192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
ehBeth
 
  6  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 12:46 pm
@maporsche,
nationalreview?
straight down the I heart #45 line there
ehBeth
 
  6  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 12:48 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
A lot of Democrats saw the weakness of their candidate, couldn't quite bring themselves to vote for Mr. Sanders, and just hoped that the remnants of the old Obama coalition might propel her to a close victory. I don't think that many Democrats really attribute her loss to anything other than her unpopularity among independents and the progressive wing of the party. The Comey statement was the knockout punch, the Wiki leaks were more akin to a bunch of flies buzzing around a pile of manure. And I question how the author "knows" that rank and file Democrats weren't becoming increasingly suspicious of Russian intentions in Eastern Europe and that most of them weren't appalled at the invasion of Crimea.


word
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -3  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 12:50 pm
@ehBeth,
You obviously don't read National Review
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 12:57 pm
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/e7/16/68/e71668913e6ec4f729d8971ec7eb937c.jpg
blatham
 
  5  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 01:01 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
USDA has begun censoring use of the term 'climate change', emails reveal
Yes, I know. These bastards are in the pocket of the petroleum interests (and have been for a long time). So they happily do the propaganda thing. I so despise these people.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  9  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 01:06 pm
And with that last post Finn's metamorphosis into Gungasnake is complete.
blatham
 
  5  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 01:11 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
What a load of crap.
Yeah, ain't it ever. Elaine Pagels' Adam, Eve and the Serpent is a hell of a good read, by the way. If you've had a Jesuit education, you've probably read Confessions. There's no question that Augustine was smart as hell but boy was he fucked up about sex. As a quick aside, some rightwing types (hi george) send out frequent alarums at what they perceive as "social engineering". What the hell do they think Christianity is? A random series of emotive yelps?
Quote:
"Oh, you mean a jism prism!"
If I believed in God, I would sincerely thank him for wiseguys like that one.
blatham
 
  5  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 01:16 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
Secrecy and Suspicion Surround Trump’s Deregulation Teams
This isn't Trump. He has little to no knowledge in these fields and clearly no interest in them at all. There's no way he's made these appointments. This is Pence and possibly Preibus and others associated with them. And behind that is the Koch operation.
blatham
 
  4  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 01:25 pm
@izzythepush,
One giant leap for mankind. One small step for a man.
ehBeth
 
  4  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 01:28 pm
@blatham,
Snowflakes. Made from the tears of conservative crybabies. Whining after a win. Always soooooooooo attractive.
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 02:36 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Quote:
Secrecy and Suspicion Surround Trump’s Deregulation Teams
This isn't Trump. He has little to no knowledge in these fields and clearly no interest in them at all. There's no way he's made these appointments. This is Pence and possibly Preibus and others associated with them. And behind that is the Koch operation.


I suspect you don't really know the truth of what you assert about Trump's knowledge or interest here. He did assert in his campaign that he would reduce the number of intrusive regulations having an adverse effect on investment and our economy, and he made some fairly explicit promises about cancelling regulations.. These issues have been discussed extensively in political and policy commentary for a long time.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 02:44 pm
@blatham,
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/4e/85/3d/4e853d68a86ec06b4c7d76ba0925c349.jpg

Meanwhile our poor English squire remains hopelessly frozen in the larval stage.

0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  7  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 02:54 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
...but I'm perfectly willing to agree that his and your levels of knowledge and ignorance are the same.

Very gracious of you, thanks. I'm sure he's a lot smarter than I am but that doesn't mean that he's above pulling a rhetorical stunt to please his audience.

Here's what I have noticed, though. A lot of conservative Republicans seem to think that Democrats as a whole retain some nostalgia for the Soviet Union and have some sentimental attachment to Russia. And this is not true. In fact, the only left-wing group to support the USSR through thick and thin was the CPUSA. Yes, it's true that during the height of the Cold War there was a strong dovish faction in the Democratic Party. They decried what they saw as hypocrisy in the behavior of the USA and pointed out that while the USSR had missiles in Cuba, we had missiles in Turkey, that sort of thing. And, by and large, they rejected the "Domino Theory". The USSR might have helped to cement this misconception by backing the civil rights movement in the USA but it's dumb to assume that Democrats welcomed this "support" and didn't see it as opportunism, a chance for the USSR to use it in propaganda addressed to Third World nations.

During the Balkan Wars right-wing commentators were accusing Democrats of supporting the Serbs and not making any objection to the atrocities being committed — "Where's Susan Brownmiller now?" asked Limbaugh.

Jolt wrote:
America’s Democrats were not so angry when Russia rolled into Crimea, when Russian-backed rebels shot down a passenger airliner, or when Russian spy planes and bombers fly near Alaska and other parts of American airspace.

This is opinion parading as fact. These issues were never tied to a particular election and I've never seen polling that would indicate that "Democrats" weren't disgusted with Russian interference in Ukraine. In Syria Republicans gave more support to Assad and seemed to admire Putin's intervention. They accused the Democrats of supporting ISIS because they initially armed the anti-Assad rebels.

I've seen a lot more admiration for Putin among Republicans than among Democrats and I stand by my earlier statement; Jolt is assembling specious "evidence" to back up a politically-motivated conclusion.
ossobucotemp
 
  4  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 03:06 pm
@blatham,
We had one Jesuit teacher for a semi demi sex talk when I was in nun school at sixteen. Never did read the Confessions..

