one more window behind the scenes:
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/10/comey-firing-trump-russia-238192

this is very naive

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/11/deputy-ag-rosenstein-reportedly-threatened-to-quit-over-depiction-of-his-role-in-comey-dismissal.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/opinion/rod-rosenstein-comey-firing.html

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/05/rod_rosenstein_is_being_used.html

this is why special prosecutors are appointed to handle such serious investigations

rosenstein being confirmed with bipartisan approval (just like sally yates before him, mind you) and not being literally the same human being as jeff sessions does not mean his perspective is unbiased, he is literally sessions' subordinate and works for the specific department with the greatest grievance against comey

comey sucked for many reasons but there is literally zero explanation of the timing of his firing that makes sense other than him antagonizing trump with his russia investigation (whether he actually found anything or not)

I personally don't give a fuck about most of the russia collusion stuff, I think it's overblown and there are far more important issues, but I do give a fuck about trump being capricious and doing weird, authoritarian things

yates, preet bharara, and comey were all specifically targeted because they were investigating the president, this smacks very heavily of the saturday night massacre

arne duncan would destroy him one on one

RIP my homie melanchon

Maybe some day

I said it myself because if it turns out to be true, I can live with it

in other news I think fios is finally coming to my neighborhood, I'm hyped to maybe get good internet soon

for the record I agree

I remember getting shit for insulting froyo's incredibly weak i58 lineup because "ur not a 2-time world champion lul"

yo so I was trying to put together a dope team on the dl but it doesn't seem likely, most of the people I wanted are not available. therefore im just testing the waters

that said, I may have reached the critical mass where the level of team I believe I should be playing on is too much better than any offers I can actually hope to get, so I'm not sure if I will play next season

the two biggest criticisms of me are prolly a) my personality and b) people thinking im old af so I must have plateaued

I cant argue with the former, I won't be for everyone personality wise, but I dont think the latter is true at all, I do think I improved a lot at the mechanical side of solly (ie jumps) towards the end of this season

demo is still prolly my better class dm wise but I can play both it and pocket fairly comfortably

gimme a chance (or dont ur call)

amazing ultiduo medic

i think i played on a 6v6 team with him once too, not sure though

that sort of thinking will lead to many more years of disappointment

it sorta makes sense, trading down is much better than trading up and theyre gonna be bad for a long time so a pick next year is fine

however if houston is really good this season that pick wont be too hot

still, compared to chi its nothing

lmao

/thread

https://twitter.com/MicahAdams13/status/857076340360708101

that would be the classical definition of libertarianism, yes. but it's not the way this test is using it when they say "libertarian socialist". by that they really mean "civil libertarian socialist".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertarianism

civil libertarianism is one facet of classical libertarianism. the other half is economic libertarianism.

I know this seems like a dumb battle of semantics but the reason I'm engaging in it is because that other dude was trying to use the unclear language to argue that free markets and other forms of liberty are inexorably tied to one another. I think this is complete bullshit; there are social democratic societies that are more free than authoritarian regimes with free markets (Pinochet's Chile for instance).

socialism is the opposite of economic libertarianism

but economic libertarians do not possess sole authority over what constitutes freedom and liberty

some people happen to believe that rich people are a lot more "free" than poor people because they have many more life options available to them and are not constrained by circumstance, and that poor people are deprived of certain basic rights, which we call positive rights

someone can be a civil libertarian and still feel this way

you're about 150 years too late on this train buddy, positive rights are ingrained in international law and the constitutions of most countries

if you think you're describing a utopian vision of how things aught to be then you might want to put down atlas shrugged and take a good hard look at yourself

rofl this might be the most ludicrous thing ive ever seen

because the turn of the 20th century was well known for poor people having long life expectancy and preventative care for infectious diseases right? that's why it was called the gilded age? because every working class person had gold-level health care plans?