No, no… You’re doing it wrong… point and accuse, point and accuse…. and repeat
classter
@Adama
My understanding of of Chris’ comment is that given that Trump is turning out to be (see newspaper above for demonstration) every bit as destructive & embarrassing as one might have predicted, whether BS now regrets (even a little bit) their embarrassingly one-sided and frankly weird pro-Trump/anti-Clinton coverage.
Did you really, honestly not understand that?
‘Cause you should have.
But if you did, your comment makes no sense whatsoever.
justpassing
Very bad news for The Irish Times. Will any of female reporters have anything to say about THAT story? Or will they all go to ground? Discriminating against new mothers!!! What has Miriam Lord, Orna Mulcahy, Eileen Battersby, Breda O’Brien, Kathy Sheridan, Una Mullally to say about this? Very little, I suspect. They and the paper ought to be ashamed of themselves.
seekingsusan
Any woman who reads the IT would be worse, after that!!
Annuder Blow In …. Annunder spineless shirt changer
Were you even here this time last week?
You’re nothing but a disposable hankie lad
Make a bitta’ve nuisance of yourself
Make a show ‘ve yerself
And end up getting your own snot all over yourself
Bin yourself
And dress up into a new shirt by next week
bisted
…ouch
Neil is a gum
You take yourself and this whole blogging thing a bit too seriously I feel. If you tried writing in full sentences and coherent phrasing maybe others would take your drivel seriously as well.
Graham F
I think you’d find they wouldn’t, actually
Neil is a gum
Well you’re probably right Graham but I was trying to appear reasonable and compassionate
Compassion Cash
I don’t think it’d be a concern for Mullaly …
Mourning Ireland
You forgot Jennifer O’Connell and the serially appalling Roisín Ingle winched in to do “The Women’s Podcast”.
They’ll do nothing of course.
classter
@justpassing
Do you know any of the facts of the case? Did you feel it was a fair judgement from the Workplace Relations Commission? Or unusually tough/lax/etc.?
I don’t pay for the Murdoch press so I haven’t read their story & Bodger’s post elsewhere has a screenshot of only the most limited set of details.
Fancy filling the rest of us in on the relevant details?
Listrade
Nope, nothing at all happened yesterday that would be worthy if hitting the front pages.
Goddamned lefties media.
Not one mention of Liverpool getting knocked out the FA cup.
Neil is a gum
Dogs make their own importance
Nigel
Nice.
Bertie Blenkinsop
Mané’s coming home, everything is going to be okay now.
Brother Barnabas
just before he pops off again to PSG
Neil is a gum
Watched Fernando Torres goal rush on LFCTV this morning and bliss is was this dawn to be alive
bertie blenkinsop
I’d say Vidic still gets night sweats when he remembers the Torres of that era.
Neil is a gum
It was extremely interesting to see how good he actually was at that time. There were several ones where he chipped the goalkeeper from the edge of the box for example. One in particular v Chelsea where left Terry, Cech and Ivanovic standing around looking like spare opposite of lady parts. He was literally unplayable.
rotide
It amuses me to see liverpool fans come out with this sort of guff.
If he was ‘literally unplayable’, then Liverpool would have won the league at a canter. He wasn’t and they didn’t. He’s a good player overshadowed by far greater ones from his peer group and country.
bertie blenkinsop
Here’s the thing –
you don’t have to be a Liverpool fan to recognise that Torres was a special talent in the same way that you don’t have to be a United fan to acknowledge that 4 or 5 years ago Rooney was superb, all you need to do is cast aside the blinkers that some feel they’re obliged to wear as a part of club allegiance.
Brother Barnabas
similar in more ways than just the extraordinary, explosive early talent – similar too in the rapid, premature decline
as an arsenal fan, while I should maybe enjoy it, I find it sad watching both Torres and Rooney scramble around, fairly pathetically, trying to find a flicker of what they once both had
Bertie Blenkinsop
This isn’t point scoring honestly but see also : Wenger
Brother Barnabas
well, yes and no. I’m not sure wenger was ever quite as brilliant as a in-their-peak rooney or torres
wenger’s humbling decline is more of a Michael Owen
Neil is a gum
They did finish second and win the champions league. Igor Biscan and Djimi Traore were playing. I’d call that over achieving but whatever.
rotide
You seem to be under the impression that Torres played for Liverpool when they won the champions league
esǝɯǝɯʇɐpɐq
It’s okay rotide… I got this one…
Neil is a gowl girl, masquerading as a boy.
