He's gay, but no more gay now than he was in 2016.
Can you say overdramatic?
-
I find I'm deriving a perverse pleasure watching the meltdowns and lamentations on the left following Trump's win. I sort of feel guilty, and sort of don't. :)
Someone I loosely know on Facebook recently posted that he literally doesn't know if he will survive the next four years. He somehow survived the first four years of Trump's presidency so I'm not sure why he feels he's in such mortal danger now. He's gay, but no more gay now than he was in 2016.
Can you say overdramatic?
Theatrics is quite common among liberal folks since the election. The co-hosts of the View wore black the day after the election, and Trump opponents far and wide vociferously insist he is a sinister threat to democracy. Yet, they've weaponized the courts in a failed attempt to eliminate Trump as a candidate, filing charges they would not ordinarily bother with; sought to have him removed from the ballot in a couple of states; coerced Biden into abandoning his re-election bid and gifted Harris the nomination in his place without due democratic process. So, the Democrats aren't exactly exemplifying democracy themselves.
-
I find I'm deriving a perverse pleasure watching the meltdowns and lamentations on the left following Trump's win. I sort of feel guilty, and sort of don't. :)
Someone I loosely know on Facebook recently posted that he literally doesn't know if he will survive the next four years. He somehow survived the first four years of Trump's presidency so I'm not sure why he feels he's in such mortal danger now. He's gay, but no more gay now than he was in 2016.
Can you say overdramatic?
Theatrics is quite common among liberal folks since the election. The co-hosts of the View wore black the day after the election, and Trump opponents far and wide vociferously insist he is a sinister threat to democracy. Yet, they've weaponized the courts in a failed attempt to eliminate Trump as a candidate, filing charges they would not ordinarily bother with; sought to have him removed from the ballot in a couple of states; coerced Biden into abandoning his re-election bid and gifted Harris the nomination in his place without due democratic process. So, the Democrats aren't exactly exemplifying democracy themselves.
But that's different. It's important they do all those things because, you know orangemanbad.
-
I find I'm deriving a perverse pleasure watching the meltdowns and lamentations on the left following Trump's win. I sort of feel guilty, and sort of don't. :)
What's the deal in Florida? If I were to vacation from overseas (as I'm not American) could I be held under suspicion of carrying fraudulent documents (passport, drivers license, etc.) given none of these things reflect the details of my birth?
-
What's the deal in Florida? If I were to vacation from overseas (as I'm not American) could I be held under suspicion of carrying fraudulent documents (passport, drivers license, etc.) given none of these things reflect the details of my birth?
That's not how it works. So long as you enter legally you won't have any problems whatsoever.
-
What's the deal in Florida? If I were to vacation from overseas (as I'm not American) could I be held under suspicion of carrying fraudulent documents (passport, drivers license, etc.) given none of these things reflect the details of my birth?
That's not how it works. So long as you enter legally you won't have any problems whatsoever.
That's what I thought; it's a shame that I had to think about it at all.
-
Trump cabinet picks, in my humble opinion
White House chief of staff: Susie Wiles : A
Secretary of state: Marco Rubio : A+ (Huge upgrade over Blinken, who seems to be working hard at managing an American decline)
Attorney general: Matt Gaetz: F (crazy, not serious person, ethics violations, won't get confirmed in the senate)
HHS secretary: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: F (crazy, not serious person, science denier, won't get confirmed in the senate)
U.N. ambassador: Elise Stefanik A++ (Will be a strong moral voice in the house of lies called the UN)
"Border czar": Tom Homan: A (His verbal sparring with AOC at a House hearing is epic!)
Defense secretary: Pete Hegseth: B (Probably very good, but young and position might be over his head. Still better than who's in the position now)
National security adviser: Michael Waltz (I don't know who this is)
Interior secretary: Doug Burgum (I don't know who this is)
Secretary of homeland security: Kristi Noem: D (Nothing against her personally, but I don't think she's up to managing the tremendous amount of personnel and agencies that fall under DHS)
CIA director: John Ratcliffe: A
Director of national intelligence: Tulsi Gabbard: F (She has pro Putin and Pro Assad tendencies, she's anti war when America does it, but pro war when our enemies do.)
EPA administrator: Lee Zeldin: A (I love Lee at any post, but I wish he got some party leadership position)
U.S. ambassador to Israel: Mike Huckabee A+++ (Loves Israel and Jews, has visited Israel over 100 times over the last 50 years)
-
If RFK JR is confirmed, I will officially consider the US to be the US depicted in Idiocracy.
-
My ideal government is a group of people with the intelligence and imagination of a four year old, sitting behind the steering wheel making “vroom vroom” noises as long as daddy has the keys…
-
If RFK JR is confirmed, I will officially consider the US to be the US depicted in Idiocracy.
I can't imagine that he will, and I do not understand why Trump is wasting political capital on trying to get him and Gaetz confirmed.
-
Most of Trump's nominees have been or became staunch supporters of the President-elect. The nomination of a few of them--not ideally suited to their pending position--can be seen as a reward for their loyalty.
I pretty much agree with fenris' assessment of the nominations/appointments, and find Gaetz' nomination particularly troubling. I mean, why even consider such an obnoxious, morally and ethically-challenged loose cannon as the future head of the DOJ?
-
I mean, why even consider such an obnoxious, morally and ethically-challenged loose cannon
lol
-
Most of Trump's nominees have been or became staunch supporters of the President-elect. The nomination of a few of them--not ideally suited to their pending position--can be seen as a reward for their loyalty.
I think this is becoming the norm. And it isn't Trump who started this phenomena. Barak Obama bragged that his Attorney General, Eric Holder, was his "wingman". The AG's job is to be chief law enforcement officer in the country- even if that means running counter to the president's wishes. But there we were, and here we are.
I pretty much agree with fenris' assessment of the nominations/appointments, and find Gaetz' nomination particularly troubling. I mean, why even consider such an obnoxious, morally and ethically-challenged loose cannon as the future head of the DOJ?
30 Senate Republicans say that they are planning to vote against him. He has no chance.
-
I see Gaetz has withdrawn as AG nominee. Symbolic gesture since he was not going to be confirmed anyway. He never should have been considered, as it wasn't a good look. Hopefully the next nominee will be more suitable for the job.
-
I see Gaetz has withdrawn as AG nominee.
Probably means that Tulsi picks up all the additional scrutiny. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.
-
Just the opposite is the feeling out of the cities…
Trump 320+ electoral college
And popular vote +1.6%
pretty shocking how close you got
-
Just the opposite is the feeling out of the cities…
Trump 320+ electoral college
And popular vote +1.6%
pretty shocking how close you got
He's a very smart guy.
-
Just the opposite is the feeling out of the cities…
Trump 320+ electoral college
And popular vote +1.6%
pretty shocking how close you got
He's a very smart guy.
Blind squirrel meets acorn.
-
Just the opposite is the feeling out of the cities…
Trump 320+ electoral college
And popular vote +1.6%
pretty shocking how close you got
He's a very smart guy.
Blind squirrel meets acorn.
Very modest, too.
-
I’m very proud of my humility…. Uriah Heep is a hero…
😳
-
If RFK JR is confirmed, I will officially consider the US to be the US depicted in Idiocracy.
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
-
If RFK JR is confirmed, I will officially consider the US to be the US depicted in Idiocracy.
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
Not to speak ill of Musk, or anything...
I'm not sure anymore that Idiocracy was the right comparison. We might be far beyond that now.
-
If RFK JR is confirmed, I will officially consider the US to be the US depicted in Idiocracy.
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
Not to speak ill of Musk, or anything...
I'm not sure anymore that Idiocracy was the right comparison. We might be far beyond that now.
Interstellar...except you know, we'd never find that wormhole and if we did NASA has already been so crippled for so many decades that there isn't a secret contingent that is even willing to consider anything so ambitious as visiting it--much less capable of building anything that could. We bear witness to some truly historic grade self mutilation, but thank Christ are kids are finally safe from...well, you know.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/JwQqXQrt/960px-2024-Tesla-Cybertruck-Foundation-Series-front-left-Greenwich.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nNCBhCQm)
Nuff said :P
-
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
And now Big Government is messing deciding what we can and can't eat. Definitely not what I voted for.
-
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
And now Big Government is messing deciding what we can and can't eat. Definitely not what I voted for.
lol, not what you voted for? Well, do you think anything about the way you evaluate things will change based on this , um, totally unexpected outcome?
-
lol, not what you voted for? Well, do you think anything about the way you evaluate things will change based on this , um, totally unexpected outcome?
You mean, should I have voted for Gigantic Government Kamala over Big Government Trump?
-
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
And now Big Government is messing deciding what we can and can't eat. Definitely not what I voted for.
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
-
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
What are you talking about?
I know a bit about immigration law.
-
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
What are you talking about?
I know a bit about immigration law.
I'm talking about not wanting to take the risk of having my phone confiscent, being detained, or being lifetime banned from visiting the US for having "falsified" documents. It's not a risk I want to take, and it's a risk I've been advised not to take.
-
I'm talking about not wanting to take the risk of having my phone confiscent, being detained, or being lifetime banned from visiting the US for having "falsified" documents. It's not a risk I want to take, and it's a risk I've been advised not to take.
Why do you think this would happen?
-
lol, not what you voted for? Well, do you think anything about the way you evaluate things will change based on this , um, totally unexpected outcome?
You mean, should I have voted for Gigantic Government Kamala over Big Government Trump?
no, that would be pointless and kind of silly (not that I don't indulge in both pointlessness and silliness often enough). I'm talking about the future...will it change anything? When you say that you didn't vote for this, it is-I assume, because you didn't expect this outcome..so do you believe this subversion of expectation will change anything about how you evaluate your expectations in the future?
-
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
And now Big Government is messing deciding what we can and can't eat. Definitely not what I voted for.
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
umm, yeah, plenty of people totally did just that.
-
I'm talking about not wanting to take the risk of having my phone confiscent, being detained, or being lifetime banned from visiting the US for having "falsified" documents. It's not a risk I want to take, and it's a risk I've been advised not to take.
Why do you think this would happen?
1. I'm Canadian
2. I'm Canadian and live in the UK
3. I'm Canadian and live in the UK and would be traveling to the US
4. I've been hassled plenty of times entering the US pre-Trump
5. None of my documentation matches my "sex at a birth"
6. If I'm put in the position of being asked to answer questions I'd consider answering with lies, I don't want to be put into that position
7. There are plenty of accounts of people being hassled entering the US; I know people who have been hassled since Donald's installation
8. I belong to a minority population Donald's admin has explicitly gone after
And on, and on, and on.
-
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
And now Big Government is messing deciding what we can and can't eat. Definitely not what I voted for.
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
umm, yeah, plenty of people totally did just that.
