monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

It all there on Hillary Clinton's website, al of her financial dealings.

Heh, beeleevez dat if ya wanz, eh, Glitta?

@layman,

Thirty years of tax returns are on the website. I haven't checked it out , but i do think you should know the difference between 'private', 'public' and 'charity'. However, if you don't, that's not my problem. If you ever get curious, you will figure out where to go and get enlightened by facts. Don't rush it, it's probably going to be very traumatic for you. MY work is never done, curses,,,,,

2 Replies

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

If you ever get curious, you will figure out where to go and get enlightened by facts.

Well, ya know, the last place to "go" for the truth is her own website. By the same token, if you ever want to learn about all the shady foundation deals, check another source.

1 Reply

@layman,

Ya know, after the Clintons got caught red-handed stealin about $80,000 (more actually, I think) worth of silver, paintings, vases and **** from the white house on the way out, and being forced to return it, they were, according to Hilly, "dead broke."

Somehow, without producing a single thing of value, the Clintons happened to "earn" about $235 million since then, and now have a net worth in excess of $100 million. Not bad for "public servants," eh?

How does that happen? Well, entire books have been written about it, perhaps the best known is "Clinton Cash," which was a basis for investigation by the FBI until the whole investgation was shut down by the white house.

0 Replies

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

Oh goody...Can I be the general in charge of the final solution of A2K liberals? Pretty please.

Shall we call you Giujohn Himmler?

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

If ya don't like reading all that much, ya could watch this video summary, eh?

1 Reply

@layman,

Life is short L-man and I prefer smart and am not a big fan of Sarah Palin silliness. Send that nonsense to one of your friends who will eat it up.

2 Replies

@glitterbag,

Exactly what I expected. You wouldn't even begin to consider facts which might be inconsistent with your pre-established ideological assumptions.

The amusing part is that while wilfully remaining ignorant, you make pretense to knowing the "facts." Typical, sho nuff.

0 Replies

@glitterbag,

Quote:

Life is short L-man and I prefer smart and am not a big fan of Sarah Palin silliness

I do not like Sarah Palin neither but I do think that video about Clinton cash is worth watching.

0 Replies

@wmwcjr,

Just say Heil.

0 Replies

I read this morning that Meryl Streep spoke at the awards last night about the sociopath about to take office. Good for her. She's a genius who's made our lives better. He's a vulgarian bully who's making America worse.

3 Replies

It is not principle that guides these people. And their descriptions of what they are up to is commonly very dishonest.

Quote:

In 2009, McConnell insisted to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that Republican cooperation in the confirmation process would be contingent upon nominees clearing background checks, obtaining OGE approval, providing financial disclosure, and cooperating with committee ranking members (the minority’s counterpart to committee chairmen). These standards weren’t particularly controversial at the time, and were part of the reason Obama’s designated secretary of Health and Human Services, Tom Daschle, ultimately withdrew his own nomination over what, by the standards Trump and his cabinet are setting, was a picayune failure to report gifts and consulting fees as income.

All of that is out the window now that Obama will no longer be president. The OGE has written to Trump aides expressing concern that the office has “lost contact with the Trump-Pence transition since the election,” and McConnell has decided to assist Trump in his determination to circumvent basic ethics requirement...

LINK

This is all about power. About gaining it however possible and then maintaining it/increasing it through most any means available. Had Clinton won the election, close readers of conservative voices understood that McConnell was very likely to have searched for some rationale and some mechanism, however unprecedented, to disallow her the nomination of a 9th SC justice. Conservative voices were already setting up this story (8 justices are enough). Likewise, the above example.

Unless we grasp this fundamental operating procedure and motivation of the modern GOP, we're getting it wrong. Power is everything. And that's been true for a long time.

It's not the case that Trump is making these people crazier or more extreme or more dishonest. It is only that his near total disregard for and disinterest in the norms of governance, civility and democracy opens the door very wide for the worst impulses of modern conservatism.

1 Reply

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

This is all about power. About gaining it however possible and then maintaining it/increasing it through most any means available.

That's right! Trump has all the power now, and, count on it, he will use it to beat your ass down.

0 Replies

A short note to contributors here.

There are posters here who are acting as trolls. That is, they visit here and make comments with the aim of disruption. These people aren't hard to spot. Short posts without substantive argument, insults or demeaning tone, etc., the standard troll behaviors. This isn't everybody from the right but there's a handful who post a lot.

This isn't a free speech issue. It's a trolling issue. Presently, there are quite a number of political discussions here started by conservative-minded posters. That's fine and proper. But I (can speak just for myself here) don't go over to those discussions and troll them. It would be a silly, juvenile game without value. As I've noted before, if you engage discussions at NRO, for example, you'll find left wing trolls doing this same stuff. I despise them because they only damage civility and rational discourse.

So here's my request. I'd ask you folks here arguing from a left perspective to refrain from quoting or engaging in pissing contests with the trolls. There's no gain in this. It's far more valuable to continue searching for, reading and linking in quality commentary and journalism as most of you have been doing.

thanks

2 Replies

@blatham,

Heh, no one who disagrees with you can have any kind of "discussion" with you. You have them all on ignore.

You are not looking for "debate." You are simply seeking to find gullible, compliant, sycophantic listeners who are susceptible to your commie-ass indoctrination. That entails excluding any dissent or disagreement.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Isn't she a vagitarian bully who's making America worse?

0 Replies

Quote:

Sessions supporters think it will be enough to count on Senate deference to a colleague and supply evidence of racial evenhandedness sufficient to clear the very low bar of establishing that the man doesn’t have white robes in his closet. They may be right.

But not satisfied with this relatively safe strategy, some conservatives have appropriated the Sessions confirmation cause into their broader effort to delegitimize anti-racism as an acceptable tactic in American politics. Characteristically, conservative firebrand (and African-American) Ken Blackwell has taken this tack to grotesque lengths in a Washington Times op-ed that compares Sessions to lynching victims.

LINK

This tactic has a rich and ugly history. One of the original conservative voices and strategists in this story is Clint Bollick. A longtime opponent of affirmative action polices, he used (and still uses) civil rights language to fight the advances of that movement. The notion of unjust discrimination against white males (particularly) was a key part of his media messaging.

What Blackwell is doing (in the quote above) is precisely the sort of strategy Bollick helped pioneer. We've seen it before, in a particularly twisted manner, with Clarence Thomas' complaint that his nomination process was "a high tech lynching". Of course, it was nothing about race at all, rather about his extremism.

Obviously, this stuff has at base an attempt to deny racism against (particularly) african americans as a fact of American life and the goal of maintaining white privilege. "It is we white who are now the victims", is the common story which is usually presented in tandem with, "policies claimed to help african americans is the new face of southern plantation evils and it only harms thos african americans claimed to be helped".

If you want to read more about Bollick, pick up Easton's Gang of Five (you should read it anyway for everything else in the book).

1 Reply

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C1qwPb1UoAAQCHj.jpg:large

0 Replies

@blatham,

I agree. Sometimes there is a specific point that needs rebutting, but on the whole, it is mostly just a lot of noise with no point.

0 Replies

@blatham,

Not surprisingly, you left out the very next sentence in the excerpt you quoted, eh, Blathy, which was:

Quote:

Jeff Sessions will be the next attorney general despite the national media’s anti-white, anti-southern racism, and the country will be better for it.

Your specialty seems to be out-of-context distortions, sho nuff.

0 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know