Greyparrot

How do you know how much fissionable material is in the Earth? We were supposed to run out of oil 50 years ago if you listened to the experts.

Nuclear isn't even being given a chance.

nukular

If this is the case, Bill Clinton will definitely be on the ballot.

Is he impeached if Pelosi refuses to pass impeachment to the Senate?

When the proles have something to defend, you can no longer call them proles. They are people with capital.

A true Marxist socialist is against the illegal immigration that destroys unionized labor.

Read a little about Cesar Chavez.

Sanders used to have the same immigration policy as this famous socialist

Until the elites purchased Sanders with a few muti-million dollar homes.

"Give a fish" policies always have disastrous, unintended consequences to some degree.

Policies that encourage constructive lifestyle choices will always reduce poverty far more than handouts.

Trump is likely to be rational and reasonable when McConnel explains how unpopular impeachment is among independents and swing-state voters, so I predict a speedy conclusion.

That assumes Trump does not order the Senate to drive a full-court press on uncovering all the facts around Ukraine, not just the ones on MSM.

It's amazing how much of a troll Trump is to get his enemies to go postal.

WASHINGTON—Looking around the chamber for some sort of food station, Congressman Don Young (R-AK) told reporters Wednesday that he could’ve sworn the last impeachment hearing he attended was catered. “When we were impeaching Clinton in the ’90s, I’m pretty sure there was a whole spread with, like, soups and sandwiches and a prime rib carving station,” said a peckish Young, explaining that he purposefully didn’t bring lunch today because he assumed the House of Representatives would be providing them with a buffet. “I asked an aide where the grub was, and she told me she could order food for me but I’d have to pay for it—can you believe it? I mean, not even a make-your-own pasta bar for exercising our constitutional duties. At the very least, they could have provided us with some danishes or something.” When it was representative Young’s turn to have the floor, sources confirmed he delivered an impassioned diatribe blasting the lack of free food.

HAMDEN, CT—According to a new poll out Wednesday from Quinnipiac University, 54% of Americans approve of President Trump receiving the death penalty, but believe his transgressions have not risen to a level that warrants removal from office. “While nearly all survey participants agreed the president should be executed in a highly public setting, only a minority thinks he should receive a proper burial, with more than half stating that the deceased commander-in-chief should be allowed to complete his four-year term,” said polling analyst Rebecca Glenski, explaining that the results indicate an unwillingness among Americans to effectively overturn the outcome of a presidential election. “Of that 54%, approximately two-thirds said that after he is put to death—preferably by hanging, beheading, or crucifixion—Trump should not only remain in the Oval Office but also be permitted to appear at public events, attend official White House functions, and have a seat at global summits like the G7. In addition, most respondents strongly indicated the president’s corpse should stand for re-election next year so the people can decide whether to remove his earthly remains from office.” Polling suggests in 2020 the bloated, lifeless body of Trump would continue to enjoy a strong, built-in advantage in the Electoral College.

Meanwhile, Trump is celebrating with his Deplorables.

Founding fathers should have required a 2/3 house vote to impeach. That would have forced a non-partisan vote instead of this disaster.

Trump is celebrating with a rally and asking for record amounts of political donations. Bill Clinton was NEVER that bold.

Pelosi had to slam her gavel and glare at her Party when they started clapping and cheering during the vote read.

Lol like there was any doubt. 28 Democrats will be losing their seats.

In a Democracy, representatives should be afraid of voting against the will of the people.

In a Tyranny, they don't give a fuck, kinda like some of the 30 Democrats about to lose their seat.

If you think about it, the president's approval rate probably needs to be in the 20% area to even have a shot at removing with 2/3 of the Senate.

I haven't heard any polls that said there was 67%+ support for removing Drumphty

Well, it's too bad Congress abused its power and refused to go to the SCOTUS about charging Drupf with a crime.

Well, it's too bad Congress abused its power and refused to go to the SCOTUS.

mew

What evidence do you have that these witnesses want to be hauled in front of a partisan pep rally?

Not that it even matters since SCOTUS upheld the president's executive privilege. Congress isn't legally allowed to disrupt and obstruct the Executive branch by sabotaging the president's cabinet.

Burn it to the ground.

USA should absolutely divest Saudi Arabia before they divest Israel.

This is the unintended consequences of "give a fish" policies being implemented instead of "teach to fish"

Universities are NOT an adequate place to train young people in basic work ethic. The home is, however.

Listen to that Ethiopian girl talk in that Change My Mind video I linked. You will hear her explain in her own words how the policies harmed her.

Correct. as cited in the Brookings study, not having 2 parents present is a far, far better indicator of poverty and making poor choices that perpetuate poverty than skin color.

The breakup of minority families is closely related to bad government policies replacing the father as a provider and cultural pressures where the father is marginalized, and the mother is glorified.

Far more related than White Americans and Asian Americans somehow oppressing black families and forcing them to raise children in single households.

For the lucky few Blacks that are raised with 2 parents present, they are doing comparatively well, even better than their contemporaries in some fields. If skin color was a major impediment, the statistics surely don't show it among 2 parent Black families.

Assuming Affirmative Action (hypothetically speaking) was deemed by the next generation to be institutionally racist, would the solution be to punish minorities that benefitted or would the solution be eliminating the institutionally racist program and moving forward to a MLK type society where skin color is not a basis of merit?

Change my mind.

I just answered it, and so have you.

Hypothetically speaking, if someone told you from birth that you deserved extra help and protection because of the color of your skin, does that help you build a society that treats all equally regardless of your skin shade or does it hurt?

Unintended consequences for sure.

Obviously you are meaning this as a rhetorical question considering the decline in standards of living since 1964.

It's way more complex than that. One of the problems dealing with hundreds of years of institutionalized slavery is the problem of self-worth and a sense of having equal value in society regardless of skin color. There are many ways to address this, but America has taken all the wrong policy approaches up to now, and it shows with the growing malaise within cultural enclaves in urban areas across the country.

Hahaha ...let's not derail a serious issue with humor.

In both of those social circles, you are most definitely not allowed to speak if you are the wrong shade of skin.

I brought it up because your assumption process to frame every problem is to scream racism first and look at other factors after. What's that phrase? Confirmation bias? Yeah, that one.

No, I don't that's your projection.

I am exactly like DreadPirate that acknowledges white supremacists and racism does exist, but it is a dwindling influence and insignificant compared to far more important pressing matters that exist in the present.

That's very interesting that you said that because I have statistics that show fatherlessness increasing AFTER the Civil Rights act.

Did America become MORE racist after 1964? How?

I don't know why you care about winning a semantic argument about whether slavery and racism is dead or not. Whether it is significant is the only point of import.

It's a big problem, even if you hypothetically assume the father is there 100% of the time, and far more significant than historical slavery.

Nah bro, it's HISTORICAL SLAVERY. and the lack of reparations. Get your story straight.

I posted 3 examples.

So you agree with me that historical legalized slavery is today an insignificant issue. Thanks.