The response is for someone to organize a boycott of LL Bean because of this.
That "Boycott bullies" isn't "These are bullies who need to be boycotted," it's, "Look at these bullies using a boycott to hurt an innocent company."
Fox News constantly talks about the good of the free market and the invisible hand and all that crap. The boycott is the biggest controlling force of that idea after supply and demand.
Trump's first reaction to hearing about a plan to boycott L. L. Bean because of one family member's support for Trump was to shill for L.L. Bean because of that family member's support for Trump, guaranteeing it would be much more of a political thing.
Conservative commentator Monica Crowley, who is slated to serve in a top national security communications role in Donald Trump's presidential administration, plagiarized thousands of words of her 2000 dissertation for her Columbia University Ph.D., a CNN KFile review has found.
That is some amazingly blatant plagiarism there.
Plagiarism scandals have cost people their posts or forced them to retire early in politics before, but this is the Trump administration.
In particular, Diamond Joe Biden was destroyed for a decade or so by plagarism.
And not even actual plagiarism, just failure of attribution once during a stump speech while he did attribution at all the others.
That is plagiarism that can get you fucked up at a good grad school
But also there are definitely degrees of plagiarism, yes
Yes but it was part of his stump speech and times previous to the incident and after he properly attributed it.
I have serious trouble caring that he missed it once out of like the fifty times he gave it.
Though supposedly there was something as well when he was at Syracuse University but I don't know those details.
Yeah. It's far more likely that bits will be sold off to megacorporations.
I get that this is a joke.
But I feel like a lot of people are really seriously thinking that the Trump administration is going to lead to civil war and military occupation. We're not there yet. It's not impossible that something like that will happen, but I'm leery of Democrats doing that thing we laughed at Republicans for when Obama got elected. I get that it's not the same thing at all and that Trump is demonstrably awful and will by all indications be a terrible President, but we have had terrible, corrupt Presidents before without devolving into shooting one another.
Trump smacks of Nixon more than Buchanan. Which is bad! And we have work to do. A lot of work! But speculation over which states will abandon the Union is premature and kind of unwarranted.
Nixon was at least a competent political operator (Senator, Vice President, etc) along with being a thug. Trump is just a goon that throws a fit when he doesn't get his way.
Trump's first reaction to hearing about a plan to boycott L. L. Bean because of one family member's support for Trump was to shill for L.L. Bean because of that family member's support for Trump, guaranteeing it would be much more of a political thing.
Conservative commentator Monica Crowley, who is slated to serve in a top national security communications role in Donald Trump's presidential administration, plagiarized thousands of words of her 2000 dissertation for her Columbia University Ph.D., a CNN KFile review has found.
That is some amazingly blatant plagiarism there.
Plagiarism scandals have cost people their posts or forced them to retire early in politics before, but this is the Trump administration.
In particular, Diamond Joe Biden was destroyed for a decade or so by plagarism.
And not even actual plagiarism, just failure of attribution once during a stump speech while he did attribution at all the others.
That is plagiarism that can get you fucked up at a good grad school
But also there are definitely degrees of plagiarism, yes
Yes but it was part of his stump speech and times previous to the incident and after he properly attributed it.
I have serious trouble caring that he missed it once out of like the fifty times he gave it.
Though supposedly there was something as well when he was at Syracuse University but I don't know those details.
He had to drop his Presidential run in the 80s because of his college plagiarism
It was way worse than his stump speech thing, but not quite as egregious as Crowley's lazy dissertation
Trump's first reaction to hearing about a plan to boycott L. L. Bean because of one family member's support for Trump was to shill for L.L. Bean because of that family member's support for Trump, guaranteeing it would be much more of a political thing.
Conservative commentator Monica Crowley, who is slated to serve in a top national security communications role in Donald Trump's presidential administration, plagiarized thousands of words of her 2000 dissertation for her Columbia University Ph.D., a CNN KFile review has found.