Better get ready to salute
-
I'm talking about not wanting to take the risk of having my phone confiscent, being detained, or being lifetime banned from visiting the US for having "falsified" documents. It's not a risk I want to take, and it's a risk I've been advised not to take.
Why do you think this would happen?
1. I'm Canadian
2. I'm Canadian and live in the UK
3. I'm Canadian and live in the UK and would be traveling to the US
4. I've been hassled plenty of times entering the US pre-Trump
5. None of my documentation matches my "sex at a birth"
6. If I'm put in the position of being asked to answer questions I'd consider answering with lies, I don't want to be put into that position
7. There are plenty of accounts of people being hassled entering the US; I know people who have been hassled since Donald's installation
8. I belong to a minority population Donald's admin has explicitly gone after
And on, and on, and on.
Yep! Caution advised.
-
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
And now Big Government is messing deciding what we can and can't eat. Definitely not what I voted for.
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
umm, yeah, plenty of people totally did just that.
Better get ready to salute
Ha, you think they'd have me? black, atheist, queer, autistic, socialist sympathizing weirdo...I don't think I'm wanted as a 'patriot'.
-
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
And now Big Government is messing deciding what we can and can't eat. Definitely not what I voted for.
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
umm, yeah, plenty of people totally did just that.
Better get ready to salute
Ha, you think they'd have me? black, atheist, queer, autistic, socialist sympathizing weirdo...I don't think I'm wanted as a 'patriot'.
Still gotta salute
-
I'm talking about not wanting to take the risk of having my phone confiscent, being detained, or being lifetime banned from visiting the US for having "falsified" documents. It's not a risk I want to take, and it's a risk I've been advised not to take.
Why do you think this would happen?
1. I'm Canadian
2. I'm Canadian and live in the UK
3. I'm Canadian and live in the UK and would be traveling to the US
4. I've been hassled plenty of times entering the US pre-Trump
5. None of my documentation matches my "sex at a birth"
6. If I'm put in the position of being asked to answer questions I'd consider answering with lies, I don't want to be put into that position
7. There are plenty of accounts of people being hassled entering the US; I know people who have been hassled since Donald's installation
8. I belong to a minority population Donald's admin has explicitly gone after
And on, and on, and on.
Yep! Caution advised.
Don't I know it, because now I'm playing segregation over here too.
-
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
And now Big Government is messing deciding what we can and can't eat. Definitely not what I voted for.
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
umm, yeah, plenty of people totally did just that.
Better get ready to salute
Ha, you think they'd have me? black, atheist, queer, autistic, socialist sympathizing weirdo...I don't think I'm wanted as a 'patriot'.
Still gotta salute
well, yeah, I suppose you have a point...but again I can only take solace in how safe the children are now.
-
And the real purpose of DOGE is to amass personal data on every American.
Talking serious authoritarianism here and who knows (?) if the constitution will even survive this administration.
.
-
1. I'm Canadian
2. I'm Canadian and live in the UK
3. I'm Canadian and live in the UK and would be traveling to the US
4. I've been hassled plenty of times entering the US pre-Trump
5. None of my documentation matches my "sex at a birth"
6. If I'm put in the position of being asked to answer questions I'd consider answering with lies, I don't want to be put into that position
7. There are plenty of accounts of people being hassled entering the US; I know people who have been hassled since Donald's installation
8. I belong to a minority population Donald's admin has explicitly gone after
And on, and on, and on.
My wife's alma mater, Calvin University in Grand Rapids, MI was asking about interest in our son attending there as he is getting closer to graduation. My wife essentially replied "Hell, no".
As of right now, we refuse to travel to the US for the foreseeable future.
-
His recent, insane attack on victims of "autism," per se, is deplorable.
And now Big Government is messing deciding what we can and can't eat. Definitely not what I voted for.
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
umm, yeah, plenty of people totally did just that.
Better get ready to salute
Ha, you think they'd have me? black, atheist, queer, autistic, socialist sympathizing weirdo...I don't think I'm wanted as a 'patriot'.
Still gotta salute
well, yeah, I suppose you have a point...but again I can only take solace in how safe the children are now.
They are just li,e so safe now, aren't they!?
-
1. I'm Canadian
2. I'm Canadian and live in the UK
3. I'm Canadian and live in the UK and would be traveling to the US
4. I've been hassled plenty of times entering the US pre-Trump
5. None of my documentation matches my "sex at a birth"
6. If I'm put in the position of being asked to answer questions I'd consider answering with lies, I don't want to be put into that position
7. There are plenty of accounts of people being hassled entering the US; I know people who have been hassled since Donald's installation
8. I belong to a minority population Donald's admin has explicitly gone after
And on, and on, and on.
My wife's alma mater, Calvin University in Grand Rapids, MI was asking about interest in our son attending there as he is getting closer to graduation. My wife essentially replied "Hell, no".
As of right now, we refuse to travel to the US for the foreseeable future.
We have a friend from Calgary who travelled down to sell some horses. She has a small Canadian flag decal on the back of her truck, and so all her windows + mirrors got smashed in while she was there.
For myself, when people tell me "Oh you don't have anything to worry about, no one would notice" that's when my eyebrows go up and I think, "Yeah that's not something you should ever have to say to me to assure me how safe it is to travel to the US".
-
Never trust any government any where for any purpose.
-
no, that would be pointless and kind of silly (not that I don't indulge in both pointlessness and silliness often enough). I'm talking about the future...will it change anything? When you say that you didn't vote for this, it is-I assume, because you didn't expect this outcome..so do you believe this subversion of expectation will change anything about how you evaluate your expectations in the future?
I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
-
And the real purpose of DOGE is to amass personal data on every American.
The government already has all that information.
-
And the real purpose of DOGE is to amass personal data on every American.
The government already has all that information.
That info cannot be accessable to DOGE or any social media site - like Musk's "X," which had been discussed.
-
Embarrassing watching the President get handlled by China
-
That info cannot be accessable to DOGE or any social media site - like Musk's "X," which had been discussed.
Doge is not the same entity as the X app.
-
That info cannot be accessable to DOGE or any social media site - like Musk's "X," which had been discussed.
Doge is not the same entity as the X app.
That is true. But it was considered, or discussed, for a time.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/social-securitys-announcements-are-leaving-its-website-and-moving-to-x-reports-4ef61a96
-
I'm not sure what the issue is. Many business entities use X to communicate with the public and even handle complaints and issues from the public.
-
Inevitable: Massive reaction to the policies of this wayward, lawless, incompetent Administration.
Too late?
Signing out for travel.
"Stupid is as stupid does." Forrest Gump
-
I wish there were a revolution on the scale that the left seems to be dreaming about…
-
I wish there were a revolution on the scale that the left seems to be dreaming about…
Every revolution creates a new ruling class.
-
Inevitable: Massive reaction to the policies of this wayward, lawless, incompetent Administration.
Too late?
Signing out for travel.
"Stupid is as stupid does." Forrest Gump
Oh, for a minute I thought I was reading an older post about the Biden administration. ;D
-
Too much division, of which I am, apparently, too much a part of.
Think the country is in very serious trouble and it is not (for heaven's sake) right vs left political ideology. Hope I am wrong. I am not.
It is about Donald Trump, a very real and present danger to the U.S. and our friends around the world.
I'll leave it be (again). Traveling.
Slow learner.
-
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
What are you talking about?
I know a bit about immigration law.
I'm talking about not wanting to take the risk of having my phone confiscent, being detained, or being lifetime banned from visiting the US for having "falsified" documents. It's not a risk I want to take, and it's a risk I've been advised not to take.
Wise.
Traveling US dropped with 30% where I live because of the detained examples in the media.
-
I can't even visit the place without risking my phone being confiscated, being held, and being lifetime banned for having "falsified" documents. Did anybody vote for that, really?
What are you talking about?
I know a bit about immigration law.
I'm talking about not wanting to take the risk of having my phone confiscent, being detained, or being lifetime banned from visiting the US for having "falsified" documents. It's not a risk I want to take, and it's a risk I've been advised not to take.
Wise.
Traveling US dropped with 30% where I live because of the detained examples in the media.
I think the UK is closer to 15%? But the lot here are sycophantic, so I'm not surprised it isn't higher.
I simply can't take the chance of "falsified document" bingo.
-
Too much division, of which I am, apparently, too much a part of.
Think the country is in very serious trouble and it is not (for heaven's sake) right vs left political ideology. Hope I am wrong. I am not.
It is about Donald Trump, a very real and present danger to the U.S. and our friends around the world.
I'll leave it be (again). Traveling.
Slow learner.
Project 2025 is in full swing and I waiting for the coup d'etat moment, a third term.
(https://i.servimg.com/u/f76/19/97/74/51/trump-13.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19977451/115)
From the official Trump store.
-
Too much division, of which I am, apparently, too much a part of.
Think the country is in very serious trouble and it is not (for heaven's sake) right vs left political ideology. Hope I am wrong. I am not.
It is about Donald Trump, a very real and present danger to the U.S. and our friends around the world.
I'll leave it be (again). Traveling.
Slow learner.
Project 2025 is in full swing and I waiting for the coup d'etat moment, a third term.
(https://i.servimg.com/u/f76/19/97/74/51/trump-13.jpg) (https://servimg.com/view/19977451/115)
From the official Trump store.
"Rewrite the rules"
Tht's a funny way to spell "C o n s t i t u t i o n a l c r i s is"
-
A hat is not a constitutional crisis.
-
A hat is not a constitutional crisis.
A hat for a term Trump isn't eligible for, with a written description (on the site) directly challenging the 22nd amendment? Yeah, Americans will realise it soon enough.
-
It's a hat.
-
It's a hat.
It's merchandise from the President of the United States of America, that comes with the description:
"The future looks bright! Rewrite the rules with the Trump 2028 high crown hat."
I don't know why the President of the United States of America has merchandise in the first place, but I do know that:
"The future looks bright! Rewrite the rules with the Trump 2028 high crown hat."
Is not an appropriate thing for the President of the United States of America to be joking about.
So yeah --
"The future looks bright! Rewrite the rules with the Trump 2028 high crown hat."
Is how you spell "C o n s t i t u t i o n a l c r i s i s" if Trump is at all serious about challenging the 22nd amendment. And there are people who take that description seriously. Trump's more crazed devotees, and the rest of the world.
-
It's a hat.
"The future looks bright! Rewrite the rules with the Trump 2028 high crown hat."
January 6 on steroids.
-
Is not an appropriate thing for the President of the United States of America to be joking about.
Eh. The guy tweeted an AI photo of himself dressed up as the Pope. He obviously doesn't hold much sacred.
-
And this capitulation on China cannot speedily repair what the trade war has already inflicted on the economy.