On the other hand, a friend of my dad's, a sub captain, joined the Jesuits after his tour of duty. Even now I think that was a reasonable thing to do.
Setanta
 
  3  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 03:22 pm
2016 was Clinton's election to lose, and that's just exactly what she did. No deep, convoluted analysis is necessary. She squandered he post-convention bounce while she did nothing, and then came up with a lame excuse about having been ill--something no one mentioned at the time. She behaved as though it were a coronation and not an elections campaign. She wasted time and resources campaigning in states where Plump was already strong, and failed to make contact in the states that elected and re-elected Mr. Obama. Three states that she neglected--Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania--would have put her over the top. The last week of the campaign, in which she wasted her time and Mr. Obama's time in Florida--a state she would never hope to win--was the most idiotic move she made in a lackluster, lazy campaign. There's not two ways about it, Clinton flat lost because her campaigned sucked.

I'm not so sure I'm upset about that either. She's an establishment Democrat, and just like the establishment Republican weasels who are so busily distancing themselves from President Plump, the electorate were not her constituency. (I was amused with conservatives whining during the campaign about her ties to Wall Street bankers. Holy Hypocrisy, Batman! That's like the cheerleaders pulling the train for the football team, and then looking with contempt on the Goth girls for alleged sexual promiscuity.)

In fact, we may have dodged a bullet in this election. It all depends on whether or not the Democrats clean up their act. There is actually not a lot of real damage that President Plump can do when his party controls Congress and they won't cooperate with him.

As for the 1984-ish attempts at language control, I'm not so sure I'm worried about that, either. When Stephen Harper got into office in Canada in 2006, his administration tried to impose the same kind of "politically correct" speech on government employees. When one research scientist was disciplined because he had failed to use the term "the new government of Canada," mandated by the Tories, he took it to court, and won. The language police quietly folded their tents and slipped behind the scenes.

This, too, shall pass.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 03:24 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:


Very gracious of you, thanks.


No problem, we're buds.


Quote:
I'm sure he's a lot smarter than I am but that doesn't mean that he's above pulling a rhetorical stunt to please his audience.


I don't think he's noticeably smarter than you, just more in tune with the world of politics.

Quote:
A lot of conservative Republicans seem to think that Democrats as a whole retain some nostalgia for the Soviet Union and have some sentimental attachment to Russia. And this is not true.


I don't know, but that's not what he was saying. Instead it was that Dems didn't much care about Russia, for whatever reason.


Quote:
During the Balkan Wars right-wing commentators were accusing Democrats of supporting the Serbs and not making any objection to the atrocities being committed — "Where's Susan Brownmiller now?" asked Limbaugh.


I've no knowledge of this and therefore no comment

Jolt wrote:
America’s Democrats were not so angry when Russia rolled into Crimea, when Russian-backed rebels shot down a passenger airliner, or when Russian spy planes and bombers fly near Alaska and other parts of American airspace.


Quote:
This is opinion parading as fact.


It's what every pundit does and we should be able to realize opinion without a statement from the pundit.


Quote:
These issues were never tied to a particular election and I've never seen polling that would indicate that "Democrats" weren't disgusted with Russian interference in Ukraine.


He is referring to Democrat politicians not the rank & file. Don't need a poll for that.

Quote:
In Syria Republicans gave more support to Assad and seemed to admire Putin's intervention. They accused the Democrats of supporting ISIS because they initially armed the anti-Assad rebels.


Opinion masquerading as fact.

Quote:
I've seen a lot more admiration for Putin among Republicans than among Democrats and I stand by my earlier statement; Jolt is assembling specious "evidence" to back up a politically-motivated conclusion.


I admire your steadfastness, nevertheless the author is quite sound in his prediction that Democrat politicians are likely to back a military action (Under a GOP president) when it seems popular only to wail about it with the first setback.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  3  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 03:29 pm
There's a word for "pundits" who offer opinion as though ti were fact, with no disclaimer. The word is demagogue, and it is justifiably a term of contempt.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 03:46 pm
@ehBeth,
Quote:
Snowflakes. Made from the tears of conservative crybabies. Whining after a win. Always soooooooooo attractive.
Peggy Noonan is so not sexually attracted to this crowd.

For whatever the **** that's worth.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  5  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 03:56 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
He did assert in his campaign that he would reduce the number of intrusive regulations having an adverse effect on investment and our economy, and he made some fairly explicit promises about cancelling regulations..
Of course he did. That's modern GOP boilerplate. That he said words bears no necessary relationship on whether he understands or agrees with those words. Let's recall, shall we, the following quote from Donald when asked about healthcare. "We'll get rid of it and replace it with something terrific". And then, later, "Who knew healthcare would be so complicated?"

Quote:
I suspect you don't really know the truth of what you assert about Trump's knowledge or interest here.
You also might suspect, if you bothered to read the transcripts of his talks with the Australian PM, that I
deem Trump almost entirely incapable of learning.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  5  
Mon 7 Aug, 2017 04:04 pm
@ossobucotemp,
In many ways, the Jesuits seem to run a fine education system. There's rigor and a good level of attention to the classics. But English public schools (which I understand are like our private schools) do as well. Just watch the youtube file with John Cleese debating Malcolm Muggeridge and a Catholic Bishop.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 5.72 seconds on 11/28/2024 at 01:54:01