It’s easy when you’re psychic. ;-)
Neil is a gum
I’m referring to the Benitez era in general.
rotide
Sure you were.
Not that benitez or indeed liverpool of that time had been mentioned. only torres.
but of course you were talking about rafa.
Neil is a gum
I was having a nice chat with my mate Bertie until you got involved rotide. As usual you added zero to the discussion.
Jesus Wept
He has a minions avatar.Now that is funny.
Loan Some Cow Boy
rotide – seriously mate are you ok?
You seem to be somewhat deficient in the old social skills department.
Neil is a gum
I can fight my own battles loan
classter
That’s not this works ‘Neil is a gum’
Other can comment whether you want them getting involved or not.
Twunt
Lots of bleeding hearts getting all worked up about Trumps ban. I don’t remember them saying much when Obama stopped Iraqi refuges back in 2011. I suppose, in their perfectly partisan world view, Obama could only do good, Trump can only do bad.
Nigel
I’d say your memory and interpretation are entirely truthful, accurate and reliable and not amother stupid false equivalence at all at all.
Listrade
Really? Maybe you weren’t on the internet in 2011? I remember it well, I also remember a lot of criticism.
Comments show all those invisible lefties who were quiet weren’t.
Ban was also over turned quickly…as unconstitutional.
petey
thanks listrade.
classter
Do you see no difference in the two cases?
Obama’s ban involved a delay in processing visas from one country based on carrying out additional background checks. It was against the backfrop of a president who spoke widely and thoughtfully about interfaith relations.
Trumps’ ban has (almost arbitrarily) chosen seven Muslim countries, the nationals of which have not been known for their involvement in anti US terror. It is to last 90 days (and will then be reviewed so perhaps much longer). It comes from a President who has exploited fears of Islam & Islamic terrorism for political gain.
If you don’t see the difference between the two scenarios you have being either willfullyor unconsciously obtuse.
Neil is a gum
I’m sure you will find it in your heart one day to be a bit more reflective and less deliberately obtuse
Loan Some Cow Boy
Yeah but I don’t think you will Neil
jimmy russell
How could trump keep his campaign promises?!?!?!?! he is literally hitler I cant even right now I’m literally shaking
Nigel
You wouldn’t believe how many of his supporters said he wouldn’t.
Listrade
But Neil it isn’t a ban on Muslims. It’s only a ban on some countries with a Muslim majority that Trump doesn’t have business deals with and haven’t as of yet had any link terrorism in the US.
Those from “minority” religions from those countries will be fast tracked and not subject to additional scrutiny…but it isn’t a Muslim ban you bleading heart fake newser as there’s no mention on Mulsim in the text (text that is practically unreadable and authorities can’t interpret).
Nigel
DAMMIT YOU HAVE CAUGHT ME OUT I AM DISSOLVING IN LOGIC WHAT A WORLD.
Well Hitler was renowned for keeping his campaign promises. Including promised referendums including removing Germany from, which in turn dissolved, the League of Nations. Every kept campaign promise was a slow clap towards complete and total global conflict. But there’s clearly no parallels here, it’s just a bunch of old stuff that happened.
Deluded
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment
On the 22nd January 2009, his second day in office, President Obama signed an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay detention centre. He said that the internment and mistreatment of innocent people was counterproductive and terrorists should stand trial in the US or the country they attacked. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13492
This order was rejected by a military judge, Army Colonel James Pohl, on a technical point saying that a pause in prosecutions while transfers were organised would impede the detainees right to speedy prosecution. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100017133
While the matter was being debated the Republican senators Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman added a provision to the appropriations bill to block any funds to move detainees.
Republicans said that military bases in America that housed prisoners would become targets, they even claimed that terror suspects would be held in city jails and among the general population. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/19585886/ns/politics/t/what-are-alternatives-guantanamo/
Provisions in the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act further impeded the movement of detainees to the US or other countries, effectively securing that Guantanamo Bay would remain open until Congress (i.e. the Republican party) voted to close it.
…
Now Obama is widely reported as “releasing terrorists” when the military has processed these detainees and cannot bring them to trial or has handed them over to other authorities which Republicans once claimed was right. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jun/18/steny-hoyer/hoyer-correct-500-guantanamo-detainees-were-releas/
Trump claims that torture works and that he will fill up Guantanamo again.