Great deal lost, nothing gained.
Also 30% tariff still remains. Which we pay.
-
Is not an appropriate thing for the President of the United States of America to be joking about.
Eh. The guy tweeted an AI photo of himself dressed up as the Pope. He obviously doesn't hold much sacred.
That's my point. The US President shouldn't be "meming" like this, or "haha it's just a joke" about rewriting the Constitution.
-
Is not an appropriate thing for the President of the United States of America to be joking about.
Eh. The guy tweeted an AI photo of himself dressed up as the Pope. He obviously doesn't hold much sacred.
That's my point. The US President shouldn't be "meming" like this, or "haha it's just a joke" about rewriting the Constitution.
It's a poll, let's see if Americans are ready.
-
That's my point. The US President shouldn't be "meming" like this, or "haha it's just a joke" about rewriting the Constitution.
Why not? It's a free country. I find this behavior much more entertaining and agreeable than Obama's pompousness or Biden's obvious dementia being hidden by the Democrats and the press.
-
It's a poll, let's see if Americans are ready.
And everyone was worried that he wouldn't step down if he lost the 2020 election. Yet he did.
All this worrying is for nothing.
-
That's my point. The US President shouldn't be "meming" like this, or "haha it's just a joke" about rewriting the Constitution.
Why not? It's a free country. I find this behavior much more entertaining and agreeable than Obama's pompousness or Biden's obvious dementia being hidden by the Democrats and the press.
Read some of the stuff that Jefferson or Adams or Lincoln or Jackson said.
As the JOker famously said in Batman I, "This town needs an enema."
-
That's my point. The US President shouldn't be "meming" like this, or "haha it's just a joke" about rewriting the Constitution.
Why not? It's a free country. I find this behavior much more entertaining and agreeable than Obama's pompousness or Biden's obvious dementia being hidden by the Democrats and the press.
Because he's the President of the United States of America.
Gonna overthrow the government haha jk.
The election was rigged haha jk.
Going to erase the 22nd Amendment haha jk.
Tariffs guys! Follow me on Truthsocial for when to buy the dip haha jk.
No more tariffs guys! Follow me on Truthsocial for when to buy the crash haha jk.
Buy my stablecoin it's stable haha jk.
Here's me as the Pope I should be the Pope haha jk.
We're going to get Greenland one way or another haha jk.
We're going to make Canada the 51st state haha jk.
I'm going to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours, within one day, haha jk.
I'd take Obama or Biden to that.
All of my travel to the US for the next ~4 years has been cancelled, haha not kidding.
It's a poll, let's see if Americans are ready.
And everyone was worried that he wouldn't step down if he lost the 2020 election. Yet he did.
All this worrying is for nothing.
That doesn't at all matter now.
-
Because he's the President of the United States of America.
And a very entertaining one, at that.
-
That's my point. The US President shouldn't be "meming" like this, or "haha it's just a joke" about rewriting the Constitution.
Why not? It's a free country. I find this behavior much more entertaining and agreeable than Obama's pompousness or Biden's obvious dementia being hidden by the Democrats and the press.
Yeah, Like I always ask myself first before anything else about a leader 'how entertaining are they?'. My biggest complaint about all the past presidents is that the level of entertainment that they directly provided was pretty sub par...I mean Abraham Lincoln's hat was pretty funny, Van Buren's mutton chops crack me up every time, and Roosevelt's 'i'm not actually in a wheelchair' bit was legendary--but Trump definitely has all of those guys beat in the jokes per minute department.
I mean sure we have a president that intentionally--even brazenly, broadcasts hilarious bits that are obviously going to provoke and antagonize (which is the sign of artistic genius I might add), then we all get to point and laugh at all of the overly sensitive idiots that got all upset about these hilarious jokes--Its win-win, generate circumstances that you know will provoke a particular response and then act as if that response is very silly, nay even insane. Classic comedy.
I won't pretend that Trump invented the whole do a thing that will piss people off and then throw your hands up like 'what are you so mad about?' joke...I mean its basically the 'i'm not touching you' bit from childhood, writ internationally. Its a super popular and effective move and it's being used super effectively ....so much so that I tend to think that allies and enemies alike are all effectively disoriented.
Trump is also pompous, but if you agree with him it lands different I suppose...I guess that's why you never seemed to like my jokes.
-
Trump is also pompous, but if you agree with him it lands different I suppose...
I voted for him. It doesn't mean that I agree with everything that he says or does. But I bought the ticket, I may as well enjoy the ride...
-
Trump is also pompous, but if you agree with him it lands different I suppose...
I voted for him. It doesn't mean that I agree with everything that he says or does. But I bought the ticket, I may as well enjoy the ride...
You bought a ticket that cancelled all of mine. That's just so hilarious, right?
-
Trump is also pompous, but if you agree with him it lands different I suppose...
I voted for him. It doesn't mean that I agree with everything that he says or does. But I bought the ticket, I may as well enjoy the ride...
Do you remember that time you begged me to stop sharing my opinion in your thread about the whole Israel Hamas kerfuffle? I believe the stance was that I was being flippant and glib about a deeply serious and sacrosanct issue--you were not in fact , entertained.
Don't get me wrong i'm not simply calling you a hypocrite, well I am, but its not really the indictment that it might at first seem. I think hypocrisy is very natural and I doubt any of us that actually interrogate our own thoughts or values can go through life without becoming one at some point or another. Nope, I'm pointing out the gracelessness seated at the heart of your position.
You are entertained, not because you fundamentally see no harm in joking about sacred cows, obviously you do--You are entertained because they aren't your cows and you are minimizing the positions of those slighted herdsmen because you want to continue having fun, because its fun for you. I get that, this is at the heart of much of my graceless behavior too..."F@#& your feelings, I'm having fun!"
-
You bought a ticket that cancelled all of mine. That's just so hilarious, right?
I am sorry that the current president is inconveniencing you personally. But given who the Democrats put up to run against him, we really didn't have any choice.
-
Trump is also pompous, but if you agree with him it lands different I suppose...
I voted for him. It doesn't mean that I agree with everything that he says or does. But I bought the ticket, I may as well enjoy the ride...
Do you remember that time you begged me to stop sharing my opinion in your thread about the whole Israel Hamas kerfuffle? I believe the stance was that I was being flippant and glib about a deeply serious and sacrosanct issue--you were not in fact , entertained.
Don't get me wrong i'm not simply calling you a hypocrite, well I am, but its not really the indictment that it might at first seem. I think hypocrisy is very natural and I doubt any of us that actually interrogate our own thoughts or values can go through life without becoming one at some point or another. Nope, I'm pointing out the gracelessness seated at the heart of your position.
You are entertained, not because you fundamentally see no harm in joking about sacred cows, obviously you do--You are entertained because they aren't your cows and you are minimizing the positions of those slighted herdsmen because you want to continue having fun, because its fun for you. I get that, this is at the heart of much of my graceless behavior too..."F@#& your feelings, I'm having fun!"
I find you to be very annoying in every topic that you post in. Sorry not sorry that my thoughts are annoying you now.
-
Trump is also pompous, but if you agree with him it lands different I suppose...
I voted for him. It doesn't mean that I agree with everything that he says or does. But I bought the ticket, I may as well enjoy the ride...
Do you remember that time you begged me to stop sharing my opinion in your thread about the whole Israel Hamas kerfuffle? I believe the stance was that I was being flippant and glib about a deeply serious and sacrosanct issue--you were not in fact , entertained.
Don't get me wrong i'm not simply calling you a hypocrite, well I am, but its not really the indictment that it might at first seem. I think hypocrisy is very natural and I doubt any of us that actually interrogate our own thoughts or values can go through life without becoming one at some point or another. Nope, I'm pointing out the gracelessness seated at the heart of your position.
You are entertained, not because you fundamentally see no harm in joking about sacred cows, obviously you do--You are entertained because they aren't your cows and you are minimizing the positions of those slighted herdsmen because you want to continue having fun, because its fun for you. I get that, this is at the heart of much of my graceless behavior too..."F@#& your feelings, I'm having fun!"
I find you to be very annoying in every topic that you post in. Sorry not sorry that my thoughts are annoying you now.
Well, I can't say that this topic is especially annoying from you...I was much more annoyed about how you besmirching my grasp of pre WW2 Japanese history (that still cheeses me to this day, if i'm honest).
Anyway my post wasn't about how annoying you are, it was about dissecting your position and putting some context around it from my perspective. It could probably help you , if you let it.
-
It could probably help you , if you let it.
I need more help than you could possibly provide, but thanks anyway.
-
It could probably help you , if you let it.
I need more help than you could possibly provide, but thanks anyway.
Undoubtedly, however I didn't mean that I would or could walk you through the work of self reflection and growth that can help you to find your grace on this issue--I meant that you could take my observation for what it is and do the work yourself, because when it comes right down to it the only person that can change your mind is you.
-
You bought a ticket that cancelled all of mine. That's just so hilarious, right?
I am sorry that the current president is inconveniencing you personally. But given who the Democrats put up to run against him, we really didn't have any choice.
It's not that I'm just so important, it's that when voting has consequences, and the people subject to those consequences take issue with the whats and the whys, "at least the pres is entertaining" is flippant, and doesn't appreciate where the concern comes from.
Especially when said person is from one of those countries the President of the United States of America is going "we're going to invade whatchu going to do about it haha jk jk haha no really haha jk jk".
Especially when said person is from one of those populations the President of the United States of America is demonising.
Especially when said person knows those who have been personally harmed by acts inspired by rhetoric from the President of the United States of America.
I don't envy the choice Americans had between Donald or Biden no wait nevermind Kamala. But let's not pretend Donald is just such a joker haha we'll be good in 2029 right?
-
Trump is also pompous, but if you agree with him it lands different I suppose...
I voted for him. It doesn't mean that I agree with everything that he says or does. But I bought the ticket, I may as well enjoy the ride...
Do you remember that time you begged me to stop sharing my opinion in your thread about the whole Israel Hamas kerfuffle? I believe the stance was that I was being flippant and glib about a deeply serious and sacrosanct issue--you were not in fact , entertained.
Don't get me wrong i'm not simply calling you a hypocrite, well I am, but its not really the indictment that it might at first seem. I think hypocrisy is very natural and I doubt any of us that actually interrogate our own thoughts or values can go through life without becoming one at some point or another. Nope, I'm pointing out the gracelessness seated at the heart of your position.
You are entertained, not because you fundamentally see no harm in joking about sacred cows, obviously you do--You are entertained because they aren't your cows and you are minimizing the positions of those slighted herdsmen because you want to continue having fun, because its fun for you. I get that, this is at the heart of much of my graceless behavior too..."F@#& your feelings, I'm having fun!"
The hypocrisy of the right is so over the top right now.
