The Trump Presidency

Discussion in 'Politics' started by joepistole, Jan 17, 2017.

  1. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    So far, you've only made up nonsense about what you think his proposal says or means. I haven't seen you post a single thing supporting your silly claims.
    Oo, oo, oo!
    So while no one is talking about forcing anyone to carry a gun or making schools pay for it, what, you want to mandate EMT training at the school's expense?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,906
    You appear to be confused about the role of this punctuation mark - "?". Its role is to mark interrogatives, not counterfactuals.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    Why would I afford you a courtesy you don't afford anyone else?
    You assume schools would bear the expense and people would be tasked to go on the offensive, instead of just self-defense.
    So why shouldn't I assume you think the same of EMT training for teachers? Double standard?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,906
    That the money and manhours would be subtracted from money and manhours otherwise available to schools for other purposes is a matter of arithmetic.
    "Tasked to go on the offensive" ?
    I think mandatory EMT training for teachers should task them to go on the offensive?
    Your confusion spreads - try not typing trollstuff at all, with or without the question mark (it seems to lodge in your mind as if from the real world).

    Trump's proposal is the arming and training of 20% of the nation's teachers, training adequate to prepare them for taking on an active school shooter while armed with a handgun, while otherwise not endangering their classrooms full of teenagers with their own weapons.
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2018
  8. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,906
    Republicanism - the gift that keeps on giving:
    http://thehill.com/regulation/energ...rganization-will-end-science-research-program
    It's been three years since anyone in Flint, Michigan, could safely drink tap water. Third grade reading scores in the local schools - where three years ago the kids were drinking from the water fountains, of course - have dropped substantially.
     
  9. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,152
  10. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    When every other voluntary gun carrier volunteers their own time and pays for it themselves?
    I still don't know what you think that means, but it doesn't sound like regular concealed carry training.
    I never said anything about EMT going on the offensive. EMT don't do that, but they do rush into dangerous situations to save lives.
    A little simple reasoning would save you some confusion.
    So you don't think schools would pay for gun or EMT training? I wouldn't have to guess so much if you just answered.
    And? Where does that say schools will pay for it?
    Maybe we need better/more mental health screenings for teachers then.
     
  11. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,906
    Of course.
    Assuming that for teachers - famously overworked and underpaid - as for the rest of us, alternatives exclude.
    It isn't. It better not be, anyway.
    Uh, yeah, you did. Directly. "Tasked" to do so, was the "same thing" you pointed at.
    In what one calls, in economics, cost accounting.
    Another cost.
    They're adding up.
     
  12. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    Again, 100% voluntary. If they can't or don't want to afford the time or money, no one has to.
    No one has proposed anything else.
    I guess you don't understand the comparable danger for an EMT.
    Voluntary gun carriers pay for their own training.
    So you don't mind teachers illegally bringing guns to school?
    Just as long as they never do so legally, where we know they have permits and training?
     
  13. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,906
    So? Alternatives exclude.
    So effectively untrained, then, despite incurring costs.
    More training cost. Priorities. Noted.
    They're teachers. Alternatives exclude. Cost accounting.
    Just counting the beans, and noting the priorities.

    I don't think schools in poorer districts can afford this - and if they could, it would be a waste of valuable resources in a critical situations.
     
  14. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    Why do you need an alternative to voluntary concealed carry?
    Again, trained and at the volunteer's cost (aside from sheriff who provide it to teachers for free).
    Again, only you are demanding such extreme training.
    No alternative needed, because it's voluntary.
    Again, no one (except you) has demanded schools pay for anything. Just an ongoing straw man.
     
  15. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,906
    ? It's a property of the real world, not a "need".
    It's possible the sheriff's contribution, even though it comes from the same property tax base, would not reduce the resources available to the school otherwise. The teachers's would, of course.
    Alternatives exclude. Basic principle. Often recorded as "opportunity cost".
    I'm just adding up costs. Whether they result from demands or not I don't care.
     
  16. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    Context parser failed.
    Again, no one has proposed anything that would cost the taxpayers.
    Parser failed. Word salad detected.
    How are the costs to volunteer teachers any different from the costs to any other volunteer conceal carrier?
     
  17. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,906
    Hire somebody to explain the hard stuff - maybe the local babysitter, or the paperboy.
    The schools, not the taxpayers.
    Are you playing stupid on purpose?
    Probably won't be. Irrelevant.
    If there is going to be adequate training, of course, as promised by Trump, that would be very much more expensive - but that's unlikely.

    Meanwhile, on topic, Jared Kushner has been a common topic of discussion since his security clearance problems surfaced in public - and we find him targeted by Saudis and Mexicans and so forth because of his inexperience and business interests in part, but also because of his financial troubles.

    This has not made the US headlines, amid all the sturm und drang of Trump, but Kushner's over a barrel financially with his bad real estate deals, and everybody except the US public and our representatives in Congress knows it. (That's not a good situation for someone with access to valuable classified information. It's dangerous. Now he's supposed to be cut off - but he's still around, hanging out with his father-in-law in the White House. And you know that guy isn't reading his daily briefing by himself - somebody has to do that for him - and has no real conception of security anyway.

    So an interesting question arises: can Trump be impeached for careless security violations? If he hands classified materials to Jared, is that enough?

    Mind, the current watchdogs overseeing the Trump family's financial dealings are running at this level of alertness and diligent attention: https://www.usnews.com/opinion/thom...nald-trumps-money-in-the-russia-investigation
    Conaway honed his keen sense of appropriate Presidential family finances with five years as CFO of W's Arbusto oil company, right when W's daddy was ex-Cia chief and Vice President under a senile President, and Arbusto was having its financial woes salved by large investments from Saudi princes - W's daddy taking the US to war against Saudi princelings's enemy Saddam was still a couple of years away.

    In case anyone thought la familia Trump was a new thing in the Republican Party.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2018
  18. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,152
    What makes you think he was mentally ill?
     
  19. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    You can't even manage to clarify your own word salad.
    You mentioned property taxes several times, so I assume you know how schools are funded.
    But I'll pander to your feigned ignorance:
    Again, no one has proposed anything that would cost the taxpayers schools.
    You keep making assumptions no one has proposed. It's a straw man.
    Kushner's clearance has been suspended because the FBI cannot clear someone under investigation, by Mueller in this case. His clearance hasn't been outright revoked.

    On the other hand, Ben Rhodes, Obama's deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, clearance was revoked by the FBI (the only one out of 187 Obama officials). He helped write the Iran deal and had clearance because the president can issue individual waivers, as well as declassify anything he likes.

    IOW, Kushner's clearance means nothing. Trump can issue a waiver, just like Obama did with Rhodes.
     
  20. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    He was already breaking the law by carrying in a school and it sounded like he was irrationally agitated.
     
  21. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,152
    How many mass shooters were actually mentally ill?
     
  22. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    Likely most, if not all.
     
  23. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,152
    I doubt it. Violence is not abnormal.
     

Share This Page