But in this case, we are talking about a friend you have been privately trying to change for a long time and he just refuses to listen. So he goes ahead and does some new thing you’ve repeatedly said is bad for him and everyone around him, and you get fed up and say, “I’m not going to publicly defend this shit anymore.”

We haven’t been privately trying to change them, the Obama Admin has made it very public. From the beginning with their call for a settlement freeze in 2009 this has been in the open with Obama saying “I’m not going to publicly defend this shit anymore.” At least before it was an argument kept between the two. Obama has now sided with those that seek to gang up and internationalize it instead of keeping it bilateral and has done so in such a way as to go back on his prior promises.

Netanyahu bypassed Obama and the State Department and gave a speech directly to Congress to denounce a treaty we were negotiating to try to keep one of Israel’s biggest rivals from becoming a nuclear power. I’m not sure I care much about Obama abandoning a promise from his first campaign, even if he really did promise to maintain something that didn’t exist and was against international law (i.e. Israeli settlement of East Jerusalem).

Oh he really did:

Yep Netanyahu did that and Obama set up an organization that would aid efforts to defeat Netanyahu. All more to my point that this was already a public disagreement, but was at least kept to the two parties.

Sure, right up until he said this:

I don’t think this conversation is going to be productive

Trump supporters don’t care about facts.

The cover of Politico magazine has this optimistic story.

Bill Perry Is Terrified. Why Aren’t You?
How an 89-year-old cold warrior became America’s nuclear conscience.

At this naked moment in the American experiment, when many people perceive civilization on the verge of blowing up in some metaphorical sense, there is an elderly man in California hoping to seize your attention about another possibility.

It is that civilization is on the verge of blowing up in a non-metaphorical sense.

William J. Perry is 89 now, at the tail end of one of his generation’s most illustrious careers in national security. By all rights, the former U.S. secretary of Defense, a trained mathematician who served or advised nearly every administration since Eisenhower, should be filling out the remainder of his years in quiet reflection on his achievements. Instead, he has set out on an urgent pilgrimage.

Bill Perry has become, he says with a rueful smile, “a prophet of doom.”

His life’s work, most of it highly classified, was nuclear weapons—how to maximize the fearsome deterrent power of the U.S. arsenal, how to minimize the possibility that the old Soviet arsenal would obliterate the United States and much of the planet along the way. Perry played a supporting role in the Cuban Missile Crisis, during which he went back to his Washington hotel room each night, fearing he had only hours left to live. He later founded his own successful defense firm, helped revolutionize the American way of high-tech war, and honed his diplomatic skills seeking common ground on security issues with the Soviets and Chinese—all culminating as head of the Pentagon in the early years after the end of the Cold War.

Nuclear bombs are an area of expertise Perry had assumed would be largely obsolete by now, seven decades after Hiroshima, a quarter-century after the fall of the Soviet Union, and in the flickering light of his own life. Instead, nukes are suddenly—insanely, by Perry’s estimate—once again a contemporary nightmare, and an emphatically ascendant one. At the dawn of 2017, there is a Russian president making bellicose boasts about his modernized arsenal. There is an American president-elect who breezily free-associates on Twitter about starting a new nuclear arms race. Decades of cooperation between the two nations on arms control is nearly at a standstill. And, unlike the original Cold War, this time there is a world of busy fanatics excited by the prospect of a planet with more bombs—people who have already demonstrated the desire to slaughter many thousands of people in an instant, and are zealously pursuing ever more deadly means to do so.

And there’s one other difference from the Cold War: Americans no longer think about the threat every day.

It is a long, but very interesting article. There is remarkable consistency virtually all the wise old men of the foreign policy and defense establishment have expressed grave (pun intended) concerns on Trump’s foreign policy. Most of them have worked for both Democratic and Republican administrations alike, and almost to a man or woman they are calm, serious people not prone to panic.

I think the US is pretty strong and resilient country and we can survive most of the crap that Trump is likely to do. The huuge exception is a nuclear bomb(s) going off in the country.

and just how high is the risk? the answer of course is ultimately unknowable. Perry’s point, though, is that it’s a hell of a lot higher than you think.
Perry invites his listeners to consider all the various scenarios that might lead to a nuclear event. “Mathematically speaking, you add those all together in one year it is still just a possibility, not a probability,” he reckons. “But then you go out ten, twenty years and each time this possibility repeats itself, and then it starts to become a probability. How much time we have to get those possibility numbers lower, I don’t know. But sooner or later the odds are going to get us, I am afraid.”

Scuzz. Trust the Farce.

What. The. Fuck. Can we somehow tie Kentucky off with a rubber band and have it drop unnoticed off the U.S. weeks later, leaving only a small almost imperceptible scar where it once festered? I guess for the Optimism part, all these vampires will someday be dead and the world will be better for it.

“it does not contain exceptions for cases of rape or incest.”

If I where a women, I would make sure speed limited in areas with childrens (anywhere in a range of 5km of a school) is limited to 4mph.

Imagine all the childrens lives saved that way.

Hell, why stop there?

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Mississippi is trying to outlaw masturbation. Apparently since each sperm is a potential life, you can be charged with tens of millions of counts of involuntary manslaughter if you’re caught.

I’m not certain if you are being sincere, or sarcastic, but I don’t want to google that while at work.

2016 was when parody and reality became indistinguishable. 2017 is when parody becomes the reality.

I’m joking, but what’s sad is how believable it is. If it were posted on a fake news site, it would spread like wildfire.

Well considering that several states had until recently (unenforced) anti sodomy laws, or laws against non procreative sex, it is entirely plausible.

The GOP: keep the government from controlling the excesses and corruptions of corporations, but make sure the government controls what other people do in their bedrooms.

Until recently? I thought most still had these.

They may very well, I didn’t search the current state of those laws, so hedged. I would be unsurprised if Mississippi or Alabama still had them on the books, just never actually prosecuted for. Hell I wouldn’t even be shocked to find they still try and use them, except I’d imagine that doing so would get a quick slap from the ACLU.

Is it bad that I can’t even keep straight which terrible pick Trump is appointing to what position?

It’s not a south thing. Oregon still has them too although they’re never used for anything but an additional charge in non-consensual acts and with cases of children. A lot of states have these, and they function the same way. To my knowledge, these laws haven’t recently changed.

Honestly, Kushner doesn’t even register on the radar of scum when put up against Trump’s other picks. But this may be because I don’t know much about him.

He’s no Bannon, but he’s not a heart-warming Presidential adviser pick either.