-
Retail giant Walmart announced it will be raising prices,
passing tariff costs onto consumers
Kinda says it all.
-
Retail giant Walmart announced it will be raising prices,
passing tariff costs onto consumers
Kinda says it all.
No country or company is going to absorb the cost of tariffs. When those import bills to start coming in more regularly, I do hope people think back fondly to one of Donald's recent speeches and derive from it a hearty laugh. Ah geez, this sweater may now cost $400 but at least Donald is a hoot!
-
It's not that I'm just so important, it's that when voting has consequences, and the people subject to those consequences take issue with the whats and the whys, "at least the pres is entertaining" is flippant, and doesn't appreciate where the concern comes from.
After everything that has happened in US politics over the last couple of decades, Trump's ridiculous and off the wall comments seem trivial to me.
Biden had dementia that was obvious to everyone, yet Democrats and the press covered for him. Then they appointed a successor who didn't even have to go through a primary process, who appeared to be drunk and or high all the time, who presented with a room temperature IQ.
He threw the borders open and allowed millions of people to enter the country illegally, and then circumvented the normal legal process and allowed them to stay.
Biden's DOJ completely ignored civil rights violations that occurred on college campuses all over the country, simply because the victims were Jews.
He propped up and covered for a terrorist regime in Gaza, even after they murdered 1200 Israelis and took hundreds of hostages.
He passed an insane spending bill that any honest bystander said would cause terrible inflation, and when it the inflation came, he blamed it on other things.
After all this ********, we're back to OMG Trump made mean tweets or something. And I really don't care.
-
Retail giant Walmart announced it will be raising prices,
passing tariff costs onto consumers
Kinda says it all.
Biden caused inflation that passed costs on to consumers.
-
The hypocrisy of the right is so over the top right now.
As opposed to the hypocrisy on the left?
Every Republican president is "the worst ever" and "literally Hitler". The turning point was the 2012 election, when the Republicans nominated Mitt Romney for president. The guy is like vanilla ice cream. Probably the most boring guy nominated in decades. Yet Biden had to paint him as a racist, telling black voters "He's going to put you back in chains!"
And the Republican base decided, you want crazy? OK, we can do crazy. Hence, Trump.
Democrats had no problem when the Obama FBI was spying on the Trump campaign, in contravention to all established political norms. It was election interference of the highest order. That it was based on fraudulent documents supplied by the Clinton campaign is just the icing on the cake.
You want crazy? We can do crazy.
-
No country or company is going to absorb the cost of tariffs. When those import bills to start coming in more regularly, I do hope people think back fondly to one of Donald's recent speeches and derive from it a hearty laugh. Ah geez, this sweater may now cost $400 but at least Donald is a hoot!
Yeah I just loved those $8 cartons of eggs and the doubled price of gasoline under Biden. We all had a heart laugh and how expensive the cost of living was. But hey, at least no mean tweets. So that's something.
-
It's not that I'm just so important, it's that when voting has consequences, and the people subject to those consequences take issue with the whats and the whys, "at least the pres is entertaining" is flippant, and doesn't appreciate where the concern comes from.
After everything that has happened in US politics over the last couple of decades, Trump's ridiculous and off the wall comments seem trivial to me.
Biden had dementia that was obvious to everyone, yet Democrats and the press covered for him. Then they appointed a successor who didn't even have to go through a primary process, who appeared to be drunk and or high all the time, who presented with a room temperature IQ.
He threw the borders open and allowed millions of people to enter the country illegally, and then circumvented the normal legal process and allowed them to stay.
Biden's DOJ completely ignored civil rights violations that occurred on college campuses all over the country, simply because the victims were Jews.
He propped up and covered for a terrorist regime in Gaza, even after they murdered 1200 Israelis and took hundreds of hostages.
He passed an insane spending bill that any honest bystander said would cause terrible inflation, and when it the inflation came, he blamed it on other things.
After all this ********, we're back to OMG Trump made mean tweets or something. And I really don't care.
John Wick didn't become a killer after Theon Greyjoy stole his car and killed his dog, He was already a very famous and prolific killer.
But yeah sure, Obama, Clinton, Biden the Dems and the media all relieved you of your autonomy and now you have no choice but to find DJT hilarious despite how his 'jokes' impact on others. You are merely the inexorable culmination of other [bad] people's [bad] choices, but not your own.
-
John Wick didn't become a killer after Theon Greyjoy stole his car and killed his dog, He was already a very famous and prolific killer.
DJT as John Wick? Sure, why not.
But yeah sure, Obama, Clinton, Biden the Dems and the media all relieved you of your autonomy and now you have no choice but to find DJT hilarious despite how his 'jokes' impact on others.
Autonomy? I haven't been relieved of any autonomy. I'm amused that shattering political norms is only bad when the other side does it.
-
John Wick didn't become a killer after Theon Greyjoy stole his car and killed his dog, He was already a very famous and prolific killer.
DJT as John Wick? Sure, why not.
No, See, you've misunderstood the analogy..DJT is more 'Succession' than John Wick, but regardless i'm not really talking about DJT so much as your relationship to him, or that is to say the way in which you've cast yourself as essentially being hectored into accepting behavior that on some level you believe is deleterious and dangerous as entertainment.
But yeah sure, Obama, Clinton, Biden the Dems and the media all relieved you of your autonomy and now you have no choice but to find DJT hilarious despite how his 'jokes' impact on others.
Autonomy? I haven't been relieved of any autonomy. I'm amused that shattering political norms is only bad when the other side does it.
You're right you haven't, still you couch your decision to selectively accept things which you would reject from the 'other side' in terms of what other people did, the Dems, Obama, Hillary, the Media. What 'they' did provides some token of cover for your own choices even though it proves an incoherent drapery upon the slightest examination. But I suppose, this wasn't ever really about reason, it is about what provides the sensations you desire, no matter how shallow.
Its not zero sum, You don't actually have to agree with either the Obama-Clinton-Biden media complex or the conceit that DJT is just doing rollicking bits.
-
No country or company is going to absorb the cost of tariffs. When those import bills to start coming in more regularly, I do hope people think back fondly to one of Donald's recent speeches and derive from it a hearty laugh. Ah geez, this sweater may now cost $400 but at least Donald is a hoot!
Yeah I just loved those $8 cartons of eggs and the doubled price of gasoline under Biden. We all had a heart laugh and how expensive the cost of living was. But hey, at least no mean tweets. So that's something.
Food prices have exploded everywhere, not just in the US. The cost of petrol in the US? Guess what it is everywhere else.
What is unique to the US is, hmm, an order for a $180 airsoft gun coming with a $381 import (read: tariff) fee. Those $8 eggs won't seem too bad in a few months.
-
After all this ********, we're back to OMG Trump made mean tweets or something. And I really don't care.
As I said, flippant. And now, disingenuous. That "or something" is doing a heck of a lot of heavy lifting.
-
No, See, you've misunderstood the analogy..DJT is more 'Succession' than John Wick, but regardless i'm not really talking about DJT so much as your relationship to him, or that is to say the way in which you've cast yourself as essentially being hectored into accepting behavior that on some level you believe is deleterious and dangerous as entertainment.
I've not been "hectored" into anything.
I'm amused at the collective freak out because it's Republicans and not Democrats who are upsetting political norms.
You're right you haven't, still you couch your decision to selectively accept things which you would reject from the 'other side' in terms of what other people did, the Dems, Obama, Hillary, the Media. What 'they' did provides some token of cover for your own choices even though it proves an incoherent drapery upon the slightest examination. But I suppose, this wasn't ever really about reason, it is about what provides the sensations you desire, no matter how shallow.
I don't think I'm being shallow.
Its not zero sum, You don't actually have to agree with either the Obama-Clinton-Biden media complex or the conceit that DJT is just doing rollicking bits.
Yeah but the political class, the mass media, and the world at large accepted and approved of whatever Obama Clinton and Biden did. Their distress now amuses and entertains.
-
Food prices have exploded everywhere, not just in the US. The cost of petrol in the US? Guess what it is everywhere else.
When prices go up in the world's largest market, they tend to go up in other, smaller markets as well.
What is unique to the US is, hmm, an order for a $180 airsoft gun coming with a $381 import (read: tariff) fee. Those $8 eggs won't seem too bad in a few months.
And that too will entertain.
-
As I said, flippant. And now, disingenuous. That "or something" is doing a heck of a lot of heavy lifting.
Well, you know, the Democrats could have run a serious candidate. Someone even a curmudgeon like me could have voted for. Instead they nominated, without a primary process, an alcoholic, pot smoking, professionally mediocre politician who accomplished virtually nothing after decades in office, simply because she hit some nice grievance checkboxes. Maybe they will have learned from the experience of losing every single battleground state, and send up a serious person next time. Although I doubt it.
-
Retail giant Walmart announced it will be raising prices,
passing tariff costs onto consumers
Kinda says it all.
Biden caused inflation that passed costs on to consumers.
Donald Trump pretty much tanked the economy as he knows full well. To wit: His (too late) capitulation to China. The effects of his trade war will soon become manifest.
And Congress let him do it.
All major retailers will now follow Walmart in pricing hikes.
-
I must confess to being somewhat bothered by the political addiction on both the left and the right. Biden . Trump
You guys claims Jesus as King.
Where is your faith? Why the focus on the material and superficial and transient that means nothing and will not lady?
I’m in a church filled with people either having orgasms over Trump the messiah or sky screeching like The Body Snatchers.
Why would any non believer want the faith we profess?
-
Physician heal thyself
-
Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's.
-
Physician heal thyself
Right back at cha, bro.
-
Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's.
That doesn’t mean to trust Caesar more than God
-
Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's.
That doesn’t mean to trust Caesar more than God
I didn't imply that. I was speaking of prioritizing loyalties and commitments, and keeping things in the proper perspective.
-
"Between Walmart and China they should, as is said, ‘EAT THE TARIFFS,’ and not charge valued customers ANYTHING,” he added. “I’ll be watching, and so will your customers!!!”
U.S. President Donald Trump
-
Why the focus on the material and superficial and transient that means nothing and will not last?
Because those are the things we're talking about.
Why are concerns about political leaders and changes in attitudes and social order with respect to how that impacts people, a sign of a lack of faith? Can not one have faith while also being concerned over how the naked beaten man ended up on the side of the road? The Samaritan turned to him and said in passing, "what is health but a material, ephemeral, superficial thing. It's transient, this means nothing, it will not last, have faith". Why didn't Jesus take a "this means nothing and will not last" attitude to the money changers in the Temple? To the plight of the poor and abused? Surely there is a place for discussing the world as it happens to be without slipping necessarily into faithless abandon? Surely there's something to be said for being concerned that "American Christianity" is now associated with Donald, the second coming of Christ.