The US is slipping back into terrorism in its war against selected clients. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-muslim-ban-excludes-countries-linked-businesses-article-1.2957956 “Not a single American was killed on U.S. soil by citizens from any of those countries (listed by Trump) between 1975 and 2015, according to statistics tallied by the conservative-leaning Cato Institute.”
@Deluded
you forgot the bit in your timeline where Obama told the nation “we must look forward as opposed to backwards”regarding US war crimes and thereby granting immunity to members of the previous administration for war crimes commited, including torture..what kind of example is that is that setting for future administrations? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-justice-department-immunity-bush-cia-torturer
EightersGonnaEight
Forget about what Obama did or didn’t do. He’s gone. It’s history. Get on with the present and the future.
Deluded
That’s true, f_lawless, I hadn’t considered it so I looked it up.
Torture was authorised so that made prosecuting agents practically impossible.
Pursuing those who authorised it was politically impossible, Bush would claim they were working in the national interest.
Obama had to let it go, he had to “pick his battles” as he rapidly ran out of political capital.
(The only reason I looked at any of this was because Trump and Trumpets keep referring to Obama. They are using half-truths and lies to claim precedent.
I happen to believe that not all politicians are as bad as each other. I think that understanding the difference is important)
kneel issa or go home
Not entirely accurate though Deluded. My understanding is President Obama made unprecedented use of executive orders. Trump is merely pointing to that as precedent. Some folks did warn about this at the time as well.
Deluded
Good point.
The danger of extending executive power was flagged at the time. (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2015/12/31/commentary/world-commentary/obama-limits-executive-power/)
I though a comparison could be made with JFK’s cabinet and how he reorganised the power structure, appointing his younger brother and inexperienced people (with JFK at the centre of control) while side-lining his vice-president.
In an effort to “get something done” the temptation is to tinker with the system.
I don’t know. I would not dismiss all Republicans as simians and neither would I embrace all Democrats.
I believe Trump will energise opposed factions even within his own party but it will take some meteoric event to truly rouse them from feeding at the trough of self-interest.
Good point.
The danger of extending executive power was flagged at the time. (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2015/12/31/commentary/world-commentary/obama-limits-executive-power/)
I though a comparison could be made with JFK’s cabinet and how he reorganised the power structure, appointing his younger brother and inexperienced people (with JFK at the centre of control) while side-lining his vice-president.
In an effort to “get something done” the temptation is to tinker with the system.
Is this website ashamed of it’s one-sided coverage of the American election?
…the proud part that Broadsheet played in the downfall of crooked Hillary is acknowledged globally…but in fairness…she did play a small part herself…
What has that got to do with the papers??
Hahahahahahahahaha…..
*cough*… sorry, you were sayin’….
.
.
“Bring out your gimps!”
*rings bell and flagelates some more*
“Bring out your gimps!”
repeat
they should be, fellating trump like that
Eh? Chris? This is the newspaper section. Even broadsheet doesn’t get to influence editors…
No, no… You’re doing it wrong… point and accuse, point and accuse…. and repeat
@Adama
My understanding of of Chris’ comment is that given that Trump is turning out to be (see newspaper above for demonstration) every bit as destructive & embarrassing as one might have predicted, whether BS now regrets (even a little bit) their embarrassingly one-sided and frankly weird pro-Trump/anti-Clinton coverage.
Did you really, honestly not understand that?
‘Cause you should have.
But if you did, your comment makes no sense whatsoever.
Very bad news for The Irish Times. Will any of female reporters have anything to say about THAT story? Or will they all go to ground? Discriminating against new mothers!!! What has Miriam Lord, Orna Mulcahy, Eileen Battersby, Breda O’Brien, Kathy Sheridan, Una Mullally to say about this? Very little, I suspect. They and the paper ought to be ashamed of themselves.
Any woman who reads the IT would be worse, after that!!
When it comes to Maternity Leave JP
Is F.U.J.I A
All the way
What does that mean?
F U Jack
I’m Alright
I see you’re taking my advice a little to heart
Heh?
Who d’ F U
Are you
Annuder Blow In …. Annunder spineless shirt changer
Were you even here this time last week?
You’re nothing but a disposable hankie lad
Make a bitta’ve nuisance of yourself
Make a show ‘ve yerself
And end up getting your own snot all over yourself
Bin yourself
And dress up into a new shirt by next week
…ouch
You take yourself and this whole blogging thing a bit too seriously I feel. If you tried writing in full sentences and coherent phrasing maybe others would take your drivel seriously as well.