That is some amazingly blatant plagiarism there.
Plagiarism scandals have cost people their posts or forced them to retire early in politics before, but this is the Trump administration.
In particular, Diamond Joe Biden was destroyed for a decade or so by plagarism.
And not even actual plagiarism, just failure of attribution once during a stump speech while he did attribution at all the others.
Didn't he actually plagarize in college? Let me look....
Honestly Biden's plagiarism incident could easily be chalked up to being young, dumb and not knowing how to cite the source he was relying upon. Which is still good enough reason to fail someone taking a law course, but probably not bad enough to end a Presidential run.
Crowley just blatantly copy/pasted and I wouldn't just chalk that up to ignorance.
The response is for someone to organize a boycott of LL Bean because of this.
I wonder why trump spoke out at this point. Could be that the boycott was biting deep into their sales. After all, republicans don't actually make up a significant fraction of voters in this county. Force everyone to the polls to vote and they'd lose 60-40 at best.
Makes me wonder about how badly things must be going at the trump brand itself. Hopefully bankruptcy awaits.
Trump was watching television and became aware of a challenge to his power.
LL Bean has explicitly come out against the political statements FYI. It's just an a-hole family member, not anyone in the leadership of the company. I'd imagine they're pretty pissed about this stuff given how much of their product goes to blue states.
Tell em to ouster that family member.
I mean I wasn't going to buy their overpriced bullshit in the first place but now I get to feel really good about not buying their overpriced bullshit.
For enlisted Army side, advancing in rank is as easy as showing up to work on time in the right uniform. Anyone can pin E4 (Specialist) in roughly 18 months if they're outstanding at their job. For the NCO ranks, E5 (Sergeant) is obtainable if you really want it/plan on staying for longer than four years. After E5, it can get tough depending on your MOS (job), but overall, getting E6 (Staff Sergeant) is possible. Its not until E7 (Sergeant First Class) and above, that promotion gets difficult. Avoiding the weeds of it, expanding the military means for the careerists that promotion is easier to obtain, therefore you get more money, and can probably sham your way to retirement.
For Warrant Officers and Officers, this is where it gets interesting. Right now, promotion rates for Second Lieutenant to First Lieutenant is 99%. The only way you don't pin 1LT is if you get a DUI, have intercourse with a subordinate, or do something that's incredibly dishonorable and brings dishonor upon yourself and the Army. First Lieuteant to Captain are roughly ~90% (plus/minus 5%) depending on your job. You basically don't make Captain if you get a DUI, bang a subordinate, or get fired, but getting fired isn't a 100% won't promote. At this time usually 50% or more of the O2s in the Army usually get out at this rank because they didn't plan on making the Army (or military) a career or that they decided the Army isn't for them. From O3 (Captain) to Major, I think promotion rates are 60%-80% range. You'll get Major if you really want it. Again, at this bracket you'll see a lot of attrition because the majority of Captains get out after they complete their Company Command / Key Development billet for that rank. After that K/D time, its Staff for the next six to ten years and that turns most Officers off. Major to LTC IIRC is something like a 50% promotion rate, LTC to Colonel is like 25% or less, and less than 10% make General Officer. You begin to see a lot of that treachery I mentioned in those field grade billets as peers try to axe one another for top block evaluations that can make/break promotion.
Overall, what I am getting at with these poorly written, poorly explained, and fatigued posts is that the dreams of a military coup are non-existant. The Military (Army in my case) is infatuated with Trump. The military almost always votes GOP. Trump ran on the platform of making the military bigger and better. The military tends to look positively on GOP candidates not because they're getting us quagmired in pointless wars, but because they increase military spending, which equals more Soldiers. More Soldiers also mean that they'll need more Leaders to manage them. That ultimately means you have a higher chance to get promoted in the end. Trump choosing Mattis wasn't a bad move because the military loves him. The only story that immediately comes to mind is that he was responsible for firing a high ranking officer for basically failing at his job and the Officer Corps idolizes him for that.