I get that today doesn't matter twenty trillion years into the age to come. But I'm about twenty trillion years and one age short of being there, and so I'm here and now. But actually I don't know if today doesn't matter, because today is kinda determinative of whether one enjoys the age to come.
-
Fair enough
I’m checking out
-
I’m checking out
And you're leaving the token Jewish guy to face the howling mob by himself?!!
Fair enough. I should be used to this by now. ;D
-
We are counted among the "People."
"Of the people, by the people, for the people." Abraham Lincoln
-
"Between Walmart and China they should, as is said, ‘EAT THE TARIFFS,’ and not charge valued customers ANYTHING,” he added. “I’ll be watching, and so will your customers!!!”
U.S. President Donald Trump
Regardless the retailer, these initial charges promise to be significant.
-
"Between Walmart and China they should, as is said, ‘EAT THE TARIFFS,’ and not charge valued customers ANYTHING,” he added. “I’ll be watching, and so will your customers!!!”
U.S. President Donald Trump
Regardless the retailer, these initial charges promise to be significant.
The tariff charges I'm seeing on Reddit are becoming more frequent, and worse with respect to amount charged. It's a concerning time to be American, and I think that's where faith comes in, but geez, it sucks and is going to suck all the same.
-
"Between Walmart and China they should, as is said, ‘EAT THE TARIFFS,’ and not charge valued customers ANYTHING,” he added. “I’ll be watching, and so will your customers!!!”
U.S. President Donald Trump
Regardless the retailer, these initial charges promise to be significant.
The tariff charges I'm seeing on Reddit are becoming more frequent, and worse with respect to amount charged. It's a concerning time to be American, and I think that's where faith comes in, but geez, it sucks and is going to suck all the same.
Indeed! There is already pressure here and folks realize it was a failed policy
-
ASIDE: I have worked as a Walmart associate. Their pricing system is now fully digital (most stores) and corp controlled, so updates on items are instant.
Shoppers can see fluctuations daily at a glance and have been concerned since even before this "operation."
-
Under the Biden-Harris administration, the civil rights of Jewish students were being violated every single day on college campuses across the country. Especially Ivy League schools. Students were physically blocked from going to classes. They were harassed, yelled at, shoved, intimidated, and threatened. My daughter's friend was terrified when she was locked in the Cooper Union library with a few other Jewish students, while a large crowd was outside, banging on the door and shouting at them.
The universities did nothing. This is a blatant violation of Title VI, which demands that universities that receive federal funds have the legal obligation to project the civil rights of students on their campus.
And Biden Harris didn't care.
Donald Trump is holding their feet to the fire. He is cutting off federal funding to universities that are not upholding Title VI. I would have crawled over broken glass to vote for him over Kamala, who would have allowed this unbelievable and immoral situation to continue.
The world is in a bad place right now. Particularly for Jews, who are seemingly despised by world leaders everywhere. Donald Trump is the one person who's standing up for us. Does anyone else here care about that?
-
Under the Biden-Harris administration, the civil rights of Jewish students were being violated every single day on college campuses across the country. Especially Ivy League schools. Students were physically blocked from going to classes. They were harassed, yelled at, shoved, intimidated, and threatened. My daughter's friend was terrified when she was locked in the Cooper Union library with a few other Jewish students, while a large crowd was outside, banging on the door and shouting at them.
The universities did nothing. This is a blatant violation of Title VI, which demands that universities that receive federal funds have the legal obligation to project the civil rights of students on their campus.
And Biden Harris didn't care.
Donald Trump is holding their feet to the fire. He is cutting off federal funding to universities that are not upholding Title VI. I would have crawled over broken glass to vote for him over Kamala, who would have allowed this unbelievable and immoral situation to continue.
The world is in a bad place right now. Particularly for Jews, who are seemingly despised by world leaders everywhere. Donald Trump is the one person who's standing up for us. Does anyone else here care about that?
if I were to respond with: I am sorry that the former administration inconvenienced your friend's daughter personally. But given who the Republicans put up to run against him, we really didn't have any choice--Some might argue that it is valid to both empathize with your friend's daughter and criticize the administration even if you still believe that the vote was the best choice you had at the time, instead dismissing such criticisms with a blanket 'I had no choice' with a side of being amused and entertained by the distress of the other side.
You keep claiming that you were not forced into your position, but you keep talking like its binary --one path or the other. Its clear that you understand the fundamental inanity of your position when transposed to someone else, but you've demonstrated to me that you aren't interested in acknowledging it in yourself.
Admittedly its hard to do, impossible to maintain, and it can't be forced...it's something you have to want.
I remember when you posted about your friend's daughter--Gonna go back and look at that thread.
-
if I were to respond with: I am sorry that the former administration inconvenienced your friend's daughter personally. But given who the Republicans put up to run against him, we really didn't have any choice--Some might argue that it is valid to both empathize with your friend's daughter and criticize the administration even if you still believe that the vote was the best choice you had at the time, instead dismissing such criticisms with a blanket 'I had no choice' with a side of being amused and entertained by the distress of the other side.
You keep claiming that you were not forced into your position, but you keep talking like its binary --one path or the other. Its clear that you understand the fundamental inanity of your position when transposed to someone else, but you've demonstrated to me that you aren't interested in acknowledging it in yourself.
Admittedly its hard to do, impossible to maintain, and it can't be forced...it's something you have to want.
I remember when you posted about your friend's daughter--Gonna go back and look at that thread.
Don't go empathizing with anyone now. That is apparently the West's greatest weakness.
-
Nothing the President is doing will address the issue of antisemitism, and his reactionary, unlawful dictates can serve to inflame these sentiments, unjustly endangering or demonizing all foreign students, just as his administration
rhetorically accuses "all" foreigners and immigrants by association.
If antisemitism on campus is Trump's concern, he has access to any number of legal means to address that, such as lawsuits or his bully pulpit, but not by royal fiat.
Ridding campuses and the nation of foreign students will not stop antisemitism, as the issue of campus security for all students does need to be addressed lawfully.
The courts need to stop his overreach almost on a daily basis.
-
Nothing the President is doing will address the issue of antisemitism, and his reactionary, unlawful dictates can serve to inflame these sentiments, unjustly endangering or demonizing all foreign students, just as his administration
rhetorically accuses "all" foreigners and immigrants by association.
If antisemitism on campus is Trump's concern, he has access to any number of legal means to address that, such as lawsuits or his bully pulpit, but not by royal fiat.
Ridding campuses and the nation of foreign students will not stop antisemitism, as the issue of campus security for all students does need to be addressed lawfully.
The courts need to stop his overreach almost on a daily basis.
well put, and I'm glad you said something. I find myself considering the idea that we are experiencing a sort of real-life Gish gallop, and that addressing these things at the level of the actual argument set forth consistently fails to make a dent. But that isn't a great attitude for me to have, especially considering that I don't actually have any way to accurately measure the dents. Anyway I appreciate you pointing out the fact that what is happening doesn't meaningfully address antisemitism (and it isn't really meant to).
-
Nothing the President is doing will address the issue of antisemitism, and his reactionary, unlawful dictates can serve to inflame these sentiments, unjustly endangering or demonizing all foreign students, just as his administration
rhetorically accuses "all" foreigners and immigrants by association.
If antisemitism on campus is Trump's concern, he has access to any number of legal means to address that, such as lawsuits or his bully pulpit, but not by royal fiat.
Ridding campuses and the nation of foreign students will not stop antisemitism, as the issue of campus security for all students does need to be addressed lawfully.
The courts need to stop his overreach almost on a daily basis.
well put, and I'm glad you said something. I find myself considering the idea that we are experiencing a sort of real-life Gish gallop, and that addressing these things at the level of the actual argument set forth consistently fails to make a dent. But that isn't a great attitude for me to have, especially considering that I don't actually have any way to accurately measure the dents. Anyway I appreciate you pointing out the fact that what is happening doesn't meaningfully address antisemitism (and it isn't really meant to).
Thanks and agreed! Looks more like an attempt at retribution.
-
if I were to respond with: I am sorry that the former administration inconvenienced your friend's daughter personally.
See, this is what nobody understands. It was not an "inconvenience". What is at stake is the right of Jews to be in public spaces. I don't think that it should be negotiable. Yet here we are.
But given who the Republicans put up to run against him
The Democrats didn't have to run Joe or Kamala. But they did. And so I voted against.
-
Nothing the President is doing will address the issue of antisemitism,
Haven't you been paying attention? Trump is addressing antisemitism, by cutting federal funding for universities that don't uphold Title VI by allowing discrimination against Jews on their campus. This is neither "reactionary" nor "unlawful". Apparently you're comfortable with saying "antisemitism can't be fixed so we should ignore it". But I'm not.
The courts need to stop his overreach almost on a daily basis.
It's the courts themselves that are overreaching by blocking perfectly legal actions. What a shame that people right here are more concerned with "foreign students" than Jews on campus.
-
"Jews should sit down and shut up and allow their betters to decide what is or isn't in their best interest". Well done, everyone.
-
if I were to respond with: I am sorry that the former administration inconvenienced your friend's daughter personally.
See, this is what nobody understands. It was not an "inconvenience". What is at stake is the right of Jews to be in public spaces. I don't think that it should be negotiable. Yet here we are.
yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyythrnhj,,yfergrh oops, sorry I dropped my jaw onto the keyboard for a second there and it rolled around a bit before I could pick it up.
Yes, it is perfectly valid to say that what your daughter's friend experienced was more than an 'inconvenience'. Your concern that your freind's daughter should be able to feel safe and welcome in public spaces and indeed in this country should not be negotiable--I'm not saying throw her a parade or anything, but if she did want to have one, then why the heck not? That's the America I want to live in! You've really turned me around on this issue...honestly when you point out why calling it an inconvenience actually minimizes the valid concerns you have, I start to wonder why I even made such a comment in the first place. I don't know why I'd say such a thing...do you?
But given who the Republicans put up to run against him. The Democrats didn't have to run Joe or Kamala. But they did. And so I voted against.
Another incisive point, you're right the party didn't have to run who they did, but they did. And a person that votes against that candidate because they are concerned for the rights and safety of marginalized grou...uh I mean Jews, we're both exclusively talking about Jews here...Is a choice that people can and have made.
-
yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyythrnhj,,yfergrh oops, sorry I dropped my jaw onto the keyboard for a second there and it rolled around a bit before I could pick it up.
Yes, it is perfectly valid to say that what your daughter's friend experienced was more than an 'inconvenience'. Your concern that your freind's daughter should be able to feel safe and welcome in public spaces and indeed in this country should not be negotiable--I'm not saying throw her a parade or anything, but if she did want to have one, then why the heck not? That's the America I want to live in! You've really turned me around on this issue...honestly when you point out why calling it an inconvenience actually minimizes the valid concerns you have, I start to wonder why I even made such a comment in the first place. I don't know why I'd say such a thing...do you?