I think you’d find they wouldn’t, actually
Well you’re probably right Graham but I was trying to appear reasonable and compassionate
I don’t think it’d be a concern for Mullaly …
You forgot Jennifer O’Connell and the serially appalling Roisín Ingle winched in to do “The Women’s Podcast”.
They’ll do nothing of course.
@justpassing
Do you know any of the facts of the case? Did you feel it was a fair judgement from the Workplace Relations Commission? Or unusually tough/lax/etc.?
I don’t pay for the Murdoch press so I haven’t read their story & Bodger’s post elsewhere has a screenshot of only the most limited set of details.
Fancy filling the rest of us in on the relevant details?
Nope, nothing at all happened yesterday that would be worthy if hitting the front pages.
Goddamned lefties media.
Not one mention of Liverpool getting knocked out the FA cup.
Dogs make their own importance
Nice.
Mané’s coming home, everything is going to be okay now.
just before he pops off again to PSG
Watched Fernando Torres goal rush on LFCTV this morning and bliss is was this dawn to be alive
I’d say Vidic still gets night sweats when he remembers the Torres of that era.
It was extremely interesting to see how good he actually was at that time. There were several ones where he chipped the goalkeeper from the edge of the box for example. One in particular v Chelsea where left Terry, Cech and Ivanovic standing around looking like spare opposite of lady parts. He was literally unplayable.
It amuses me to see liverpool fans come out with this sort of guff.
If he was ‘literally unplayable’, then Liverpool would have won the league at a canter. He wasn’t and they didn’t. He’s a good player overshadowed by far greater ones from his peer group and country.
Here’s the thing –
you don’t have to be a Liverpool fan to recognise that Torres was a special talent in the same way that you don’t have to be a United fan to acknowledge that 4 or 5 years ago Rooney was superb, all you need to do is cast aside the blinkers that some feel they’re obliged to wear as a part of club allegiance.
similar in more ways than just the extraordinary, explosive early talent – similar too in the rapid, premature decline
as an arsenal fan, while I should maybe enjoy it, I find it sad watching both Torres and Rooney scramble around, fairly pathetically, trying to find a flicker of what they once both had
This isn’t point scoring honestly but see also : Wenger
well, yes and no. I’m not sure wenger was ever quite as brilliant as a in-their-peak rooney or torres
wenger’s humbling decline is more of a Michael Owen
They did finish second and win the champions league. Igor Biscan and Djimi Traore were playing. I’d call that over achieving but whatever.
You seem to be under the impression that Torres played for Liverpool when they won the champions league
It’s okay rotide… I got this one…
Neil is a
gowlgirl, masquerading as a boy.It’s easy when you’re psychic. ;-)
I’m referring to the Benitez era in general.
Sure you were.
Not that benitez or indeed liverpool of that time had been mentioned. only torres.
but of course you were talking about rafa.
I was having a nice chat with my mate Bertie until you got involved rotide. As usual you added zero to the discussion.
He has a minions avatar.Now that is funny.
rotide – seriously mate are you ok?
You seem to be somewhat deficient in the old social skills department.
I can fight my own battles loan
That’s not this works ‘Neil is a gum’
Other can comment whether you want them getting involved or not.
Lots of bleeding hearts getting all worked up about Trumps ban. I don’t remember them saying much when Obama stopped Iraqi refuges back in 2011. I suppose, in their perfectly partisan world view, Obama could only do good, Trump can only do bad.
I’d say your memory and interpretation are entirely truthful, accurate and reliable and not amother stupid false equivalence at all at all.
Really? Maybe you weren’t on the internet in 2011? I remember it well, I also remember a lot of criticism.
NY times reported it as did other newspapers:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/world/middleeast/13baghdad.html
Comments show all those invisible lefties who were quiet weren’t.
Ban was also over turned quickly…as unconstitutional.
thanks listrade.
Do you see no difference in the two cases?
Obama’s ban involved a delay in processing visas from one country based on carrying out additional background checks. It was against the backfrop of a president who spoke widely and thoughtfully about interfaith relations.
Trumps’ ban has (almost arbitrarily) chosen seven Muslim countries, the nationals of which have not been known for their involvement in anti US terror. It is to last 90 days (and will then be reviewed so perhaps much longer). It comes from a President who has exploited fears of Islam & Islamic terrorism for political gain.