I can post more if you want tomorrow. I'm on mobile and delaying going to bed atm.
Am not Military, but I have heard it said that combat experience can be a big factor in career advancement as well. I believe it came up repeatedly during some of the recent "women in combat operations?!" discussions, that not being able to (at least intentionally) get combat experience was a possible factor in holding back the military careers of female soldiers.
If that is the case, the fact that a lot of the GOP won't shut up about bombing/invading a variety of countries probably doesn't hurt either. Y'know, likely get some people killed (promotions?) and combat experience (more promotions!) and let's not think too hard about the collateral damage from the last couple ventures?
Note, I'm simply thinking aloud, not accusing anyone of this train of thought.
But the picture you paint, it's hard not to connect the dots. Trump and some of his admin seem awfully eager to use that big stick.
Also let's just insert here the entire horror trilogy that is Trump's lack of understanding of, yet compelling interest in, nuclear weapons.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
GoodKingJayIIIThey wanna get mygold on the ceilingRegistered Userregular
So ethics lawyers of every stripe agree that Trump's "plan" to distance himself from the business is woefully insufficient. There's some disagreement on how far he needs to go, but the baseline is more less to put all the assets in a trust and set up an independent trustee to manage everything. He's probably running afoul of the constitution and maybe even federal law if he doesn't straighten out this shot before inauguration.
Of course he was never going to do any of this despite the constitution, federal law, ethics, and past precedent.
It's really quite shocking how negotiable our legal system is when someone powerful decides not to follow the law. Our representatives either don't care or don't have the numbers to make a difference.
So ethics lawyers of every stripe agree that Trump's "plan" to distance himself from the business is woefully insufficient. There's some disagreement on how far he needs to go, but the baseline is more less to put all the assets in a trust and set up an independent trustee to manage everything. He's probably running afoul of the constitution and maybe even federal law if he doesn't straighten out this shot before inauguration.
Of course he was never going to do any of this despite the constitution, federal law, ethics, and past precedent.
It's really quite shocking how negotiable our legal system is when someone powerful decides not to follow the law. Our representatives either don't care or don't have the numbers to make a difference.
Trump's doing the Peter Gibbons thing with the Presidency.
I'm thinking of getting some of the techies I know to do something with google maps to help me avoid all the places that would result in me giving money secondhand to causes I disagree with.
Being a responsible consumer in a capitalist society is fucking hard.
Even more annoying that it's in the context of opposing the TPP will help out NB's domestic production. So the options are Trump supporting New Balance's that are made in the USA (if you look for those models) or some other brand that is probably produced in less than optimal working conditions.
Anyone know off the top of their head any running shoe company that combines no sweatshops and no Trump?
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
If Trump can be bought that cheaply, has the DNC considered a higher bid?
California would just offer him an Oscar if they really wanted to leave the union.
Problem is renewable energy is not as profitable as fossil fuels yet so they can't outbid.
Welcome to the kleptocracy!
CA is the third largest oil producer in the US. There's really no reason we couldn't be our own country (resource and economy wise).
Self defense might be a bit rough.
Kind of depends. The state is remarkably defensible geographically and a rather large amount of the US military is based here, and really with the amount we contribute to the Feds it would only be fair we keep them.
But yeah, unless it was an amicable break we'd almost certainly get wrecked.
You're also working under the assumption that the people who live in the parts of California that actually grow all the food/etc would be willing to follow San Francisco and LA in this scheme, which is probably not true. Trump still got almost 4M votes in CA (only 700K less than he got in Texas if you want to feel especially depressed), after all.
For sure. Lotta those people are Latino though, be interesting to see how they feel about him if they start suffering individual persecution. The mountain folk would still be an issue though.
I'm thinking of getting some of the techies I know to do something with google maps to help me avoid all the places that would result in me giving money secondhand to causes I disagree with.
Being a responsible consumer in a capitalist society is fucking hard.