I have no idea if this is sarcasm or not.
Another incisive point, you're right the party didn't have to run who they did, but they did. And a person that votes against that candidate because they are concerned for the rights and safety of marginalized grou...uh I mean Jews, we're both exclusively talking about Jews here...Is a choice that people can and have made.
Because Jews aren't a marginalized and historically discriminated against group? Or is it ok to discriminate against Jews, because... reasons?
-
Nothing the President is doing will address the issue of antisemitism,
Haven't you been paying attention? Trump is addressing antisemitism, by cutting federal funding for universities that don't uphold Title VI by allowing discrimination against Jews on their campus. This is neither "reactionary" nor "unlawful". Apparently you're comfortable with saying "antisemitism can't be fixed so we should ignore it". But I'm not.
The courts need to stop his overreach almost on a daily basis.
It's the courts themselves that are overreaching by blocking perfectly legal actions. What a shame that people right here are more concerned with "foreign students" than Jews on campus.
Familiar with Title 6, yes, which involves "any" race, and is a matter for the courts.
-
Familiar with Title 6, yes, which involves "any" race, and is a matter for the courts.
It ultimately falls under the president's purview, which he did exercise. Given how the universities tolerated mistreatment of Jewish students, I support his actions in this matter. A shame nobody else here seems to.
-
yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyythrnhj,,yfergrh oops, sorry I dropped my jaw onto the keyboard for a second there and it rolled around a bit before I could pick it up.
Yes, it is perfectly valid to say that what your daughter's friend experienced was more than an 'inconvenience'. Your concern that your freind's daughter should be able to feel safe and welcome in public spaces and indeed in this country should not be negotiable--I'm not saying throw her a parade or anything, but if she did want to have one, then why the heck not? That's the America I want to live in! You've really turned me around on this issue...honestly when you point out why calling it an inconvenience actually minimizes the valid concerns you have, I start to wonder why I even made such a comment in the first place. I don't know why I'd say such a thing...do you?
I have no idea if this is sarcasm or not.
Well, my jaw didn't actually fall onto the keyboard. And obviously I do actually know why I made the 'inconvinienced' statement. And of course you didn't change my mind on a position that I never actually held.
Fine, i'll say it plain, what is different about when you said the same thing to Athanasius and when I said it to you. Please break it own for me.
-
Because Jews aren't a marginalized and historically discriminated against group? Or is it ok to discriminate against Jews, because... reasons?
"Jews should sit down and shut up and allow their betters to decide what is or isn't in their best interest". Well done, everyone.
Your friend's daughter being locked into a building by violent protesters when she was just minding her business being Jewish on campus (if that characterization is accurate] is wrong.
This is the initial letter sent to Harvard https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/04/Letter-Sent-to-Harvard-2025-04-11.pdf (https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/04/Letter-Sent-to-Harvard-2025-04-11.pdf)
Dear Dr. Garber:
The United States has invested in Harvard University’s operations because of the value to the
country of scholarly discovery and academic excellence. But an investment is not an entitlement. It
depends on Harvard upholding federal civil rights laws, and it only makes sense if Harvard fosters
the kind of environment that produces intellectual creativity and scholarly rigor, both of which are
antithetical to ideological capture.
Harvard has in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that
justify federal investment. But we appreciate your expression of commitment to repairing those
failures and welcome your collaboration in restoring the University to its promise. We therefore
present the below provisions as the basis for an agreement in principle that will maintain Harvard’s
financial relationship with the federal government.
If acceptable to Harvard, this document will constitute an agreement in principle, which the parties
will work in good faith to translate into a more thorough, binding settlement agreement. As you will
see, this letter incorporates and supersedes the terms of the federal government’s prior letter of April
3, 2025.
● Governance and leadership reforms. By August 2025, Harvard must make meaningful
governance reform and restructuring to make possible major change consistent with this
letter, including: fostering clear lines of authority and accountability; empowering tenured
professors and senior leadership, and, from among the tenured professoriate and senior
leadership, exclusively those most devoted to the scholarly mission of the University and
committed to the changes indicated in this letter; reducing the power held by students and
untenured faculty; reducing the power held by faculty (whether tenured or untenured) and
administrators more committed to activism than scholarship; and reducing forms of
governance bloat, duplication, or decentralization that interfere with the possibility of the
reforms indicated in this letter.
● Merit-Based Hiring Reform. By August 2025, the University must adopt and implement
merit-based hiring policies, and cease all preferences based on race, color, religion, sex, or
national origin throughout its hiring, promotion, compensation, and related practices among
faculty, staff, and leadership. Such adoption and implementation must be durable and
demonstrated through structural and personnel changes. All existing and prospective faculty
shall be reviewed for plagiarism and Harvard’s plagiarism policy consistently enforced. All
hiring and related data shall be shared with the federal government and subjected to a
comprehensive audit by the federal government during the period in which reforms are
being implemented, which shall be at least until the end of 2028.
● Merit-Based Admissions Reform. By August 2025, the University must adopt and
implement merit-based admissions policies and cease all preferences based on race, color,
national origin, or proxies thereof, throughout its undergraduate program, each graduate
program individually, each of its professional schools, and other programs. Such adoption
and implementation must be durable and demonstrated through structural and personnel
changes. All admissions data shall be shared with the federal government and subjected to a
comprehensive audit by the federal government—and non-individualized, statistical
information regarding admissions shall be made available to the public, including
information about rejected and admitted students broken down by race, color, national
origin, grade point average, and performance on standardized tests—during the period in
which reforms are being implemented, which shall be at least until the end of 2028. During
this same period, the dean of admissions for each program or school must sign a public
statement after each admissions cycle certifying that these rules have been upheld.
● International Admissions Reform. By August 2025, the University must reform its
recruitment, screening, and admissions of international students to prevent admitting
students hostile to the American values and institutions inscribed in the U.S. Constitution
and Declaration of Independence, including students supportive of terrorism or
anti-Semitism. Harvard will immediately report to federal authorities, including the
Department of Homeland Security and State Department, any foreign student, including
those on visas and with green cards, who commits a conduct violation. As above, these
reforms must be durable and demonstrated through structural and personnel changes;
comprehensive throughout all of Harvard’s programs; and, during the reform period, shared
with the federal government for audit, shared on a non-individualized basis with the public,
and certified by deans of admissions.
● Viewpoint Diversity in Admissions and Hiring. By August 2025, the University shall
commission an external party, which shall satisfy the federal government as to its
competence and good faith, to audit the student body, faculty, staff, and leadership for
viewpoint diversity, such that each department, field, or teaching unit must be individually
viewpoint diverse. This audit shall begin no later than the summer of 2025 and shall proceed
on a department-by-department, field-by-field, or teaching-unit-by-teaching-unit basis as
appropriate. The report of the external party shall be submitted to University leadership and
the federal government no later than the end of 2025. Harvard must abolish all criteria,
preferences, and practices, whether mandatory or optional, throughout its admissions and
hiring practices, that function as ideological litmus tests. Every department or field found to
lack viewpoint diversity must be reformed by hiring a critical mass of new faculty within
that department or field who will provide viewpoint diversity; every teaching unit found to
lack viewpoint diversity must be reformed by admitting a critical mass of students who will
provide viewpoint diversity. If the review finds that the existing faculty in the relevant
department or field are not capable of hiring for viewpoint diversity, or that the relevant
teaching unit is not capable of admitting a critical mass of students with diverse viewpoints,
hiring or admissions within that department, field, or teaching unit shall be transferred to the
closest cognate department, field, or teaching unit that is capable of achieving viewpoint
diversity. This audit shall be performed and the same steps taken to establish viewpoint
diversity every year during the period in which reforms are being implemented, which shall
be at least until the end of 2028.
● Reforming Programs with Egregious Records of Antisemitism or Other Bias. By
August 2025, the University shall commission an external party, which shall satisfy the
federal government as to its competence and good faith, to audit those programs and
departments that most fuel antisemitic harassment or reflect ideological capture.
o The programs, schools, and centers of concern include but are not limited to the
Divinity School, Graduate School of Education, School of Public Health, Medical
School, Religion and Public Life Program, FXB Center for Health & Human Rights,
Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Carr Center for Human Rights at the Harvard
Kennedy School, Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures, and the
Harvard Law School International Human Rights Clinic.
o The report of the external party shall include information as to individual faculty
members who discriminated against Jewish or Israeli students or incited students to
violate Harvard’s rules following October 7, and the University and federal
government will cooperate to determine appropriate sanctions for those faculty
members within the bounds of academic freedom and the First Amendment.
o The report of the external party shall be submitted to University leadership and the
federal government no later than the end of 2025 and reforms undertaken to repair
the problems. This audit shall be performed and the same steps taken to make repairs
every year during the period in which reforms are being implemented, which shall be
at least until the end of 2028.
● Discontinuation of DEI. The University must immediately shutter all diversity, equity, and
inclusion (DEI) programs, offices, committees, positions, and initiatives, under whatever
name, and stop all DEI-based policies, including DEI-based disciplinary or speech control
policies, under whatever name; demonstrate that it has done so to the satisfaction of the
federal government; and demonstrate to the satisfaction of the federal government that these
reforms are durable and effective through structural and personnel changes. By August
2025, the University must submit to the government a report—certified for accuracy—that
confirms these reforms.
● Student Discipline Reform and Accountability. Harvard must immediately reform its
student discipline policies and procedures so as to swiftly and transparently enforce its
existing disciplinary policies with consistency and impartiality, and without double
standards based on identity or ideology. Where those policies are insufficient to prevent the
disruption of scholarship, classroom learning and teaching, or other aspects of normal
campus life, Harvard must develop and implement disciplinary policies sufficient to prevent
those disruptions. This includes but is not limited to the following:
o Discipline at Harvard must include immediate intervention and stoppage of
disruptions or deplatforming, including by the Harvard police when necessary to stop
a disruption or deplatforming; robust enforcement and reinstatement of existing time,
place, and manner rules on campus, including ordering the Harvard police to stop
incidents that violate time, place, and manner rules when necessary; a disciplinary
process housed in one body that is accountable to Harvard’s president or other
capstone official; and removing or reforming institutional bodies and practices that
delay and obstruct enforcement, including the relevant Administrative Boards and
FAS Faculty Council.
o Harvard must adopt a new policy on student groups or clubs that forbids the
recognition and funding of, or provision of accommodations to, any student group or
club that endorses or promotes criminal activity, illegal violence, or illegal
harassment; invites non-students onto campus who regularly violate campus rules; or
acts as a front for a student club that has been banned from campus. The leaders or
organizers of recognized and unrecognized student groups that violate these policies
must be held accountable as a matter of student discipline and made ineligible to
serve as officers in other recognized student organizations. In the future, funding
decisions for student groups or clubs must be made exclusively by a body of
University faculty accountable to senior University leadership. In particular, Harvard
must end support and recognition of those student groups or clubs that engaged in
anti-Semitic activity since October 7th, 2023, including the Harvard Palestine
Solidarity Committee, Harvard Graduates Students 4 Palestine, Law Students 4
Palestine, Students for Justice in Palestine, and the National Lawyers Guild, and
discipline and render ineligible the officers and active members of those student
organizations.
o Harvard must implement a comprehensive mask ban with serious and immediate
penalties for violation, not less than suspension.
o Harvard must investigate and carry out meaningful discipline for all violations that
occurred during the 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 academic years, including the
Harvard Business School protest of October 2023, the University Hall sit-in of
November 2023, and the spring encampment of 2024. This must include
permanently expelling the students involved in the October 18 assault of an Israeli
Harvard Business School student, and suspending students involved in occupying
university buildings, as warranted by the facts of individual cases.
o The Harvard president and police chief must publicly clarify that the Harvard
University Police Department will enforce University rules and the law. Harvard
must also commit to cooperating in good faith with law enforcement.
