Sorry everyone, I know this is the second Wednesday open thread with nothing new in between. This is traditionally a slow time for post with the holiday season and life in general. We hope some of our regular guest can help us out here today with some timely topics. The General Assembly was called back into a special session to confirm the new member of the Delaware Superior Court, Jan Jurden. Thoughts?
This is a map of “active hate groups” listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Why are groups that identify as Christian listed? Why not Islamist groups? Why aren’t the Black Panthers listed, and what is a “General Hate” group anyway ?
http://www.businessinsider.com/active-hate-groups-by-state-2014-2
@FBH,
You might want to click on the interactive map and look at Delaware. There are 4 groups listed, only one of which seems to have a specific location — the Nation of Islam, in Wilmington.
(1) Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan Ku Klux Klan [no location given]
(2) Nation of Islam Black Separatist Wilmington
(3) National Socialist Freedom Movement Neo-Nazi [no location given]
(4) National Socialist Movement Neo-Nazi [no location given]
As far as why “christian” groups are shown, it may just have something to do with appropriating a name for purposes of cover. Or just to deceive the dim-witted.
Yeah, but you see they listed “black separatist” as a group.
They did not categorize Islamist groups or any other religious groups exept Christian.
Your observation has lived up to your name.
I think that’s pretty close to the case. Certainly it is true of many religions, who preach hate and violence in the name of God. People who justify their violent and hateful actions by invoking God (regardless of what God it is) are not just hypocritical but I believe a special place in hell (presuming their is such a place) is reserved for them.
No doubt, but why does the SPLC single out Christians?
Quantity. If there was only one, there would be no need to have a category for them.
Can anyone tell me the downside of normalizing relations with Cuban?
“Can anyone tell me the downside of normalizing relations with Cuba ?” – Frank
Cigars are bad for your health.
Cuban cigars (which are overrated, you pay for the name) will be taxed. That’s about it. Oh yeah, the Cuban Americans in Florida will pitch a hissy fit until they realize that they will be able to freely see their relatives and of course Major League Baseball will be taken over by the Cubans.
The guys on talk radio don’t like it because Obama did it..I was thinking it would be agreat vacation spot or maybe I could open up a bar in Havannah Harbor called the Cold War Cafe
That’s a good point. Most “Christians” I encounter use the name Christian as a cover to and conflate it with their hateful religious politics. Mostly sexual obsessions; abortion, gays, birth control. Angry white men issues and the exact opposite of what Jesus taught
Interests, which are assumed to be foreign, have threatened American industry, and kept it from conducting business . This is a textbook example of a breach in National security.
To quote Joe Biden – “This is a big f***ing deal”.
Mouse says, “Most “Christians” I encounter use the name Christian as a cover to and conflate it with their hateful religious politics.”
See Mouse, “Disagree when we must, agree when we can”. This has unfortunately been my experience as well, far too often.
As for the Cuba thing, those who will oppose this simply because it was president Obama who has put it in motion are only putting themselves on the wrong side of right based on party politics.
The fifty plus years of the embargo has done nothing positive. To have influence over anything, or anyone, you must have interaction with them. This may not be the end all, but it is a step in the right direction.
At this point I am a little suspicious of the timing of the reaching out to Cuba initiative, especially in light of the affront by North Korea…. /China/Russia/Iran). It could be a diversion from what’s really going on, or it could be a move in a political chess match concerning Russia/China/Iran. We have a military base in Cuba, so it’s not like we are reconnecting with an old friend.
North Korea is a pawn of the Chinese government , and China uses them accordingly. So, the question is, what are China/Russia/Iran up to right now?
BTW, I’m pretty sure that Russia doesn’t want the US to have improved relations with their Cuba.
Our government/”We the People” must consider this breach in National security to be a failure of the highest magnitude.
If the Federal Government can’t provide a safe and stable platform for the people of this country to conduct business as usual, i.e. “provide for the common defense”, then they are failing at one of their most basic tasks.
Cuba Libre
“At this point I am a little suspicious of the timing of the reaching out to Cuba initiative”
Talks were going on for 18 months prior to the announcement. It would have been difficult to cherry pick a deflective initiative. Sometimes things happen when the happen. Sometimes not. I suspect that this was just a culmination of considerable effort over a fairly long period of time.
Well something’s are right no matter the reason they happen.
“Talks were going on for 18 months prior to the announcement. ”
Probably longer than that.
GEORGE W. BUSH: “Now is the time to support the democratic movements growing on the island. Now is the time to stand with the Cuban people as they stand up for their liberty. And now is the time for the world to put aside its differences and prepare for Cuba’s transition to a future of freedom and progress and promise.”
And on another note:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/12/18/congress-again-buys-abrams-tanks-army-doesnt-want/
Gen. Ray Odierno, the Army chief of staff, recommends suspension of tank production.
Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio (chair of the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee), said that Congress “recognizes the necessity of the Abrams tank to our national security and authorizes an additional $120 million for Abrams tank upgrades.”
I guess Mike knows more about Army stuff than Ray. Anyway, Congress hard at work with your tax dollars. Of course, the only U.S. manufacturer of tanks is in Lima, Ohio which happens to be in Turners district. Still I’m sure that had nothing to do with it.
Beltway bandit defense contractors manufacture in every state and every district they can so that our military budget serves corporate pork welfare and not protection of the US. In fact, excessive military spending often makes places less stable and us less secure. Drive out Rt 270 from DC and have a look. Its full of Beltway bandits with lobby offices on K st. down town. The military budget is 22 % of the federal budget and 60% of discretionary spending while our infrastructure crumbles and colleges are not affordable. Do the math on that..
