Donald Trump and US politics

The military exists to defend your country and kill your enemies, not to cater to leftist social experiments and provide welfare to "sexual minorities". Good move from Trump. This liberal insanity where every gov institution and even private businesses have to bow down to cry-bullies and leftist dogma, has to end.

E:
Transgenders apparently have a 40%+ suicide rate. You don't want unstable people to play with weapons.

"

morbo wrote:

The military exists to defend your country and kill your enemies, not to cater to leftist social experiments and provide welfare to "sexual minorities". Good move from Trump. This liberal insanity where every gov institution and even private businesses have to bow down to cry-bullies and leftist dogma, has to end.

E:
Transgenders apparently have a 40%+ suicide rate. You don't want unstable people to play with weapons.

While I don't disagree with this, would you say that there should be gun control form transgenders based on that suicide rate/mental instability?

"

faerwin wrote:

While I don't disagree with this, would you say that there should be gun control form transgenders based on that suicide rate/mental instability?

People with mental health issues should not be able to buy guns, yes, or the scope should be very limited. I'm for a gun control that would be somewhere in between the very liberal US system and the very limited EU system.

But I'm not qualified to say if transgenderism is a "mental issue". I can only interpret the reported statistics on suicide rates, which seems to be very high.

And in general, the military should not cater to anyone that requires "special needs or special accomodation".

"

morbo wrote:

The military exists to defend your country and kill your enemies, not to cater to leftist social experiments and provide welfare to "sexual minorities". Good move from Trump. This liberal insanity where every gov institution and even private businesses have to bow down to cry-bullies and leftist dogma, has to end.

E:
Transgenders apparently have a 40%+ suicide rate. You don't want unstable people to play with weapons.

it's not really a question of allowing people into the military to provide welfare - it's about not shutting people out of the military without any good reason.

It's not about the money! If that orange-haired imbecile puppet cared about the money, he'd not have spent as much time in mar-a-largo. It's about getting love from his voters and doing something to get that love. He is an attention-whore, and that's it.

When you virtue signal on Facebook but don't realize you're actually validating Trump's decision.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

This is where Trump's abuse of twitter to shift the narrative falls apart: its all the same thing. The one tactic, over and again. And that is shifting the narrative itself, erratically, brazenly. The misdirect of "I'll keep you in suspense", to quote him on the matter of whether or not he'd accept defeat should Clinton have won.

Shame on those biting the hook, but that's news I guess. Fools.

Right now only one thing is true: anything that might seem beyond the pale, that might appeal as the One Line He Should Not Have Crossed, is not. Atrocity is normalised gradually, but he's nowhere near smart enough or I believe genuinely malicious enough to pull that off. He's a showman and a con artist, and all he's doing is feeding sensationalist shit to the idiot masses day after day. It should be simply dismissed as the impotent story-twisting that it is. He's all front, all mask, all bluster. Always was, always will be.

Oh well. There's one other thing I'd say is true right now. Teflon might be extremely non-stick but it's not bulletproof. One can hope. *Trumpshrug*

Lets just wait for Mueller to indict Trump. Then america probably gets Pence until 2020. Trump supporters are not Pence supporters.

"

ImmaPokemon wrote:

Lets just wait for Mueller to indict Trump.

"

Donnerdrummel wrote:

it's not really a question of allowing people into the military to provide welfare - it's about not shutting people out of the military without any good reason.

See the "Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders" section of the following:

http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/disqualifiers-medical-conditions.html

Someone requiring a once daily tablet for hypothyroidism is disqualified. The ongoing hormone treatment after reassignment surgery has far more potential impact than something like levothyroxine to boost thyroid function. It is a more complex regimen, and some of the medications themselves require more monitoring.

http://transhealth.ucsf.edu/trans?page=guidelines-feminizing-therapy

While these considerations certainly don't necessitate disqualification, they are certainly more impactful than low thyroid, having braces, an extra finger, heavy sweating or others which all disqualify people from applying to the US Military.

In a non-military setting, those would all be ADA violations. I may have missed it, but I don't recall any public outcry when disabled people (those with an extra-finger, psoriasis or current use of braces) were denied entry into the US military.

Are disabled people somehow less human to the people currently protesting the recent decision, or is it more likely that the public wasn't aware of the stringent nature of the application process?

I'm not saying Trump made the right decision here, but only seeing the decision through the lens of discrimination is completely faulty. The military does things differently for usually valid reasons. Those reasons may seem inscrutable to people who have no idea what goes on in combat, or the supporting roles of such. For instance, most average people and companies aren't developing solutions for a post-nuclear attack. The internet is the direct child of such an effort by the Department of Defense's effort to establish a robust communication system that could survive a nuclear attack. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET

The GPS system people use for navigation? Also the result of military efforts. And that device that rules so many people's lives nowadays?



What is a matter of "convenience" and good manners for the average person can be a matter of life and death in the combat zone. Pretending that doesn't matter is like pretending the Earth is flat.

"

Donnerdrummel wrote:

it's not really a question of allowing people into the military to provide welfare - it's about not shutting people out of the military without any good reason.

Not having to cater to a specific sexuality group of confused people and adding extra expense, is a good enough reason. Suicide risk is another.

People enter the military to perform specific jobs for the government. Jobs that have absolutely nothing to do with sexuality and gender. The military shouldn't even officially recognize any form of "LGBT" classification of its members. If you meet the requirements and are able to perform the tasks required, then ok, no one needs to know about your sexuality or gender issues.

If, otoh, the military has to provide special accommodations for the "issues" you have with yourself, then this is an unneeded additional cost on the taxpayers. Because there is maybe 0.1% of trans-genders that would want to enter into the military, liberals would have you add a whole bureaucratic process for it (cause all those useless gender studies majors cant find jobs outside of governmental bureaucracy). Fvk that, just bring in classic 'cis scum' males - there is no shortage of those. And save on all the sensitivity training courses.

Soldiers should spend time learning how to dispose of the enemy, not about how to deal with a trans-binary multiracial non-gender-specific 'pronouns-yet-undefined' affirmative action recruits and their hurt feelings.

E:
Eh, nvm me, just read DalaiLama on the previous page

"

ImmaPokemon wrote:

Lets just wait for Mueller to indict Trump. Then america probably gets Pence until 2020. Trump supporters are not Pence supporters.

That truck just made a big U-Turn yesterday in Congress with the markup process of H.R. 391 and H. Res. 446. Robert Mueller's appointment is now on track to be scrutinized by the judiciary committee as well as an investigation of Loretta Lynch, James Comey, Hillary Clinton, Cheryl Mills, Bill Clinton, and others such as Susan Rice (mentioned by name in the video, but not listed in the first four pages)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUQUTPAS8b0&t=25167s

(Around 7 hours in, is where it starts happening)

The big problem for the left, is that once the FBI starts accessing Imran Awan's hard drives, they will have access to a lot of data on congressional democrats that the Awan brothers weren't supposed to be accessing (but were collecting). People that play dirty like to collect dirt for potential blackmail later on.

I expect it to take a few weeks to gain steam, but when it does, the most dangerous swamp creatures will be dealt with through legal channels. Once DC is clear of those, the next step (cleaning out the deep state swamp rats) will begin, and then the rest of the swamp can be drained.