● Whistleblower Reporting and Protections. The University must immediately establish
procedures by which any Harvard affiliate can report noncompliance with the reforms
detailed in this letter to both university leadership and the federal government. Any such
reporter shall be fully protected from any adverse actions for so reporting.
● Transparency and Monitoring. The University shall make organizational changes to
ensure full transparency and cooperation with all federal regulators. No later than June 30,
2025, and every quarter thereafter during the period in which reforms are being
implemented, which shall be at least until the end of 2028, the University shall submit to the
federal government a report—certified for accuracy—that documents its progress on the
implementation of the reforms detailed in this letter. The University must also, to the
satisfaction of the federal government, disclose the source and purpose of all foreign funds;
cooperate with the federal government in a forensic audit of foreign funding sources and
uses, including how that money was used by Harvard, its agents, and, to the extent available,
third parties acting on Harvard’s campus; report all requested immigration and related
information to the United States Department of Homeland Security; and comply with all
requirements relating to the SEVIS system.
We expect your immediate cooperation in implementing these critical reforms that will enable
Harvard to return to its original mission of innovative research and academic excellence.
If this was about antisemitism then the letter would have been about antisemitism...it isn't. Sure there is an antisemitism section, and the merits of the administrations requests in that section can be debated, but acting as if rejection of this letter that covers far more than protecting students from violent or aggressive antisemtic protesters means that I or Harvard therefore think its cool to discriminate or otherwise harm Jews is a dishonest framing.
Addtionally Harvard claims to have actually taken steps against antisemitism on thier campuses: https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/04/Harvard-Response-2025-04-14.pdf (https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/04/Harvard-Response-2025-04-14.pdf)
We represent Harvard University. We are writing in response to your letter dated April 11,
2025, addressed to Dr. Alan Garber, Harvard’s President, and Penny Pritzker, Senior Fellow of the
Harvard Corporation.
Harvard is committed to fighting antisemitism and other forms of bigotry in its community.
Antisemitism and discrimination of any kind not only are abhorrent and antithetical to Harvard’s
values but also threaten its academic mission.
To that end, Harvard has made, and will continue to make, lasting and robust structural,
policy, and programmatic changes to ensure that the university is a welcoming and supportive
learning environment for all students and continues to abide in all respects with federal law across
its academic programs and operations, while fostering open inquiry in a pluralistic community free
from intimidation and open to challenging orthodoxies, whatever their source.
Over the past 15 months, Harvard has undertaken substantial policy and programmatic
measures. It has made changes to its campus use policies; adopted new accountability procedures;
imposed meaningful discipline for those who violate university policies; enhanced programs
designed to address bias and promote ideological diversity and civil discourse; hired staff to
support these programs and support students; changed partnerships; dedicated resources to combat
hate and bias; and enhanced safety and security measures. As a result, Harvard is in a very different
place today from where it was a year ago. These efforts, and additional measures the university
will be taking against antisemitism, not only are the right thing to do but also are critical to
strengthening Harvard’s community as a place in which everyone can thrive.
It is unfortunate, then, that your letter disregards Harvard’s efforts and instead presents
demands that, in contravention of the First Amendment, invade university freedoms long
Messrs. Gruenbaum, Keveney, and Wheeler
April 14, 2025
Page 2
recognized by the Supreme Court. The government’s terms also circumvent Harvard’s statutory
rights by requiring unsupported and disruptive remedies for alleged harms that the government has
not proven through mandatory processes established by Congress and required by law. No less
objectionable is the condition, first made explicit in the letter of March 31, 2025, that Harvard
accede to these terms or risk the loss of billions of dollars in federal funding critical to vital research
and innovation that has saved and improved lives and allowed Harvard to play a central role in
making our country’s scientific, medical, and other research communities the standard-bearers for
the world. These demands extend not only to Harvard but to separately incorporated and
independently operated medical and research hospitals engaging in life-saving work on behalf of
their patients. The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional
rights. Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the
federal government. Accordingly, Harvard will not accept the government’s terms as an agreement
in principle.
Harvard remains open to dialogue about what the university has done, and is planning to
do, to improve the experience of every member of its community. But Harvard is not prepared to
agree to demands that go beyond the lawful authority of this or any administration.
Again I think debating whether or not Harvard did enough or anything meaningful about antisemitism on their campuses in the 15 months is, i'd say--more to the point. Do you know what steps they took? if so what issues do you take with their measures?
-
Your friend's daughter being locked into a building by violent protesters when she was just minding her business being Jewish on campus (if that characterization is accurate] is wrong.
Oh. "it's wrong". Thank you so much for admitting the obvious.
No, wait. "if that characterization is accurate". So you're not even sure that it's true, even though the event was caught on film and played in the NYC news.
If this was about antisemitism then the letter would have been about antisemitism...it isn't. Sure there is an antisemitism section, and the merits of the administrations requests in that section can be debated, but acting as if rejection of this letter that covers far more than protecting students from violent or aggressive antisemtic protesters means that I or Harvard therefore think its cool to discriminate or otherwise harm Jews is a dishonest framing.
I don't think it's dishonest framing. It doesn't seem to bother you one bit. It certainly didn't bother Joe Biden or Kamala Harris.
Harvard is committed to fighting antisemitism and other forms of bigotry in its community.
Antisemitism and discrimination of any kind not only are abhorrent and antithetical to Harvard’s
values but also threaten its academic mission.
To that end, Harvard has made, and will continue to make, lasting and robust structural,
policy, and programmatic changes to ensure that the university is a welcoming and supportive
learning environment for all students and continues to abide in all respects with federal law across
its academic programs and operations, while fostering open inquiry in a pluralistic community free
from intimidation and open to challenging orthodoxies, whatever their source.
Over the past 15 months, Harvard has undertaken substantial policy and programmatic
measures. It has made changes to its campus use policies; adopted new accountability procedures;
imposed meaningful discipline for those who violate university policies; enhanced programs
designed to address bias and promote ideological diversity and civil discourse; hired staff to
support these programs and support students; changed partnerships; dedicated resources to combat
hate and bias; and enhanced safety and security measures. As a result, Harvard is in a very different
place today from where it was a year ago.
Harvard saying these things doesn't magically make it true. They rejected the government's letter. They have not provided any information on disciplinary procedures for any students here on a student visa. Perhaps none exist; if they don't discipline foreign students, no matter how egregious the violation, then there's nothing to report. Very convenient.
-
Familiar with Title 6, yes, which involves "any" race, and is a matter for the courts.
It ultimately falls under the president's purview, which he did exercise. Given how the universities tolerated mistreatment of Jewish students, I support his actions in this matter. A shame nobody else here seems to.
The issue is in court, where it belongs. If it rises from there, it will be legally determined if the university is in violation.
-
Your friend's daughter being locked into a building by violent protesters when she was just minding her business being Jewish on campus (if that characterization is accurate] is wrong.
Oh. "it's wrong". Thank you so much for admitting the obvious.
No, wait. "if that characterization is accurate". So you're not even sure that it's true, even though the event was caught on film and played in the NYC news.
I was talking about how I recounted it, but to your point I actually don't know if you've accurately conveyed it, and I didn't see the video you're talking about--so I don't know if your characterization is accurate either.
If this was about antisemitism then the letter would have been about antisemitism...it isn't. Sure there is an antisemitism section, and the merits of the administrations requests in that section can be debated, but acting as if rejection of this letter that covers far more than protecting students from violent or aggressive antisemtic protesters means that I or Harvard therefore think its cool to discriminate or otherwise harm Jews is a dishonest framing.
I don't think it's dishonest framing. It doesn't seem to bother you one bit. It certainly didn't bother Joe Biden or Kamala Harris.
well, lets leave joe and Kamala out of this for now as I don't speak for them and they do not speak for me.
I take this to mean that you don't believe antisemitism personally bothers me? It does, but I believe that is beside the point. The way I feel about Jewish people does not change the fact that the demands outlined in the letter to Harvard extend well beyond antisemitism. Most blatantly is all of that DEI business. You can't convince me that the requests are restricted to and focused on antisemitism because I read the letter, I posted it and literally anyone that can read can see that that is true. Framing the only motive for rejection of the demands in this letter as antisemitism is dishonest.
Harvard is committed to fighting antisemitism and other forms of bigotry in its community.
Antisemitism and discrimination of any kind not only are abhorrent and antithetical to Harvard’s
values but also threaten its academic mission.
To that end, Harvard has made, and will continue to make, lasting and robust structural,
policy, and programmatic changes to ensure that the university is a welcoming and supportive
learning environment for all students and continues to abide in all respects with federal law across
its academic programs and operations, while fostering open inquiry in a pluralistic community free
from intimidation and open to challenging orthodoxies, whatever their source.
Over the past 15 months, Harvard has undertaken substantial policy and programmatic
measures. It has made changes to its campus use policies; adopted new accountability procedures;
imposed meaningful discipline for those who violate university policies; enhanced programs
designed to address bias and promote ideological diversity and civil discourse; hired staff to
support these programs and support students; changed partnerships; dedicated resources to combat
hate and bias; and enhanced safety and security measures. As a result, Harvard is in a very different
place today from where it was a year ago.
Harvard saying these things doesn't magically make it true. They rejected the government's letter.
I agree, Harvard asserting things does not make it true. Also true that they rejected the letter--which I must repeat was not merely about antisemitism.
They have not provided any information on disciplinary procedures for any students here on a student visa.