I suspect there is much that far left and far right people could agree on if they sat down and discussed the details without the heated rhetoric. Rand Paul appeals to me in many ways but not all. I worry about about corporate and monied power more than government power..
“Drive out Rt 270 from DC and have a look”
Nah, I used to live out there. I’m pretty familiar. But most of them are in Tysons (and out along Rt 28).
” lobby offices on K st. ”
M Street is the new K Street. Still quite a few on K but the most of the power players are on M now.
“military budget is 22 % of the federal budget and 60% of discretionary spending”
It’s only projected to be 55% of discretionary spending in 2015. Total discretionary spending is only 29% of federal budget. The military budget share is 15.95% of the federal budget. To put it another way, mandatory spending (entitlements) are 65% of the federal budget, along with 6% for servicing the debt. https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/
A budget where 65% of entire budget goes to benefits for citizens and 16% of the budget goes towards national defense seems to be a fairly decent ratio. Considering the world in which we live, what ratio would you suggest?
Well, I’m not really sure. I would reallocate some of the military budget to renewable energy which I believe to be a type of national defense. Maybe some for infrastructure. Or mayby raise the cap on SS or or allow investment income to be taxed at the income tax rate after an exemption of 100K? Maybe ask the 1% to pay a bit more from all the things they profit from on the backs of average people. Much of the military budget dosn’t go to protect us but to big dollar exotic or redundant weapon systems that often don’t work and the same company gets billion dollar no bid contracts to fix the defective things they made. We could also close a lot of over seas military bases.
Mouse, I would only add that you can’t wait until you need the machines to build them. It’s called being prepared for the unknown. Sort of like health insurance.
As for renewable fuels? Well if they are viable then private business will develope them. Government involvement will only restrict out of the box thinking because to get the funding you would have to be working on whatever government saw as the solution.
Frank Said:
“Mouse says, “Most “Christians” I encounter use the name Christian as a cover to and conflate it with their hateful religious politics.”
See Mouse, “Disagree when we must, agree when we can”. This has unfortunately been my experience as well, far too often.”
Who’s a Christian, NOT FRANK KNOTTS. A Christian is judged by their actions and not their words Frank. You are a hemi-chordate and have yet to grow a spine. The more you talk the deeper in crap you get. You and your organization have done more to destroy Christianity and Conservatism in Delaware than anyone I know. Grossman hates Christians and advances his agenda though simple-minded puppets such as you.
I’d write more but you won’t hear it and it won’t do any good.
MOVING DELAWARE FORWARD, NOT FRANK KINOTTS, STEVE GROSSMAN OR JEFF CRAGG.
You three are just master manipulators of destruction.
Action Not Words, and is this “YOUR” example of how a Christian behaves?
Well, I would argue that renewables are viable now as evidenced by driving through any new development. My problem is that the economic viability of renewables is a partically a dishonest argument. Fossil fuels are only apparently cheap because we don’t conect them to the cost to public health, land, air and water pollution. These cost are all invisable when we purchase fossil energy and are placed on everyone. This creates the illusion of cheaper fossil fuel energy. And I suspect, at some point pumping gigatons into the atmosphere year after year will have an extreme cost that our kids will have to pay and deal with. And there’s a difference between defense preparedness and pure pork barrel corporate welfare for the 1%
Gigatons of CO2
In my view Christian conservatives have done the harm to the Republican party. There was a time when I voted and even worked on a few republican campaigns. Now the party is a joke. Witches, religious nuts, spreaders of ebola, gays, abortion…Few educated people will ever vote for that crap
In my view Christian conservatives have done the harm to the Republican party… Now the party is a joke.
Well, the joke’s on you. Next month, the GOP will hold a 247-188 majority in the House of Reps, and a 54-45 majority in the Senate. The GOP will hold 31 governorships and more state legislature seats than any time since 1928. The GOP will have total control (both legislative chambers and governor) in 23 states (compared to the Dems’ 7). Yes, quite a “joke.”
Witches, religious nuts, spreaders of ebola, gays, abortion…Few educated people will ever vote for that crap…
Yes, the GOP needs that highly educated ghetto voting block, that votes 99% Dem.
100% in Philly….lol
Mouse, the renewables you are talking about when riding through developments I assume is solar panels. Would you like to talk about the environmental impact of the manufacturing of those panels? The mining of metals, the energy used, most likely not solar or wind, but good old coal fired power plants. As for the cost or viability of them economically ? Well how many of those homes would have had them installed had it not been for the government subsidies. Thus the admission that the industry is not economically viable without the government propping them up.
I see gov subsidies of solar as leveling the playing field to more accurately reflect the impact cost of fossil fuel. The energy generated from solar can be used to make more solar. The advantages of solar/renewables are obvious with jobs, energy independence, middle east wars and a clean safe environment. The implications of gassing off gigatons of CO2 are obvious too unless one is invested in denying science to support polluters and their political party. Google rivers and water supplies contaminated by fossil fuels
I hear solar panels save people money on their electric bills.
You know who could use some help on their electric bills? I do. It’s poor people
You know who has solar panels on their house? Yeah, it’s rich people, and to add insult to injury, we all have to subsidize them.
Then we get to listen to them pontificate about CO2 while they get ready to jet off somewhere on vacation, and leave a bigger carbon footprint then anyone else.
You have to love the liberal elite.
Mouse you completely ignored the pollution and energy used to create solar panels and then went cheap with party affiliation.