monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@blatham,

Me too

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Indeed

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

emmett grogan wrote:
16 Charities Are Cancelling Mar-a-Lago Events Since Trump Defended White Supremacists

Trump didn't defend White Supremacists.

Of course he didn't but the Left, unfortunately, continues to largely succeed in the public arena to bend reality to their ideological designs. Therefore, criticizing Antifa thugs is defending white supremacists and saying that there some fine people among the hundreds of demonstrators (which no one can prove is untrue) is defending white supremacists.

This is the perilous waters in which Trump sails. He either must kowtow to what the Left insists he declares or risk their accusations of being vile. It's pretty clear that he refuses to be controlled by them, which I like.

The same thing is going on in this forum. It's pernicious and must be resisted.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

No, and I won't forget Benghazi either.

Yeah, the Nation — I enjoyed your assessment of Vanden Heuvel and Cohen. I don't read the periodical regularly so I'm not that familiar with the inner workings of the editorial board. But I do know that there have always been "lefter-than-left" critics — some ideological, some just contrarian gadflies— who delight in exposing the alleged hypocrisy and perfidy of the hapless moderates and enjoy pushing an alternate narrative. Counterpunch is one example. Since I consider myself more an anti-rightist than a leftist I don't pay much attention to the higher criticism which circulates in the rarefied atmosphere of the ultra-progressives.

1 Reply

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

No, and I won't forget Benghazi either.

Me either but I suspect we have different reasons.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Quote:
In today's government, Eisenhower has a fan in his fellow Kansan Secretary of Defense Robert Gates -- who keeps a portrait of the former general in his office at the Pentagon, Bowman says.

Speaking at the Eisenhower Library last year, Gates talked about America's insatiable appetite for more and more weapons:

"Does the number of warships we have, and are building, really put America at risk, when the U.S. battle fleet is larger than the next 13 navies combined -- 11 of which are our partners and allies?

Is it a dire threat that by 2020, the United States will have only 20 times more advanced stealth fighters than China?

These are the kinds of questions Eisenhower asked as commander-in-chief. They are the kinds of questions I believe he would ask today."

That is indeed the sort of crap that Ike would spew.

The United States Navy and Air Force needs to cover the entire planet. That is not something that other Navies and Air Forces need to do. Having enough F-22's to cover one corner of the planet isn't going to be much help if an enemy is attacking us in a different part of the planet.

One additional point that I overlooked last night is that China is still building up their military. They already foresee matching the size of our Navy (including aircraft carriers) in a few more decades. If they ever decide to challenge us in the future, by that point their military will be vastly larger than it is now.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Lets say that you are "more correct" than I. Trump's very self proclaimed "Skills" at negotiation and "deal making" are his failings totally and not the result of liberal establishments. His failure in doing in the ACA has a lot to do with his petulance and inability to see the deals possible and to politically Arm Twist (like Lyndon Johnson could).

I blame the failure of the ACA reform on the Democrats and their witch hunt against Trump.

farmerman wrote:

I see examples of cross aisle cooperation between Dems and GOP to"fix the ACA" (theres a big push to broker a deal among the representatives to get the issues of drug pricing and plan pricing to make insurance companies calm down.

I hope that works out. The Republican plan wasn't nearly as bad as portrayed, but I think we'll get a better yet result from a bipartisan plan involving moderates from both parties.

farmerman wrote:

AND, it looks like, despite Trumps warnings about shutting down the govt if he isnt satisfied over the "border Wall" There were several GOPers who said that the House has enough votes to ovverride his veto.

His own party, as was mentioned in a NYT story on Thurs, is working to marginalize him and to possibly make him irrelevant.

It looks like Trump might have to primary a few Republicans to impose some order.

farmerman wrote:

His breaking the constitution ois already being done with his Secy of Education's plans for bringing prayer to Charter schools (It must be recalled that charter schools are still considered public institutions, and his mean spirited talk about what hed do with the press sounds a lot like like Spiro Agnew.

I'm not entirely sure that is breaking the Constitution. No Establishment Of Religion merely means that one religion can't be favored over another.

At any rate, if someone thinks it is wrong they should challenge it in court. Trump may make irate tweets at judges, but he still abides by their rulings. If the courts find that it is unconstitutional, Trump will comply with their rulings.

farmerman wrote:

His base hangs on because they dont like to admit that they fucked up.

I'm probably not representative of his base, but I hang on because I don't see him as doing anything wrong. I blame most of the inaction on the Democrats' witch hunt against him.

farmerman wrote:

Independents arent so loyal. They want real results.
Were coming up to end of year 1 and the whole govt is dysfunctional and most of that is due to Trump's inability to play political checkers.(Hes really not the strategist that he claims he is), and it appears that hes got some major screws loose.

I see no evidence of any screws loose. And as I said, I blame the dysfunction entirely on the Democrats.

0 Replies

@emmett grogan,

Quote:

Pence seems "mainstream" standing up next to Trump.

Exactly. During the GOP primaries, my concern was that such a contrast would aid the advance of someone like Cruz. This potential problem hasn't gone away.

