Politics

[Sonikku]

Trump admin strikes down Trans protections, citing state rights.
http://www.advocate.com/transgender/201 ... guidelines

Trump admin to enforce federal ban on marijuana against states that legalized it.
http://fox6now.com/2017/02/23/sean-spic ... marijuana/

Being a Sanders supporter, I know I'm in the clear minority here at the Dojo. But I would be intrigued to hear from the many Trump supporters around here the justifications for federal government telling state governments that they can expect a fight on the marijuana they legalized.

[InsanityIsCrazy]

Trump admin strikes down Trans protections, citing state rights.
http://www.advocate.com/transgender/201 ... guidelines

Trump admin to enforce federal ban on marijuana against states that legalized it.
http://fox6now.com/2017/02/23/sean-spic ... marijuana/

Being a Sanders supporter, I know I'm in the clear minority here at the Dojo. But I would be intrigued to hear from the many Trump supporters around here the justifications for federal government telling state governments that they can expect a fight on the marijuana they legalized.

Not exactly a justification, but this has been standard practice for a while now:
https://www.greenrushdaily.com/2016/02/ ... ma-regime/

I personally don't agree with it, and I'm not certain what this enforcement will mean to the average citizen purchasing / using cannabis. My understanding is that the feds prioritize the distributors instead of a case-by-case prosecution of recipients, but this could all change with Sessions as AG. There's also the issue of accidentally targeting medical facilities.

If there's a silver lining, it'll be the amazing transparency of live-streamed arrest coverage, as everyone will be scrutinizing what comes out of the AG's office.

[St. Elmo's Fire]

Well both of those seem pretty shitty to me. For the weed thing, prohibition never works, so if he does go ahead with that, it will just drive that huge market even further underground as the customers head back to the guy on the street or the other folks they know who can acquire it. Everyone that smokes it still will, only the govt/state will now be completely taken away from the middle and make no coin...

[shredingskin]

When people vote Trump because Hillary is a warmonger, but Trumps ends increasing militar expending

[Mr. Frozen]

Trump admin strikes down Trans protections, citing state rights.
http://www.advocate.com/transgender/201 ... guidelines

Trump admin to enforce federal ban on marijuana against states that legalized it.
http://fox6now.com/2017/02/23/sean-spic ... marijuana/

Being a Sanders supporter, I know I'm in the clear minority here at the Dojo. But I would be intrigued to hear from the many Trump supporters around here the justifications for federal government telling state governments that they can expect a fight on the marijuana they legalized.

I was a big sanders supporter and voted for him in the democratic primary. I am also a current Trump supporter and don't like Sanders so much right now because him aligning himself with the democratic party forced him to say and do things that I don't like. Independent Bernie Sanders was pretty sweet. Democrat Bernie Sanders, not so much.

Anyway, the first link is political bullshit. The Obama administration had no intention of enforcing those guidelines, it was just them saying they acknowledge trans people. Makes sense that the Trump administration would dismiss any guidelines placed out by the Obama administration since Trump doesn't like heavy federal oversight in public schools.

The second one, looks like colorful news reporting. Exaggerate statements in order to create a story that will get eyeballs on their report. Trump never really cared about controlling marijuana, and has always talked about the state's rights. I don't feel like watching that hour long press conference to get the context of everything, but based on the facts presented in the article, Spicer just said that the department of justice will reinforce whatever laws are currently in place. He used words such as "I think" which immediately nullifies his statement as any official action that will take place.

[Mr357]

When people vote Trump because Hillary is a warmonger, but Trumps ends increasing militar expending

Tell me then, would have having a weak military (or none at all) prevent conflicts?

[shredingskin]

As far as I could tell USA does indeed need a bigger army... Specially since other countries war should not be USA problem (paraphrasing the donald).

BTW, the speech was pretty damn good. If democrats follow the sanders lead they're going for a trump 2020, they're trying to burn the flame too soon, people will get tired of it.


They did great with the writing, covered their asses pretty good, came as extending a hand, kept the jingoism, kept the promises/tone of the campaign, shut up some of the concerns and made it pretty uplifting, all while making it sound like a "Trump speech". Give them kudos for that.

They're doing the Goebbels approach of repeating a lie... But they didn't measure that Trump would repeat lies more often than them.