My sister outright refuses to buy anything that will enrich Rupert Murdoch in any way.
She does her research before seeing any movie or buying any DVD. (TV programs are okay, if she's not paying for them)
Like, even liberals outside of California would be almost uniformly opposed to California seceding.
+8
Options
Johnny ChopsockyScootaloo! We have to cook!Grillin' HaysenburgersRegistered Userregular
I'm still gonna wear New Balance shoes, if only because they make my feet feel good and don't cost $Texas. That and 'vice president of communications' is a nothing position that can be easily replaced for costing the company money by saying something stupidly political.
So ethics lawyers of every stripe agree that Trump's "plan" to distance himself from the business is woefully insufficient. There's some disagreement on how far he needs to go, but the baseline is more less to put all the assets in a trust and set up an independent trustee to manage everything. He's probably running afoul of the constitution and maybe even federal law if he...[/quote]
This was a weird construction to me....
spool32 on
+1
Options
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
For enlisted Army side, advancing in rank is as easy as showing up to work on time in the right uniform. Anyone can pin E4 (Specialist) in roughly 18 months if they're outstanding at their job. For the NCO ranks, E5 (Sergeant) is obtainable if you really want it/plan on staying for longer than four years. After E5, it can get tough depending on your MOS (job), but overall, getting E6 (Staff Sergeant) is possible. Its not until E7 (Sergeant First Class) and above, that promotion gets difficult. Avoiding the weeds of it, expanding the military means for the careerists that promotion is easier to obtain, therefore you get more money, and can probably sham your way to retirement.
For Warrant Officers and Officers, this is where it gets interesting. Right now, promotion rates for Second Lieutenant to First Lieutenant is 99%. The only way you don't pin 1LT is if you get a DUI, have intercourse with a subordinate, or do something that's incredibly dishonorable and brings dishonor upon yourself and the Army. First Lieuteant to Captain are roughly ~90% (plus/minus 5%) depending on your job. You basically don't make Captain if you get a DUI, bang a subordinate, or get fired, but getting fired isn't a 100% won't promote. At this time usually 50% or more of the O2s in the Army usually get out at this rank because they didn't plan on making the Army (or military) a career or that they decided the Army isn't for them. From O3 (Captain) to Major, I think promotion rates are 60%-80% range. You'll get Major if you really want it. Again, at this bracket you'll see a lot of attrition because the majority of Captains get out after they complete their Company Command / Key Development billet for that rank. After that K/D time, its Staff for the next six to ten years and that turns most Officers off. Major to LTC IIRC is something like a 50% promotion rate, LTC to Colonel is like 25% or less, and less than 10% make General Officer. You begin to see a lot of that treachery I mentioned in those field grade billets as peers try to axe one another for top block evaluations that can make/break promotion.
Overall, what I am getting at with these poorly written, poorly explained, and fatigued posts is that the dreams of a military coup are non-existant. The Military (Army in my case) is infatuated with Trump. The military almost always votes GOP. Trump ran on the platform of making the military bigger and better. The military tends to look positively on GOP candidates not because they're getting us quagmired in pointless wars, but because they increase military spending, which equals more Soldiers. More Soldiers also mean that they'll need more Leaders to manage them. That ultimately means you have a higher chance to get promoted in the end. Trump choosing Mattis wasn't a bad move because the military loves him. The only story that immediately comes to mind is that he was responsible for firing a high ranking officer for basically failing at his job and the Officer Corps idolizes him for that.
I can post more if you want tomorrow. I'm on mobile and delaying going to bed atm.
Am not Military, but I have heard it said that combat experience can be a big factor in career advancement as well. I believe it came up repeatedly during some of the recent "women in combat operations?!" discussions, that not being able to (at least intentionally) get combat experience was a possible factor in holding back the military careers of female soldiers.