If you don’t see the difference between the two scenarios you have being either willfullyor unconsciously obtuse.
I’m sure you will find it in your heart one day to be a bit more reflective and less deliberately obtuse
Yeah but I don’t think you will Neil
How could trump keep his campaign promises?!?!?!?! he is literally hitler I cant even right now I’m literally shaking
You wouldn’t believe how many of his supporters said he wouldn’t.
But Neil it isn’t a ban on Muslims. It’s only a ban on some countries with a Muslim majority that Trump doesn’t have business deals with and haven’t as of yet had any link terrorism in the US.
Those from “minority” religions from those countries will be fast tracked and not subject to additional scrutiny…but it isn’t a Muslim ban you bleading heart fake newser as there’s no mention on Mulsim in the text (text that is practically unreadable and authorities can’t interpret).
DAMMIT YOU HAVE CAUGHT ME OUT I AM DISSOLVING IN LOGIC WHAT A WORLD.
Eek, sorry, Nigel, not Neil.
Listrade… Obama came up with the countries.
jus” sayin’
This is NOT jimmy russell: https://youtu.be/RnIWSI2tkDM
Well Hitler was renowned for keeping his campaign promises. Including promised referendums including removing Germany from, which in turn dissolved, the League of Nations. Every kept campaign promise was a slow clap towards complete and total global conflict. But there’s clearly no parallels here, it’s just a bunch of old stuff that happened.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment
On the 22nd January 2009, his second day in office, President Obama signed an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay detention centre. He said that the internment and mistreatment of innocent people was counterproductive and terrorists should stand trial in the US or the country they attacked.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13492
This order was rejected by a military judge, Army Colonel James Pohl, on a technical point saying that a pause in prosecutions while transfers were organised would impede the detainees right to speedy prosecution.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100017133
While the matter was being debated the Republican senators Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman added a provision to the appropriations bill to block any funds to move detainees.
Republicans said that military bases in America that housed prisoners would become targets, they even claimed that terror suspects would be held in city jails and among the general population.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/19585886/ns/politics/t/what-are-alternatives-guantanamo/
Provisions in the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act further impeded the movement of detainees to the US or other countries, effectively securing that Guantanamo Bay would remain open until Congress (i.e. the Republican party) voted to close it.
…
Now Obama is widely reported as “releasing terrorists” when the military has processed these detainees and cannot bring them to trial or has handed them over to other authorities which Republicans once claimed was right.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jun/18/steny-hoyer/hoyer-correct-500-guantanamo-detainees-were-releas/
Trump claims that torture works and that he will fill up Guantanamo again.
The US is slipping back into terrorism in its war against selected clients.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-muslim-ban-excludes-countries-linked-businesses-article-1.2957956
“Not a single American was killed on U.S. soil by citizens from any of those countries (listed by Trump) between 1975 and 2015, according to statistics tallied by the conservative-leaning Cato Institute.”
http://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/27/14412420/terrorism-muslims-america-islam-trump
True, it’s a tiny fraction of a very high murder rate but I don’t think the US is wrong in tackling terrorism
http://time.com/3934980/right-wing-extremists-white-terrorism-islamist-jihadi-dangerous/
Even my moderate Trump voting US friends are worried
…wow…only eight words in that sentence and I count three oxymorons…welcome to Broadsheet…
Job’s Oxo
“deluded”
vox say no more
Jushatinlike
Are you pro-Trump jusayinlike? Not attempting to have a go or anything, it’s a genuine question.
No Mildred I’m not pro Trump and thank you for asking
How come you get off so lightly…
*throws tantrum, breaks out in full snowflake melt down, with finger wagging and pointing an’ all*
Stay strong clampers..
Interesting, the White House are claiming it’s not about Muslims.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/10/muslim-ban-statement-removed-from-donald-trumps-website/
Apparently people are now trying to draw an equivalence between Obama’s visa waiver programme and Trump’s ban because Trump used the same list.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/no-barack-obama-jimmy-carter-9717520
…
The business connection is purely coincidental yet believable which shows my bias.
…
“Section 1, Purpose” of Trump’s order cites 9/11 as a reason yet the countries those terrorists were from are unaffected by this ban.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-trumps-executive-order-on-refugees-travel-restrictions/
(The ban was first proposed by Trump in response to the Orlando nightclub shooting which was committed by a US citizen born in New York.)