Sadly for democrats it's the apex approach, but I guess it's a 2 for 2 presidencies again.

phpBB [video]

[InsanityIsCrazy]

When people vote Trump because Hillary is a warmonger, but Trumps ends increasing militar expending

Great, now the ADL is gonna think the Shenmuedojo forums are white nationalists. Good job, Pepe!

[InsanityIsCrazy]

Trump admin strikes down Trans protections, citing state rights.
http://www.advocate.com/transgender/201 ... guidelines

Trump admin to enforce federal ban on marijuana against states that legalized it.
http://fox6now.com/2017/02/23/sean-spic ... marijuana/

Being a Sanders supporter, I know I'm in the clear minority here at the Dojo. But I would be intrigued to hear from the many Trump supporters around here the justifications for federal government telling state governments that they can expect a fight on the marijuana they legalized.

I was a big sanders supporter and voted for him in the democratic primary. I am also a current Trump supporter and don't like Sanders so much right now because him aligning himself with the democratic party forced him to say and do things that I don't like. Independent Bernie Sanders was pretty sweet. Democrat Bernie Sanders, not so much.

Sanders perplexed me during the election. He went on national television to decry to his supporters "not to listen to him," should he tell them what to do, and THEN, turned around and supported Hillary Clinton at the convention. I felt like that interview was his most honest moment during the campaign, sadly, and everything since then has been some form of "keeping on-message" to ensure that his movement doesn't fall completely apart (and it has long-since removed itself from the DNC, imo). link

The interesting thing about the marijuana predicament is that there's a new bipartisan-sponsored bill to remove it from the schedule 1 listing: link

And this bit, right here:

"then-Senator Sessions pointed out that if legislators did not like this approach, they should change the laws accordingly."

Almost makes me think that they're forcing the issue due to Sessions' reputation as a hard-liner on drugs.

But who knows? Everything is upside-down now. I still think this was a years-long plot dreamt up by Trump and Vince McMahon to kayfabe a president.

[shredingskin]

Marge, just about everything is white nationalist.
Have you ever sat down and watch mass media ?

(((mass media)))

[St. Elmo's Fire]

When people vote Trump because Hillary is a warmonger, but Trumps ends increasing militar expending

Tell me then, would have having a weak military (or none at all) prevent conflicts?

Well to be fair, when the USA already spends almost as much as the rest of the planet combined on their military, "increasing military spending" makes me do a WTF also...

I can only see conflicts being lessened by having the CINC specifically stay out of problems that don't need antagonising though (talking stuff like Libya and Syria)...

[Mr357]

I can only see conflicts being lessened by having the CINC specifically stay out of problems that don't need antagonising though (talking stuff like Libya and Syria)...

I completely agree, and so does Donald Trump. That doesn't mean the U.S. can't have a strong military. The idea is deterrence, not conquest.

[St. Elmo's Fire]

In this day and age deterrence rather than the other stuff should be a military's MAIN objective, so I agree with that also. The US military hardware is already SO many light years ahead of everyone else's that nobody would be crazy enough to attack it anyway, the fact it's already so damned huge also guarantees this for the foreseeable. #

That's one of the reasons why the media "Russia is about to take over the world!" thing drove me mad, they simply couldn't, even if they wanted to try, and they're not stupid, they know attacking a NATO country or America would be suicide, so they're highly unlikely to try that either.

[Pogogacy]

When people vote Trump because Hillary is a warmonger, but Trumps ends increasing militar expending

Tell me then, would have having a weak military (or none at all) prevent conflicts?

If your idea of a "weak" military is one that is more expensive than merely the next 7 countries combined (rather than 8 ) then, yes, said "weak" military is already more than adequate to function as a deterrent and prevent conflicts.

[Mr357]

If your idea of a "weak" military is one that is more expensive than merely the next 7 countries combined (rather than 8 ) then, yes, said "weak" military is already more than adequate to function as a deterrent and prevent conflicts.

More expensive doesn't mean better; you should know that. Do you think China has to pay their R&D contractors much? The U.S. (NATO, really) military-industrial complex is a HUGE business, and their lobbies ensure that our military and defense agencies buy what they want them to, instead of what might actually be best. You can bet that some people made shit loads off of the U.S. invasion of Irag and Afghanistan; around 5 trillion was spent between those two conflicts.

Don't forget that there's tens of thousands of U.S. troops stationed in countries like Japan, South Korea, and Germany. They pay nothing for the protection that provides them, so the cost comes out of taxpayers' pockets.