If that is the case, the fact that a lot of the GOP won't shut up about bombing/invading a variety of countries probably doesn't hurt either. Y'know, likely get some people killed (promotions?) and combat experience (more promotions!) and let's not think too hard about the collateral damage from the last couple ventures?
Note, I'm simply thinking aloud, not accusing anyone of this train of thought.
But the picture you paint, it's hard not to connect the dots. Trump and some of his admin seem awfully eager to use that big stick.
Also let's just insert here the entire horror trilogy that is Trump's lack of understanding of, yet compelling interest in, nuclear weapons.
They (The Pentagon/Department of Defense) used to consider Combat Experience as a big plus for promotion, but it wasn't a guaranteed career promotion type of thing. You have to keep in mind though, Iraq "ended" roughly six, seven years ago. A lot of those Soldiers/Officers that served during Iraq/Early Afghanistan that were Junior Enlisted and Company Grade Officers are now Staff Sergeant and above, and Majors/LTCs by now. Even moreso, lots of those individuals did their time and got out. The DoD recognizes that and with the new generation of Officers/Soldiers in the service now, Combat Deployments are increasingly rare. Basically, you won't deploy to a war zone unless you're from Fort Campbell, Fort Bragg, or Fort Drum (Infantry Brigade Combat Teams) because they have the skillset needed for an Afghanistan deployment versus other units like the Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (ex: Joint Base Lewis McChord, Carson, Texas, Alaska, and a few other places) or the Heavy Brigade Combat Teams. (Tanks! That being Riley, Hood, or Stewart) or are a needed support branch/field. Anyway, because of this, the DoD doesn't want Soldiers that deployed to have a promotion advantage over non-deployed individuals. Can't remember exactly, but I'm pretty sure having no deployments won't hurt you for promotion. The Army has moved towards a more educated force direction, IE, have yourself a Bachelors Degree/Masters, go to Army Schools (Ranger, Drill Sergeant, Recruiter, and various other cool guy schools), and diversified experience. Going to war again just means more fancy ribbons/medals that provide small point increments for Enlisted, but don't mean a whole lot for Officers other than making you look cool.
The GOP whole, "Go to war" thing is more related to the industrial military complex, but that is a discussion for another thread.
If Trump can be bought that cheaply, has the DNC considered a higher bid?
California would just offer him an Oscar if they really wanted to leave the union.
Problem is renewable energy is not as profitable as fossil fuels yet so they can't outbid.
Welcome to the kleptocracy!
CA is the third largest oil producer in the US. There's really no reason we couldn't be our own country (resource and economy wise).
Self defense might be a bit rough.
Kind of depends. The state is remarkably defensible geographically and a rather large amount of the US military is based here, and really with the amount we contribute to the Feds it would only be fair we keep them.
But yeah, unless it was an amicable break we'd almost certainly get wrecked.
You're also working under the assumption that the people who live in the parts of California that actually grow all the food/etc would be willing to follow San Francisco and LA in this scheme, which is probably not true. Trump still got almost 4M votes in CA (only 700K less than he got in Texas if you want to feel especially depressed), after all.
For sure. Lotta those people are Latino though, be interesting to see how they feel about him if they start suffering individual persecution. The mountain folk would still be an issue though.
I don't know how many of those 4 million votes are actually farmers or rural populations. Growing up in California there are just entire cities of full of weird racist people. They don't usually have farms and are often on assistance of some kind in my personal anecdotal experience. Oroville, Paradise, Yuba City, Durham, San Bernardino, Redlands, Redding.... and probably a hundred more. All cities that would be considered of modest size in any other state are scrub towns in California. I knew quite a few people growing up who were in to southern country culture* as more of a social clique than any actual geographical living situation. The state has 39 Million people in it.
*Not to disparage people who actually live in the country or are from the south, it's the suburban gangsta rap white kid equivalent though... spending all their money on confederate flags, trucks nuts and boots while hanging out behind the feed store... then driving home to their sub-division and complaining when they have to mow the lawn.
