Random Politics & Religion #06

I would bet serious money that you get his policy stances only from heavily biased sources that have no interest in fair coverage.

I would bet serious money that you get his policy stances only from heavily biased sources that have no interest in fair coverage.

I would bet serious money that you get his policy stances only from heavily biased sources that have no interest in fair coverage.

Trump's policies are up on his website. Front and center is the wall plan.

The more I dig trying to find out what his policies actually are, the more contradictions and gaps I run into. I can't find a coherent set of policies he's ever put forth, let alone ones he hasn't revoked within hours

second amendment isn't even this issue anymore. there are seriously an incalculable number of guns just floating around the country. there's no way we're going to get rid of it. i honestly wish i had a good solution to this. i think we have to change the way people think and try to make a country where people don't have the desire to commit acts like this tragedy. that's a little idealistic, and the rare crazy will still get through. however, i still think it's more likely than getting grandpa crazies gun stock hidden in the shed behind his house.

you never dug...quit lying!

there's nothing in the rules that say our policies have to be coherent!....you're making that up!!

make america great
build a huge wall
negotiate better deals

the end

I have, actually. I tend to like to know what presidential nominees propose to do.

So what's big liberal idea on gun control?

The idea that law-abiding Americans should learn to do without “assault weapons” in the interest of limiting terrorists’ access to them too?

if we apply that to the second amendment, what would limit them from doing it to the first?

Serious question.

I don't believe you! Show us your time sheets!

let's get real...MAYBE you went to his website or read a couple articles on the internet ...

but you never DUG in the tradition journalistic sense of deep research spending hours in a research library and interviewing people close to trump to unveil his true motives.

so stop lying and exaggerating.

So what's big liberal idea on gun control?

The idea that law-abiding Americans should learn to do without “assault weapons” in the interest of limiting terrorists’ access to them too?

if we apply that to the second amendment, what would limit them from doing it to the first?

Serious question.

(Newser) – When Pope Francis first met with the newly elected president of his native Argentina in February, the Buenos Aires Herald termed their 22 minutes together as "frosty." Relations don't seem to have improved much since, with the Guardian reporting that a donation President Mauricio Macri made to an educational foundation promoted by the pope—an organization featuring ambassadors like George Clooney, Salma Hayek, and Richard Gere —was turned down, with a fairly icy postscript. Macri earlier this month donated 16,666,000 pesos, or nearly $1.2 million, to Scholas Occurentes; Francis reportedly instructed the charity's branch in Argentina to give it back, with the Guardian reporting that the pope was perturbed at the donation being painted by the media as proof of warming relations between the two.

The Herald reports that Francis instructed Scholas' directors to return the money, writing in a letter, "the Argentine government needs to address so many needs you shouldn’t be demanding a single penny from it." And so last Thursday they did, specifying that in returning it they were "taking into account that some may try to distort this gesture ... with the aim of creating confusion and sowing division among Argentines." The Guardian has one more detail from Francis' letter, by way of local media. It reports Francis added in a postscript to the directors, "I don't like the 666." Macri and Francis' relationship stretches back to a time when one was Buenos Aires' mayor, the other its archbishop. The Herald notes relations began to deteriorate in 2009 when Macri declined to appeal a court ruling that allowed a gay couple to marry in the city.

I rather enjoyed the long stretch in P&R where we didn't discuss religion much. Not because I have a problem discussing the topic, but rather because:

1. Pretty much everyone is set on their stance to such a degree that discussion is meaningless (even more so than most P&R topics).
2. Practically nobody has a clue what they're talking about anyway.