Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[degrub]

Yeah, "tricky Dickie" soured us on politicians. And social media provided the tool set for mass propaganda and easier manipulation.

[Robert Roaldi]

When the SpaceX rocket blew up the other day, I saw online some comments about how it night have been because of his DEI staff. Cruel but funny.

The explosion caused a lot of commercial flight disruption and delays, I wonder if they’re all going to sue SpaceX. You can’t just go round exploding rocket ships, can you?

Seems like Musk may be trying to move his Starlink in place of Verizon at FAA, although they’re denying it. I wondered if it is part of a normal redesign there, but in that case there would have been RFPs sent out to bidders, shouldn’t there? Musk’s presence would already be a conflict of interest even in that case. But if the whole thing turns out to be his idea to begin with, that’s spectacular corruption. Banana republic time. Mafia Dons would wet their pants to be able to get away with that.

The whole thing is just so glaringly public that it can't be what it looks like. The denials suggest that they're only trying out some Starlink equipment. We'll see what that means. But I did see a report that some guy from Starlink warned FAA staffers not to obstruct this in any way or they would be reported to Musk with dire consequences. At the very least, that's inappropriate I would think. You can't have private companies moving into public offices telling people what to do, can you? I mean, who does that?

Found this link about it from Reuters https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/faa-says-agency-needs-multiple-technologies-us-air-traffic-system-2025-03-05/. There are many stories online about it. I guess true believers view this as another selfless act on Musk's part to improve air safety in the USA. He must be a generous guy.

[Rob C]

There’s the theory in the local bar that Trump’s crazy ways are actually quite brilliant: create uncertainty with those with whom you interact, and then when they are terminally confused, offer them an easy way out that suits the Trumpian plan. Seems he will get his earths from the Ukraine after all.

I noticed some days ago, in the news, that Mrs T looked shell-shocked, quite removed from wherever she was. Poor woman.

[digitaldog]

There’s the theory in the local bar that Trump’s crazy ways are actually quite brilliant.

This is the thinking those under the influence of alcohol would come up with. 

[Robert Roaldi]

There’s the theory in the local bar that Trump’s crazy ways are actually quite brilliant: create uncertainty with those with whom you interact, and then when they are terminally confused, offer them an easy way out that suits the Trumpian plan. Seems he will get his earths from the Ukraine after all.

I noticed some days ago, in the news, that Mrs T looked shell-shocked, quite removed from wherever she was. Poor woman.

From all reports Trump seems to be pretty blasé about the recession he's plunging his country into. I guess he expects to weather it well. I think that Trump should launch a Recession Meme Coin. Buy a piece of history, with all proceeds remaining with the Trump family so that they can more comfortably muddle through the bad times ahead. Then, when it's all over and everything is Great again, well, people will 'Have fun!', as he's lately fond of saying.

There might be some mighty real estate bargains out there soon as people abandon their unaffordable homes. But hey, that's the risk they took. That's the free market, what could be more fair.

I also saw that Bernie Sanders is giving speeches to packed houses, some in red states, and that those events are not being covered by what the podcaster referred to as "corporate media".

I saw an online report about how much Trump's golf weekends are costing the taxpayer. The security entourage required is very large and expensive. Just one example is that a military transport plane follows Air Force One around carrying all the vehicles that are needed for ground transport. I wonder if DOGE will investigate that.

Musk's troubles at Tesla are continuing, or so it appears from the online reports. They say that both the stock price and sales are down. Are they offering rebates or sales deals on the cars? Maybe a tent sale? Free Scotchguarding? Imagine how you'd feel if you worked at Tesla, was proud of the cars you made, and it all started to disintegrate through no fault of your own. I wonder if Musk will use any of his money to help out those Tesla employees who might end up with ruined careers if this continues. How's that Mars project going?

[Robert Roaldi]

Some things I cannot just pass by. Trump says that people illegally boycotting Tesla, https://www.thedailypoliticususa.com/p/oligarchy-trump-says-people-are-illegally.

Maybe he can sue everyone that doesn't buy a Tesla. Or maybe he can impose a surcharge on anyone who buys another car brand. Maybe he can declare Tesla to be the "Official Car of the USA". Maybe he can declare higher speed limits for Teslas, Tesla-only parking spots, or maybe he can allow them to go through red lights. There's no end of possible perks.

[Robert Roaldi]

You can't make this stuff up. Trump and Musk were hawking cars on TV today https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzMzYfB52_c.

I wanted Musk so much to say that they'd throw in undercoating for free if you bought one before midnight!

[degrub]

and that's not all. Call now and get a second one absolutely free !.

[Rob C]

and that's not all. Call now and get a second one absolutely free !.

If you accept the second one, you agree to house a third one free of charge.

Actually, if you buy up all the electricity companies, free cars makes a kind of sense.

[kers]

Some things I cannot just pass by. Trump says that people illegally boycotting Tesla, https://www.thedailypoliticususa.com/p/oligarchy-trump-says-people-are-illegally.