Edit: I would argue the country needs states like California and New York to drag it into the present every once in a while. There has to be a population dense enough state that has the agriculture and economy to actually push back once in a while or forge ahead. In some small way it counter-acts the anchor of places like Kansas, though that anchor is getting heavier by the year.
I wasn't advocating for it. I just always get amused when people forget that my state is an oil state.
Our economy's just so diversified everybody always forgets.
The true statement however is that nobody is seceding from union, because the quality of the union cannot degrade to the point where large states or groups of states want to leave.
Yes, california cant leave. But if the senator from california, with the backing of his governor and the people of california, was going to stand up in the house the next day and proclaim independance, then elements of the US government would have to go to him and say, "what needs to be done to make you not do that?" And then they'd have to do it.
Impossibility is a two way street. It's only seemed like it's all on the states lately because (for example) Texas has never actually wanted to leave the union.
More likely of course is internal cooperation pacts beyond the federal government. So, say, california, oregon and washington agree to share 2% of tax revenue into a mutual fund, and to coordinate their laws and standards more closely. Perhaps even set up a regional capital and elect a western states parliament. Perhaps even bring in Canada too.
And then vote for federal tax to go to zero. And against all federal spending, returning all that money as it is recouped to their regional government.
If Trump can be bought that cheaply, has the DNC considered a higher bid?
California would just offer him an Oscar if they really wanted to leave the union.
Problem is renewable energy is not as profitable as fossil fuels yet so they can't outbid.
Welcome to the kleptocracy!
CA is the third largest oil producer in the US. There's really no reason we couldn't be our own country (resource and economy wise).
Self defense might be a bit rough.
Kind of depends. The state is remarkably defensible geographically and a rather large amount of the US military is based here, and really with the amount we contribute to the Feds it would only be fair we keep them.
But yeah, unless it was an amicable break we'd almost certainly get wrecked.
You're also working under the assumption that the people who live in the parts of California that actually grow all the food/etc would be willing to follow San Francisco and LA in this scheme, which is probably not true. Trump still got almost 4M votes in CA (only 700K less than he got in Texas if you want to feel especially depressed), after all.
For sure. Lotta those people are Latino though, be interesting to see how they feel about him if they start suffering individual persecution. The mountain folk would still be an issue though.
I don't know how many of those 4 million votes are actually farmers or rural populations. Growing up in California there are just entire cities of full of weird racist people. They don't usually have farms and are often on assistance of some kind in my personal anecdotal experience. Oroville, Paradise, Yuba City, Durham, San Bernardino, Redlands, Redding.... and probably a hundred more. All cities that would be considered of modest size in any other state are scrub towns in California. I knew quite a few people growing up who were in to southern country culture* as more of a social clique than any actual geographical living situation. The state has 39 Million people in it.
*Not to disparage people who actually live in the country or are from the south, it's the suburban gangsta rap white kid equivalent though... spending all their money on confederate flags, trucks nuts and boots while hanging out behind the feed store... then driving home to their sub-division and complaining when they have to mow the lawn.
Edit: I would argue the country needs states like California and New York to drag it into the present every once in a while. There has to be a population dense enough state that has the agriculture and economy to actually push back once in a while or forge ahead. In some small way it counter-acts the anchor of places like Kansas, though that anchor is getting heavier by the year.
(I'm from that part of California, I know. It's what I meant by mountain folk.)
I don't mean just her PhD, I mean all PhDs from Columbia.
That's not about Monica Crowley, it's about Columbia. Plagiarism is serious business and if the university does not react everyone will know their true academic standards...
Posts
That "Boycott bullies" isn't "These are bullies who need to be boycotted," it's, "Look at these bullies using a boycott to hurt an innocent company."
Fox News constantly talks about the good of the free market and the invisible hand and all that crap. The boycott is the biggest controlling force of that idea after supply and demand.
Yes but it was part of his stump speech and times previous to the incident and after he properly attributed it.
