That is your specialty, right?
Hi -- New here.
- Thread starter Oneuli
- Start date
That is your specialty, right?
Fluff harder. BTW, "she" may not be a "woman."
I agree, Grumps.
OK. I'm not sure what your point is. Is this just a generalized attack on Salon for having published something by a bad person?
Of course you aren't, sock. Playing dumb is very unbecoming. #Bebetter.
No, I'm Korean-American. I have never had Korean citizenship.
I thought some people here would appreciate a bit of context when meeting a new poster. If you don't, that's fine. You're free to ignore it. As for mentioning my sexuality, as I recall sexuality was something you were interested in with regard to another poster. So, I thought you might appreciate that context for me. If your'e only interested in gay men, that's fine. You're welcome to ignore my biographical anecdote there, as well.
Last edited:
There's no such thing unless you have dual citizenship, sock.
Your explanations ring hollow, since we both agree that online identities are meaningless - unless you were trying to establish a certain advantage, as I believe liberals are wont to do.
You seemed skeptical about the anecdote. The existence of the report I got from my friend doesn't matter to the argument being made here, except with regard to establishing the underlying facts about that sentiment. So, since you reacted with skepticism, I provided other sources that supported the underlying claim without needing to believe my anecdote.
Yes, there is. If we get a better sense of who different people are in the real world, at least if we believe them, we can pump those people for relevant information and insights. For example, if you were to tell me you have a prosthetic leg, then if we were discussing a story dealing with prosthetics, I'd be more interested in your perspective on it.
Too concise. I'm not clear which of the claims you're looking to have substantiated.
He's a civilian working for the military. His attitude is polite and he's been working hard to learn Japanese. That's actually what made this stick particularly in my mind, because I felt bad that someone who was a Japanophile, excited to live in the country, and working to learn the language and culture, would be met with that attitude. I think it was pretty disillusioning for him.
Interesting anecdote about you, there.
Eagle_Eye
Well-known member
I like asinine discussions that's why I read your posts.
I'm project-based and between projects right now.
Okay, Grump, glad my asinine posts have a modicum of value for someone.
QUESTION: At the end of the college football season, are you shouting "Go ARMY, beat NAVY" or "Go NAVY, beat ARMY?"
Or are you just celebrating another AF win of the Commander in Chief's Trophy?
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Oneuli,
The thing that always gets me is how Republicans think the reason the government is always short is because it spends too much. But then when confronted with what they feel should be cut back, they can't precisely name a program or how much of it should be cut, and how they expect that to make the budget balance.
And after complaining about the debt during the entire skillfully guided recovery from the Great Recession, (which happened to be during Obama's years so they naturally blamed the debt on him,) they go out and slash revenue with a big give-away tax cut for the rich which nearly doubles the deficit! And this after Trump campaigned by saying he would pay the debt completely off within 8 years. What a pile of stink! Now, not only will the debt NOT be paid off in 8 years, it will be vastly increased.
And here's the kicker. I have repeatedly asked Republicans how they expect to pay the debt down during a recession if we can't pay it down during an expanding economy. (NOW) Not one has ever even tried to answer that one.
What? Do they expect the economy to get any better?
The thing that always gets me is how Republicans think the reason the government is always short is because it spends too much. But then when confronted with what they feel should be cut back, they can't precisely name a program or how much of it should be cut, and how they expect that to make the budget balance.
And after complaining about the debt during the entire skillfully guided recovery from the Great Recession, (which happened to be during Obama's years so they naturally blamed the debt on him,) they go out and slash revenue with a big give-away tax cut for the rich which nearly doubles the deficit! And this after Trump campaigned by saying he would pay the debt completely off within 8 years. What a pile of stink! Now, not only will the debt NOT be paid off in 8 years, it will be vastly increased.
And here's the kicker. I have repeatedly asked Republicans how they expect to pay the debt down during a recession if we can't pay it down during an expanding economy. (NOW) Not one has ever even tried to answer that one.
What? Do they expect the economy to get any better?
If you have a semantic preference for "American citizen with Korean ancestry," that's fine. "Korean American" is a handy shorthand for that, though.
If I were, wouldn't I say that I'm a straight white man -- then my support for liberal policies couldn't be as easily dismissed by right-wingers as a matter of personal self interest, since I'd be advocating policies that are actually against my personal interests. In fact, wouldn't I insist I was a wealthy straight white veteran living in rural red-state America. That would provide real rhetorical advantage to a liberal in an argument, whereas identifying as someone who ticks a lot of the usual liberal boxes just makes it easier for others to put you in a box rather than addressing your actual arguments.
Last edited:
Personal question...answer or not as you choose:
Do you spend any time at the Frying Pan?
I think a useful exercise is to make an honest effort to balance the budget oneself, using real numbers. You can do a decent "back of the napkin" calculation, using the real budget, plus income distribution tables, tax tables, etc. When you dig into that and try to do it with real numbers, it becomes quickly obvious how naive (or disingenuous) Republican talk on the topic of fiscal responsibility tends to be. If you're unwilling to raise taxes, and unwilling to default on the debt (or on entitlements people have already earned, like Medicare and Social Security), and unwilling to cut our largest area of discretionary spending (the military), it's pretty much impossible to balance the budget, without completely unworkable and counter-productive methods like ending all infrastructure spending. Fiscally serious people pretty much have to focus on raising taxes and/or cutting military spending, but those are the two areas Republicans won't even talk about. And that's why getting them to get specific about which changes they'd make is impossible, and why their sham fiscal conservatism is disposed of the moment a Republican gets into the White House.
The boat bar in Chelsea? I've heard of it, but I've never been there. It would be a bit out of the way for me.