SecondJon @SecondJon@social.cleverlibre.org

@peterdrake
I heard yesterday that most (if not all) Western European countries have no birthright citizenship. Is that accurate? (If that's accurate, who knew that becoming more like European countries was so terrible. Or maybe the hyperbole and hysteria is a bit much. )

They caught him.

Utah man charged for sending toxic letters to Trump, other admin officials - CNNPolitics

https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/10/18/politics/utah-ricin-letters-william-clyde-allen/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fflagandcross.com%2Fman-charged-for-sending-ricin-to-trump-mattis-media-ignores%2F

@NPR
Wow. Great news that ISIS was routed last year. I hadn't heard it or had forgotten. The residents " left to pick up the pieces" or residents "free from US nation building to rebuild"?

I wonder what the right approach is, I'm guessing any admin has/will face criticism however the aftermath is handled after such a victory.

#politics

@emerican@mastodon.social
I'm not anti authority. I'm pro consistency. In other threads seeking objectivity and consistency is being called 'spin' which is unfortunate.

@hashtaggrammar
Wow. That's really accusatory. No way to #reachacross.

Earlier this month, before the suspicious packages sent to democrats, suspicious packages were sent to Republicans, some testing positive for ricin, one grain of which is lethal and has no known antidote.

1. The media asserted that Trump's rhetoric and his alone was the cause of the suspicious packages sent to democrats. Certainly we can find media giving equal blame to his opponents rhetoric from earlier this month for the packages sent to republicans.

2. Media dubbed the second unknown mailer the MAGA bomber, certainly they must have dubbed the first three Love Trumps Hate bomber.

3. CNN ran the ticker blaming Trump as news was just breaking about the second mailer, they must have run the ticker blaming democrats for the first.

Or none of the above is true and media bias seems glaring.

Source : Suspicious letters addressed to Trump, Ted Cruz office, Pentagon

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ricin-suspected-least-2-envelopes-sent-pentagon-mail-center-n915891

Democrats are to blame for the packages sent to Republicans in equal amount to the blame resting on Republicans for packages sent to democrats.

Maybe this stuff isn't restricted to one side, but we just assume it is because the media gets viewership by polarizing so they present it that way. (Or media outlets are more just active as an arm of a political party and we'd do well to acknowledge that.)

Maybe we can rise above the constant us VS them mentality and get away from the one sided outrage for a minute to think clearly.

#uspol

Is it true that the deadly poison ricin (can be deadly on skin contact) was sent to President Trump, Republican Senator Ted Cruz, Defense Secretary James Mattis, and the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral John Richardson earlier this month?

Not to make light of the current strange news headlines. But wouldn't it be fair to consider our politicians suspicious packages?

Who really knows what's inside them? what makes them tick, if they tick at all? Are they active or inert, and which is preferable?

Often no one wants to claim responsibility for sending them to Washington and we all wonder what kind of person would have sent them. They're constantly taking over news headlines , and no one knows if or when they'll implode or explode or just stay around forever.

@Surasanji
Agreed. I didn't mean to say the packages were a good or harmless thing overall, I should have been more precise.

But I still wonder who would be motivated. If someone who likes Trump, then they're an idiot, as it inevitable turns media stories against Trump. If someone on the left seeking the news pre election, then we have a different problem.

I don't know that anyone knows who is behind it or their motivation, I'm curious. Wouldn't put it past whoever leaked Ford's info for political purposes, but we don't know who that was either.

Fewer Sexual Partners Before Marriage Yield Greater Happiness in Marriage: Study

New research reveals that marriages are quantifiably happier if the couple had fewer sexual partners prior to their wedding day.

https://www.christianpost.com/news/fewer-sexual-partners-before-marriage-yield-greater-happiness-marriage-study-228128/

Heard this morning that the packages were inert...not explosive. So could possibly be motivated to send scary but harmless packages that could only result in negative media for Trump 2 weeks before election day?

Strange.

@peterdrake
A different topic that you touched on is whether one can separate the person from the policy. You said the GOP seems uncomfortable with Trump, but they all vote together.

If you're right, then everyone is uncomfortable with Trump. But what's the connection to how they vote? If you're uncomfortable with a person do you have to oppose their policy ideas?

I think that's a mistake that both the left and right share. On the right Trump supporters I know like the policies so they believe he must be a great guy. On the left, they see him as very much not a great guy, so how dare anyone vote for the policies of this unlikable person.

What if we voted based on policy ideas, rather than personality? I don't like the manta of Party over Person, but Policy over Person makes more sense.

If I need a medical specialist, but the best guy for the job is someone I'd never get along with, would I go with someone else? I think I'd try to get the best for the job and not try to arrange a vacation together.

If it's reasonable to separate person from policy, maybe the conversation could shift toward ideas rather than personality. Or we could at least separate them into two conversations and then it's not a mystery why, for example, the party that always runs in tax cuts will vote for tax cuts even if they're uncomfortable with the person in the white house.

@peterdrake
Right, I'm free to distance myself from any politician. The bumper sticker I bought that election was "Giant Meteor 2016."

I don't get to vote for individuals behavior, so that's why I'm talking about people in actual leadership positions.

My take is that commanding your political followers away from civility toward violence is bad, whether it's coming from the single person on the right's leadership or the many voices on the left's leadership.

It's no way to #reachacross.

When Trump supporters are okay with his infidelity but not Clinton's (I know Clinton did this while President, but a lot of Trump supporters seemed ok with it even back in the primary season). Our when the left has a new found puritan morality and objects to Trump's lack of commitment to traditional marriage but were okay with Clinton.

Or those who are okay with Trump's offer of amnesty last year but rejected the same from Obama, or those who didn't call Obama a bigot for his hard line stance against illegal immigration.

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/23/donald-trump-uses-obama-clip-troll-democrats-illeg/

#uspol #leftism #right

@peterdrake
I don't think I actually hold Bernie Sanders responsible for his supports trying to assassinate his political opponents, but I do see the right always rejecting and distancing themselves from the self professed or otherwise identified "right wing" violent people. I don't see the same from the left.