I have serious trouble caring that he missed it once out of like the fifty times he gave it.
Though supposedly there was something as well when he was at Syracuse University but I don't know those details.
Nixon was at least a competent political operator (Senator, Vice President, etc) along with being a thug. Trump is just a goon that throws a fit when he doesn't get his way.
He had to drop his Presidential run in the 80s because of his college plagiarism
It was way worse than his stump speech thing, but not quite as egregious as Crowley's lazy dissertation
Didn't he actually plagarize in college? Let me look....
Crowley just blatantly copy/pasted and I wouldn't just chalk that up to ignorance.
Trump was watching television and became aware of a challenge to his power.
That's it.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Uh, they just get an inheritance. As far as I know she's not part of running the company much at all.
Statement on it:
https://www.facebook.com/llbean/posts/10154557395087415
LL Bean is a pretty solid company that still makes an effort to make things in the US.
Am not Military, but I have heard it said that combat experience can be a big factor in career advancement as well. I believe it came up repeatedly during some of the recent "women in combat operations?!" discussions, that not being able to (at least intentionally) get combat experience was a possible factor in holding back the military careers of female soldiers.
If that is the case, the fact that a lot of the GOP won't shut up about bombing/invading a variety of countries probably doesn't hurt either. Y'know, likely get some people killed (promotions?) and combat experience (more promotions!) and let's not think too hard about the collateral damage from the last couple ventures?
Note, I'm simply thinking aloud, not accusing anyone of this train of thought.
But the picture you paint, it's hard not to connect the dots. Trump and some of his admin seem awfully eager to use that big stick.
Also let's just insert here the entire horror trilogy that is Trump's lack of understanding of, yet compelling interest in, nuclear weapons.
If they don't, the value of a PhD from Columbia becomes zero.
For instance, New Balance.
Of course he was never going to do any of this despite the constitution, federal law, ethics, and past precedent.
It's really quite shocking how negotiable our legal system is when someone powerful decides not to follow the law. Our representatives either don't care or don't have the numbers to make a difference.
My dad's worn New Balance basically since I can remember. When he found out about this, he was pissed.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Trump's doing the Peter Gibbons thing with the Presidency.
"Well, I wouldn't say I've been missing them..."
DAMN IT.
I'm thinking of getting some of the techies I know to do something with google maps to help me avoid all the places that would result in me giving money secondhand to causes I disagree with.
Being a responsible consumer in a capitalist society is fucking hard.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
On the one hand, "the official shoes of white people" is just something some white supremacist said, not anybody at NB.
On the other hand, I really really really don't want somebody to get the wrong idea if they see me wearing them.
Fucking racists.
New Balance officially supported Donald Trump, they don't really need to say anything else.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Even more annoying that it's in the context of opposing the TPP will help out NB's domestic production. So the options are Trump supporting New Balance's that are made in the USA (if you look for those models) or some other brand that is probably produced in less than optimal working conditions.
Anyone know off the top of their head any running shoe company that combines no sweatshops and no Trump?
Goddammit I'm wearing a pair right now.
For sure. Lotta those people are Latino though, be interesting to see how they feel about him if they start suffering individual persecution. The mountain folk would still be an issue though.
I had just gotten a pair of something else about two weeks before this whole thing happened. Thankfully I didn't end up brand loyal.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
My sister outright refuses to buy anything that will enrich Rupert Murdoch in any way.
She does her research before seeing any movie or buying any DVD. (TV programs are okay, if she's not paying for them)
Like, even liberals outside of California would be almost uniformly opposed to California seceding.
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
This was a weird construction to me....