Fair play for showing your own bias…. it can still get ya lynched by the mob around here, but kudos from me.
Great work Deluded on the links and reading material… some of those I haven’t seen… more reading for me :)
Harrassment of innocent people through programmes that completely fail to identify terrorists is what is at issue here.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/22/nseers-arab-muslim-tracking-system-dismantled-obama
There appears to be a reason that Trump used Obama’s list of countries.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316726-giuliani-trump-asked-me-how-to-do-a-muslim-ban-legally
@Deluded
you forgot the bit in your timeline where Obama told the nation “we must look forward as opposed to backwards”regarding US war crimes and thereby granting immunity to members of the previous administration for war crimes commited, including torture..what kind of example is that is that setting for future administrations?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-justice-department-immunity-bush-cia-torturer
Forget about what Obama did or didn’t do. He’s gone. It’s history. Get on with the present and the future.
That’s true, f_lawless, I hadn’t considered it so I looked it up.
Torture was authorised so that made prosecuting agents practically impossible.
Pursuing those who authorised it was politically impossible, Bush would claim they were working in the national interest.
Obama had to let it go, he had to “pick his battles” as he rapidly ran out of political capital.
(The only reason I looked at any of this was because Trump and Trumpets keep referring to Obama. They are using half-truths and lies to claim precedent.
I happen to believe that not all politicians are as bad as each other. I think that understanding the difference is important)
Not entirely accurate though Deluded. My understanding is President Obama made unprecedented use of executive orders. Trump is merely pointing to that as precedent. Some folks did warn about this at the time as well.
Good point.
The danger of extending executive power was flagged at the time. (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2015/12/31/commentary/world-commentary/obama-limits-executive-power/)
I though a comparison could be made with JFK’s cabinet and how he reorganised the power structure, appointing his younger brother and inexperienced people (with JFK at the centre of control) while side-lining his vice-president.
In an effort to “get something done” the temptation is to tinker with the system.
(Obama’s first week in office:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/175/end-the-use-of-torture/)
Obama supported TPP because, he said, “if we don’t establish rules — norms — for how trade and commerce are conducted in the Asia-Pacific region, then China will.”
“They’re sure not worried about labor standards, or environmental standards, or human trafficking or anti-corruption measures,”
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/pushing-tpp-president-obama-argument-trump-clinton/story?id=41074632
However TPP was widely opposed for varying reasons (even though it would make little difference to US law) and was not expected to pass.
http://fortune.com/2016/08/17/obama-tpp-congress-lame-duck-trade/
Perhaps Clinton or Sanders had an alternative plan to raise standards among their trading partners to a US level (small steps, I know) while appeasing concerns listed in the Fortune link regarding automation, pharmaceutical profits and currency speculation, maybe even limiting corporate power which was a concern of many.
https://www.thenation.com/article/trump-finished-off-tpp-but-what-is-his-real-trade-agenda/
We are now depending on Republicans to apply the checks and balances but I expect a lot of tokenism and handwringing while any judges that find against them are branded as enemies of the people for doing their job.
http://www.theonion.com/article/i-promise-work-tirelessly-achieve-my-campaigns-goa-55094
I don’t know. I would not dismiss all Republicans as simians and neither would I embrace all Democrats.
I believe Trump will energise opposed factions even within his own party but it will take some meteoric event to truly rouse them from feeding at the trough of self-interest.
#Obamatheliar
#altfacts
#numpty
#Trumpty
Ba-dum-tishy !
More fake news.
2010 – Trump looked at Republican bloggers on MySpace and copied everything.
The Trumpanzies
Nice, I like :)
Niamh Horan- surely shades of orange is more in her keeping a straight face on the matter ?
M4 be like sloooowww…. Looks like a wheel came off a boat trailer…
3 fire brigades…
(I’m a passenger)
Speaking of fake news and alternative facts:
Una Mullally: Why the abortion strike will succeed
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/una-mullally-why-the-abortion-strike-will-succeed-1.2955661
Good point.
The danger of extending executive power was flagged at the time. (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2015/12/31/commentary/world-commentary/obama-limits-executive-power/)
I though a comparison could be made with JFK’s cabinet and how he reorganised the power structure, appointing his younger brother and inexperienced people (with JFK at the centre of control) while side-lining his vice-president.
In an effort to “get something done” the temptation is to tinker with the system.