Maybe he can sue everyone that doesn't buy a Tesla. Or maybe he can impose a surcharge on anyone who buys another car brand. Maybe he can declare Tesla to be the "Official Car of the USA". Maybe he can declare higher speed limits for Teslas, Tesla-only parking spots, or maybe he can allow them to go through red lights. There's no end of possible perks.

Since Trump is all about oil amndputs a stop on all development in electrical cars and loadstations (woke!) , i never really understood Musk's support for Trump, nor Trump's new support for Tesla.

[Rob C]

Since Trump is all about oil amndputs a stop on all development in electrical cars and loadstations (woke!) , i never really understood Musk's support for Trump, nor Trump's new support for Tesla.

Well, Musk has an eye on the next step: assuming the presidency.

As for Mr T, either he is playing Mr M for a fool, just using him as a convenient fiscal muscle, or he has Tesla in his portfolio too. It would make sense (if he can actually afford the investment), to cover as many investment bases as possible - some will grow and others fail, but with critical mass on his side, he should be okay either way. It's only widows and orphans who should stay far from the brokers.

It could be entirely possible that, for the very rich, the presidency is nothing more than just a highly visible status symbol, theirs to enjoy until they no longer do. In any case, it’s key to insider knowledge, and if a president can now excuse and forgive himself for any abuses whilst in office, nothing could be more helpful to the family fortunes. New Age ethics, then.

[Robert Roaldi]

Since Trump is all about oil amndputs a stop on all development in electrical cars and loadstations (woke!) , i never really understood Musk's support for Trump, nor Trump's new support for Tesla.

The trade war with China is similarly suspicious. Musk builds there, Apple builds there, Walmart gets almost everything in their stores from there, etc., so what gives? Are the US and China really in conflict.

Anyway, in the wider game theory world of "planet dominance", if Trump, Musk and Vance are the best the USA can come up with, China can probably rest easy. They can't even manage a civil service re-organization without throwing their own country into massive turmoil.

[Frans Waterlander]

...Are the US and China really in conflict...

...Trump, Musk and Vance...

You're kidding about China, right? And on top of TDS, VDS and MDS.

[digitaldog]

You're kidding about China, right? And on top of TDS, VDS and MDS.

“Well, it's not so easy to give an answer when you ask a stupid question!”
Hans Christian Andersen

[digitaldog]

Are the US and China really in conflict.

On Earth 1, this is what China said this week ( Chinese Embassy in the U.S. said in a post on X on Wednesday, signaling an increasingly aggressive stance toward the U.S.):

“If war is what the U.S. wants, be it a tariff war, a trade war or any other type of war, we’re ready to fight till the end,”

[Chris Kern]

Well, Musk has an eye on the next step: assuming the presidency.

Not going to happen: Musk was born in South Africa.  In all other respects, naturalized citizens have exactly the same legal status as those born here, but the U.S. Constitution (Article 2, Section 1) restricts them from serving as president:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

This section is not plausibly vulnerable to challenge in the courts.

[digitaldog]

Not going to happen: Musk was born in South Africa.  In all other respects, naturalized citizens have exactly the same legal status as those born here, but the U.S. Constitution (Article 2, Section 1) restricts them from serving as president:

You think the constitution is going to have any effect?
Trump asks Supreme Court to allow him to end birthright citizenship.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/13/politics/birthright-citizenship-trump-supreme-court/index.html

[Chris Kern]

You think the constitution is going to have any effect?
Trump asks Supreme Court to allow him to end birthright citizenship.

It plausibly can be argued that the commonly-accepted view of the meaning of the birthright citizenship clause is mistaken—although in my opinion it's quite unlikely a majority of the Supreme Court justices can be persuaded to overturn or somehow distinguish the Court's the opinion in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), which held:

The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties, were to present for determination the single question, stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil[e] and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative.

The immediate issue isn't substantive, however.  The Trump Administration has petitioned the Supreme Court to lift the current nationwide injunctions issued by lower courts that prohibit the administration from implementing a policy that denies birthright citizenship to anyone who does not have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident.  If the Court agreed to narrow the injunctions to the plaintiffs who requested them in specific lawsuits, the substantive issue of what the birthright clause actually means would still need to be litigated.  That process could take several years to conclude.

[kers]

The immediate issue isn't substantive, however.  The Trump Administration has petitioned the Supreme Court to lift the current nationwide injunctions issued by lower courts that prohibit the administration from implementing a policy that denies birthright citizenship to anyone who does not have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident.  If the Court agreed to narrow the injunctions to the plaintiffs who requested them in specific lawsuits, the substantive issue of what the birthright clause actually means would still need to be litigated.  That process could take several years to conclude.

I hope that if the supreme court will agree with this it will be active on all US citizens in retrospective.

[Robert Roaldi]

You're kidding about China, right? And on top of TDS, VDS and MDS.

Are they in conflict or economic competitors? The USA has not hesitated to do business with them and still doesn't, so it can't be a simple good guy vs bad guy thing.