Most the liberals (and progressives) I know in California are opposed to it. Ride or die.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
They (The Pentagon/Department of Defense) used to consider Combat Experience as a big plus for promotion, but it wasn't a guaranteed career promotion type of thing. You have to keep in mind though, Iraq "ended" roughly six, seven years ago. A lot of those Soldiers/Officers that served during Iraq/Early Afghanistan that were Junior Enlisted and Company Grade Officers are now Staff Sergeant and above, and Majors/LTCs by now. Even moreso, lots of those individuals did their time and got out. The DoD recognizes that and with the new generation of Officers/Soldiers in the service now, Combat Deployments are increasingly rare. Basically, you won't deploy to a war zone unless you're from Fort Campbell, Fort Bragg, or Fort Drum (Infantry Brigade Combat Teams) because they have the skillset needed for an Afghanistan deployment versus other units like the Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (ex: Joint Base Lewis McChord, Carson, Texas, Alaska, and a few other places) or the Heavy Brigade Combat Teams. (Tanks! That being Riley, Hood, or Stewart) or are a needed support branch/field. Anyway, because of this, the DoD doesn't want Soldiers that deployed to have a promotion advantage over non-deployed individuals. Can't remember exactly, but I'm pretty sure having no deployments won't hurt you for promotion. The Army has moved towards a more educated force direction, IE, have yourself a Bachelors Degree/Masters, go to Army Schools (Ranger, Drill Sergeant, Recruiter, and various other cool guy schools), and diversified experience. Going to war again just means more fancy ribbons/medals that provide small point increments for Enlisted, but don't mean a whole lot for Officers other than making you look cool.
The GOP whole, "Go to war" thing is more related to the industrial military complex, but that is a discussion for another thread.
I don't know how many of those 4 million votes are actually farmers or rural populations. Growing up in California there are just entire cities of full of weird racist people. They don't usually have farms and are often on assistance of some kind in my personal anecdotal experience. Oroville, Paradise, Yuba City, Durham, San Bernardino, Redlands, Redding.... and probably a hundred more. All cities that would be considered of modest size in any other state are scrub towns in California. I knew quite a few people growing up who were in to southern country culture* as more of a social clique than any actual geographical living situation. The state has 39 Million people in it.
*Not to disparage people who actually live in the country or are from the south, it's the suburban gangsta rap white kid equivalent though... spending all their money on confederate flags, trucks nuts and boots while hanging out behind the feed store... then driving home to their sub-division and complaining when they have to mow the lawn.
Edit: I would argue the country needs states like California and New York to drag it into the present every once in a while. There has to be a population dense enough state that has the agriculture and economy to actually push back once in a while or forge ahead. In some small way it counter-acts the anchor of places like Kansas, though that anchor is getting heavier by the year.
I'm just glad I don't have wide feet anymore so I'm not forced to hit new balance the next time I need gym shoes.
The true statement however is that nobody is seceding from union, because the quality of the union cannot degrade to the point where large states or groups of states want to leave.
Yes, california cant leave. But if the senator from california, with the backing of his governor and the people of california, was going to stand up in the house the next day and proclaim independance, then elements of the US government would have to go to him and say, "what needs to be done to make you not do that?" And then they'd have to do it.
Impossibility is a two way street. It's only seemed like it's all on the states lately because (for example) Texas has never actually wanted to leave the union.
More likely of course is internal cooperation pacts beyond the federal government. So, say, california, oregon and washington agree to share 2% of tax revenue into a mutual fund, and to coordinate their laws and standards more closely. Perhaps even set up a regional capital and elect a western states parliament. Perhaps even bring in Canada too.
And then vote for federal tax to go to zero. And against all federal spending, returning all that money as it is recouped to their regional government.
(I'm from that part of California, I know. It's what I meant by mountain folk.)
I don't mean just her PhD, I mean all PhDs from Columbia.
That's not about Monica Crowley, it's about Columbia. Plagiarism is serious business and if the university does not react everyone will know their true academic standards...
Mattis is entirely competent. Under a real C-in-C he'd be a fine Sec Def choice
In my opinion he's literally one of the two times the stopped clock has been right.
Given that, the fact that Trump is already shitting all over him by taking none of his advisement just makes sense