I don't know whether or not Harvard provided any information on disciplinary procedures specifically for visa students--I'm not actually clear about what you are asking after here. Specifically is it that Harvard should have some specific set of rules for visa students that engage in antisemetic activity that does not actually violate the law (that is excluding threats of violence, assault, damaging property and other things that are illegal]? Can you clarify what activities visa students should be specifically targeted for in regards to antisemitism in Harvard disciplinary policy?
Perhaps none exist; if they don't discipline foreign students, no matter how egregious the violation, then there's nothing to report. Very convenient.
This is just you saying things, perhaps they do exist, what if they do discipline foreign students? Like are you thinking of some specific activity or event that you feel went unpunished or under-punished and that foreign students should face exclusive penalties for this activity? Please clarify and expand on what you are talking about exactly.
-
Everyone wants to observe social niceties while Jews are being made victims on college campuses.
Words are not sufficient to express my disappointment here.
I'll direct your attention to a social media post by Shabbos Kestenbaum, who sued Harvard for what they permitted to happen to him while he was a student there. https://x.com/ShabbosK/status/1926784117162545445
There are two Harvard students who physically accosted a Jewish classmate on campus.
The first assailant was rewarded a $65,000 by Harvard Law School fellowship to work at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
As of this week, the second assailant was rewarded the honor of class marshall by Harvard Divinity School at the upcoming graduation ceremony and university-wide commencement.
Although numerous Harvard students filed complaints, noting how inappropriate it is to reward a student who was sentenced to 80 hours of community service and complete an anger management program for a 2023 assault on a Jewish student, Harvard has defended the decision.
But nobody here cares. How "Christian" of you.
-
Everyone wants to observe social niceties while Jews are being made victims on college campuses.
Words are not sufficient to express my disappointment here.
I'll direct your attention to a social media post by Shabbos Kestenbaum, who sued Harvard for what they permitted to happen to him while he was a student there. https://x.com/ShabbosK/status/1926784117162545445
There are two Harvard students who physically accosted a Jewish classmate on campus.
The first assailant was rewarded a $65,000 by Harvard Law School fellowship to work at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
As of this week, the second assailant was rewarded the honor of class marshall by Harvard Divinity School at the upcoming graduation ceremony and university-wide commencement.
Although numerous Harvard students filed complaints, noting how inappropriate it is to reward a student who was sentenced to 80 hours of community service and complete an anger management program for a 2023 assault on a Jewish student, Harvard has defended the decision.
But nobody here cares. How "Christian" of you.
Is this a response to my post asking for specifics?
-
Ever wonder what you would have done in the 1930s? You're doing it now.
No urgency. No worries. "Oh, some Jewish students were assaulted on a college campus? Let's talk about Trump instead." And everyone else is a passive bystander.
Two employees of the Israeli embassy were murdered last Wednesday. They were attending a Jewish function at the Jewish museum when a gunman shot and killed them both. The gunman left the scene, only to return yelling "free Palestine". They were a couple, she Jewish, he a devout Christian who tied his fate to the people of Israel.
The shooter was a Latino from Chicago who ascribed to far left causes like BLM. Why would he do such a thing? Because he saw that violence against Jews was not punished, but becoming normalized. Even rewarded.
To be a Jew in this world is to feel very alone, sometimes. Christians have not been there for Jews in the past, and most aren't with us now either. For shame.
-
Ever wonder what you would have done in the 1930s? You're doing it now.
No urgency. No worries. "Oh, some Jewish students were assaulted on a college campus? Let's talk about Trump instead." And everyone else is a passive bystander.
Two employees of the Israeli embassy were murdered last Wednesday. They were attending a Jewish function at the Jewish museum when a gunman shot and killed them both. The gunman left the scene, only to return yelling "free Palestine". They were a couple, she Jewish, he a devout Christian who tied his fate to the people of Israel.
The shooter was a Latino from Chicago who ascribed to far left causes like BLM. Why would he do such a thing? Because he saw that violence against Jews was not punished, but becoming normalized. Even rewarded.
To be a Jew in this world is to feel very alone, sometimes. Christians have not been there for Jews in the past, and most aren't with us now either. For shame.
To be fair...this is a thread about the president.
I've always understood your anger, fear and disappointment, probably far better than you think I do. In the hopes that perhaps you might understand me better ,and understand that while I can't be how you want me to be, and we are misaligned on quite a few things --I do now and have always believed that antisemitism is alive and kicking, it is real, it is dangerous, it is deadly and it is not a scary foreign import, we manufacture plenty right here in the united states alongside our other favorite bigotries. The united states has a love affair with hate, bigotry and racism and it is anything but new. America fights tooth and nail to obfuscate, misdirect and distract from the fact that what underlies many of its policies, views, institutions, traditions and structures is unabashed racism and bigotry.
I don't think we are repeating the 1930's, I think we are living with the revised and evolved legacy of racism that never died, it thrives on the same underlying principles that it did back then with some insidious and sneaky tweaks--all aided by technology and a whittling away of understanding and trust of history that extends much further back than any administration either of us were alive for (unless you are significantly older than I think lol).
Your pain is a lever to pry profit from your misery, and i'm not talking about some secret cabal darkly controlling the levers of power. I'm talking about people that want to erase the truth of slavery and turn around and tell you that they are really serious about eradicating antisemitism. In no way can I trust that. I can't be with you on this administration's war on antisemitism because I don't believe they care any more about you than they do about me. I cant take seriously a group of people that won't even acknowledge that racism and bigotry is alive and well, but yet they must defeat anti-Semitism which conveniently lives only on liberal college campuses (no doubt it does, but not just there). I cant take seriously people that will dismiss structural and institutional racism and then attack those structures and institutions to eradicate the form of bigotry that is useful for them right now--all while simultaneously smuggling in things to strengthen the structural foundations of their means of oppressing and crippling current bigotry targets. I don't believe for a second that the plight of Jewish people provides anything but useful cover that will be disregarded and targeted the second you are no longer useful.
I hate antisemitism as much as I hate other forms of bigotry, but if you are looking for real allies then you should also consider being one.
-
And with instances of antisemitism in Harvard's past, the stated aim of this administration is to break the school's autonomy and control every facet of it's existence, including
student body, faculty and teaching, just for starters.
At some point Title 6 is cited as a just cause, but, again, that is not the unilateral perrogitive of the executive branch - it must go through the courts.
Without separation of powers and our constitutional checks and balances we end up as a monarchy.
I'm waiting for the courts and the legal process.
This President can falsely accuse and defame judges all he wants - he is still not a king.
EDIT: Holding to the U.S. constitution is neither a "Right" or "Left" ideology.
-
To be fair...this is a thread about the president.
This is just the perfect response.
I raised an issue about a serious sociological problem that is occurring in this country at this time, and as it pertains to the president's actions. And your response is "let's not talk about that". Okay.
Your pain is a lever to pry profit from your misery,
And now you accuse me of using this problem for some kind of self benefit, as though it isn't displaying deep rot in American society.
I hate antisemitism as much as I hate other forms of bigotry, but if you are looking for real allies then you should also consider being one.
LOL. I should "consider being one"? By voting Democrat? That's the only way we can have serious discussions about antisemitism in this country? Even though the last Democrat president only offered token admission of the problem, lest it offend his political base? Yeah, okay.
-
And with instances of antisemitism in Harvard's past, the stated aim of this administration is to break the school's autonomy and control every facet of it's existence, including
student body, faculty and teaching, just for starters.
Harvard could have avoided all this by just accepting the letter sent to them by the government, insisting that they uphold Title VI.
Again, I think it's amazing that Jews are being discriminated against in a very obvious and public way, and people are using the president's lawful response as a cause to attack him.
EDIT: Holding to the U.S. constitution is neither a "Right" or "Left" ideology.
What part of the "Constitution" is being upheld here?
-
To be fair...this is a thread about the president.
This is just the perfect response.
I raised an issue about a serious sociological problem that is occurring in this country at this time, and as it pertains to the president's actions. And your response is "let's not talk about that". Okay.
You suggested that people in the thread are saying "Let's talk about Trump instead", The thread is more or less about the president so it makes sense that that is who we are all talking about, not 'instead' of anything. I would ignore this completely if it weren't basically a full 1/3 of your response.
Your pain is a lever to pry profit from your misery,
And now you accuse me of using this problem for some kind of self benefit, as though it isn't displaying deep rot in American society.
This is a simple misunderstanding. You are not the one who is attempting to pry profit from your pain. With that cleared up, what do you think about the rest of what I wrote? because I too am talking about deep rot in America.
I hate antisemitism as much as I hate other forms of bigotry, but if you are looking for real allies then you should also consider being one.
LOL. I should "consider being one"? By voting Democrat? That's the only way we can have serious discussions about antisemitism in this country? Even though the last Democrat president only offered token admission of the problem, lest it offend his political base? Yeah, okay.
Honestly I was thinking you might start with stuff like not dismissing Athanasius' concerns as mere 'inconvenience'. I don't know where it might take you if you started with the small things, but if you're anything like me it probably won't make you super popular with democrats either--its pretty well known at this point that no one likes me right? I got smoke for the democrats too, but we aren't there yet Fenris because I can't trust you to hear me on these basics yet.
with that out of the way can we talk about the rest of my post?
-
But nobody here cares. How "Christian" of you.
?
-
Whelp, I checked with my long-time Jewish associates (two are with "Jews for Jesus.") and they are taking the administration's avowed fight against antisemitism at Harvard with a grain of salt, as in "antisemitism is not the real Issue here."
A common sentiment, also, is that the administration's desire to basically destroy Harvard must and will fail.
Opinions. Waiting on the courts.
-
Whelp, I checked with my long-time Jewish associates (two are with "Jews for Jesus.") and they are taking the administration's avowed fight against antisemitism at Harvard with a grain of salt, as in "antisemitism is not the real Issue here."
Wow, "Jews" who identify as Christians are not concerned about antisemitism. What a shocker.
Ask Jews who identify as Jewish and who are visibly observant. You know, the people who are likely to experience antisemitism themselves, as I have. They might have a different opinion.
-
with that out of the way can we talk about the rest of my post?
Nope. You've made your opinion clear. I have no interest in any further discussion with you on the topic.
-
Today, May 28
Celebrating!!!
Federal court says Trump doesn't have the power to impose tariffs unilaterally
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/federal-court-trump-power-impose-tariffs-unilaterally/story?id=122290881
According to the judges, Congress, not the president, has the authority to impose tariffs under most circumstances, and Trump’s tariffs do not meet the limited condition of an “unusual and extraordinary threat” that would allow him to act alone.
:) :D ;D 8)
-
Congress has been giving that power away for years
Just more of the ongoing bulk shiitake of the courts as this tribal nation tears itself to shreds without a thought for anything but power
Especially no thought for God