After Bush, the GOP's reputation suffered badly. The "tea party" served as an effective rebranding of Republican politics. Whatever/whoever arises following Trump will again ride along on a similar rebranding - "I'm definitely not Trump (and there'll be the evergreen claim) because Trump was never a real conservative and I am." At least, that will be the subtext. To the degree that the GOP and it's media allies can manage it, they will try to bury the recent Trumpian past very deep in the memory hole. The less they can mention or refer to Trump will be the way they'll go - in aid of forgetting and marketing something "brand new".

1 Reply

I see that there is a new Ditch Mitch campaign underway. This comes from the DeMint crowd (Senate Conservatives Action - Freedom Caucus) with Ken Cuccinelli a prime player. That is, the same crowd that got rid of Boehner. A relevant factor here is the tight association between Heritage and the Koch brothers.

0 Replies

How cool is this? Every president needs a brain-trust.

Quote:

Joe Arpaio thanks conspiracy theorist Alex Jones for getting his story to Donald Trump, who is reportedly poised to pardon the former sheriff

MM

0 Replies

Quote:

Laurence Tribe‏Verified account
@tribelaw
Arpaio's pardon for his contempt conviction tells guys like Flynn & Manifort they needn't obey a subpoena to testify for Mueller grand jury!

Given what we know as regards Trump's concerns about the Russia investigations, Tribe's point makes a lot of sense.

0 Replies

I think I'd better advance this claim before others get to it.

Because of the vile, unnatural and degraded acts of sodomy committed in New York and San Francisco, God is raining down his righteous punishment on Houston, Texas.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Yeah, I was half expecting some kind of pronouncement from Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell Jr. that the flooding was because of ungodly illegal immigration.

3 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Therefore, criticizing Antifa thugs is defending white supremacists and saying that there some fine people among the hundreds of demonstrators (which no one can prove is untrue) is defending white supremacists.

Oh?

the president wrote:

But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.

How does he know there were "very fine people" on both sides? As far as I know he hasn't been able to produce even one of these "very fine people". You know, the kind of "very fine people" who decide to attend a pro-Nazi white supremacist demonstration — or break one up. I can see it now, Trump with a "very fine" person on either side of him, one covered in fascist symbols holding a shield and a Tiki torch and the other one masked, all in black, holding a truncheon. Voila!

Quote:

(which no one can prove is untrue)

Um, kind of difficult to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. He only needs to produce one "very fine person" from each side. That should be a lot easier than trying to track down every single thug and prove that he's not a "very fine person".

His statement said nothing. It meant nothing. He was talking out of both sides of his mouth. He back-tracked after categorically denouncing the white supremacists the day before. He's afraid to alienate the gamers and perpetual adolescents who make up the glowing nuclear core of his base.

Quote:

This is the perilous waters in which Trump sails.

Oh, the poor guy. So misunderstood. Silly liberals can't seem to understand that a disinclination to offend white supremacists is in no way a defense of white supremacists. He just doesn't like to hurt people's feelings.

Quote:

It's pretty clear that he refuses to be controlled by them, which I like.

It's pretty clear that he's undisciplined, impetuous, and thin-skinned. Those aren't qualities I particularly admire in anyone, especially a head of state. "Refusing to be controlled by them" is a far cry from actually outsmarting them.

Quote:

It's pernicious and must be resisted.

Good luck with that. Obama didn't expressly defend "radical Islamist terrorists" either but that would be a hard sell to Trump supporters. The world is just so unfair.

3 Replies

@hightor,

You have to be very screwed up to think that anti fascism is a bad thing. This mindset is unique to fascists and some, (if I'm being very generous,) Americans.

Elsewhere fighting bigotry and hatred is seen as a good thing.

4 Replies

@snood,

Well, the Christian god certainly hates immigrants so that's probably adding to His high POQ (pissed off quotient). In either case, He's gonna bring down a shitstorm and why the hell not Houston? If God had a twitter account...

Quote:

No Wall Yet?! Inexcusable! Where's the Shame? Watch this, Fake Christians!

1 Reply

Quote:

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll illustrates the dilemma Republican politicians face. It found that 28 percent of polled voters say they approved of Mr. Trump’s response to Charlottesville. But among Republican voters, the figure was 62 percent, while 72 percent of conservative Republicans approved.

The more offensive Mr. Trump is to the rest of America, the more popular he becomes with his core supporters. One policy example: At a recent rally in Phoenix, the president said he was willing to shut down the government over the question of funding for a border wall, which most of his base favors but only about a third of all Americans want.

Much of this mess is of the Republican Party’s own making. Let’s not forget that Mr. Trump’s political rise began with his promulgation of the racist conspiracy theory that President Obama was not a natural-born American
citizen. The Trump presidency is the result of years of destructive mental habits and moral decay. So there’s no easy solution for responsible Republicans.

..We are well past the point where equivocations are defensible, and we’re nearly past the point where a moral reconstitution is possible. The damage Mr. Trump has inflicted on the Republican Party is already enormous. If the party doesn’t make a clean break with him, it will be generational.

Peter Wehner, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, served in the previous three Republican administrations and is a contributing opinion writer..

WP

I'm all for that generational time frame.

0 Replies

0 Replies

@snood,

snood wrote:

Yeah, I was half expecting some kind of pronouncement from Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell Jr. that the flooding was because of ungodly illegal immigration.

So easy to criticize people if you get to make up their words.

1 Reply

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know