192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:02 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

But let's also note at this critical juncture where the US of A speeds over the edge of the cliff, that Trump is orchestrating this State Dept appointee thing exactly as he would promote a professional wrestling match. Exactly.

And if you think about it, one can see that Trump's understanding of truth is the same, no difference whatsoever, as it is for a wrestling promoter.


Do you believe that is a resoned analysis of the situation? Perhaps just a little hyperbloe? "exactly" Do you really know any of this stuff?

Frankly the only thing on the present scene that appears to be headed for a cliff is the U.S. Democrat Party. They appear to be stoutly resisting any reasoned analysis of recent events or intelligent adaptation to them. Indeed they're doubling down on known bad bets ... a suggestion of continuing delusion. There's still time for them, and I am somewhat confident they will emerge from their denial and rage over the "stupidity" of the people who rejected them; face some facts; and make some changes.

Meanwhile the drama continues..... The reporting yesterday of Hillary's loudly expressed (indeed shrill) concerns about the emergence of "Fake News" on the national scene, at (of all things) a "farewell event for the infamous Harry Reid, and the tears shed at a post event meeting were .... a bit much. She didn't define exactly what she meant by "fake news", but, coming from her, any such reference is breathtaking (" the vast right wing conspiracy" "we were dead broke when we left the White House" (hell they even stole the furniture), " we landed amid sniper fire ..." plus a very long stream of lies following her outrageous destruction of a private server, then under Federal subpoena ...... all make the charge more than a little hypocritical, deceptive and suggestive of some continuing delusion on her part.
ossobucotemp
 
  2  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:06 pm
@revelette1,
What is the source? I still avoid paywall and tricks to avoid them.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  0  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:06 pm
From the NYRB review noted just above:

Quote:
Just as the tobacco industry gained decades of huge profits by obfuscating the dangers of smoking, the oil industry secured decades of profits—in Exxon’s case, some of the largest profits of any corporation in history—by helping to create a fake controversy over climate science that deceived and victimized many policymakers, as well as much of the public. The bogus science it paid for through front groups, which was then repeated and validated by industry-funded, right-wing think tanks and a too-easily cowed press, worked just as well for ExxonMobil as it had for R.J. Reynolds. A 2004 study by Naomi Oreskes in Science examined 928 peer-reviewed papers on climate science and found that not a single one disputed global warming’s existence or its human cause.50 But according to a recent Yale University study, only 11 percent of Americans understand that there is a scientific consensus on these points.51

As I've noted previously, the term "propaganda" becomes rather meaningless (or confused in meaning) where it is not properly differentiated from PR/marketing. There must be a political component and there must be purposeful deceits being forwarded that are designed to advantage the deceitful party(s).
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:14 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

I've just begun reading this review of books and documents detailing how Exxon's scientists have long appreciated the global warming crisis while their PR operations have pretended something quite different.

I think you and the author whose words you post here are likely well over your heads in terms of real understanding on these points. Anticipating the likelihood of increased regulation of CO2 emissions does not require anything more than orfdinary business prudence, and in no way constitutes an embrace of the already discredited forecasts or theories of Al Gore and his self serving (and uninformed) supporters. Reinforcing expensive infrastucture on the North Shore of Alaska doesn't do that either. There is a universe of engineering issues, of which I suspect you know little, likely involved there. I recognize it doesn't take much to stimulate your "vast conspiracy" theories, but this is a bit trivial even by your standards (If all you have is a hammer then every probelm appears to be a nail....)
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:24 pm
@Frugal1,
Frugal1 wrote:

Trump is well on his way to becoming one of America's great presidents.


We shall see,,,,,, Recent competition for that title looks pretty tough. Have you been following the comments on Obama's "It ain't my fault" tour ??
glitterbag
 
  3  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:28 pm
@georgeob1,
You should be celebrating. After Capt. Chaos is sworn in, no one will be able to criticize Trump or any of our sainted republicans. Trump believes he just acquired another company, and you and your like-minded buddies believe that to be true. So, now Trump can clash with the CIA because he doesn't like their findings......he can admire the FBI because they didn't behave in a political (Hardy har har) fashion. Anyone who doesn't march lockstep with Trump's rapidly shifting pronouncements is, worst case, an enemy of the state or, best case, a drooling moron who should be ignored.

So, if this country is facing imminent attack I suppose Trump will suss it out by reading the National Inquirer or other scholastic tomes. We may no longer need a Joint Chiefs or even a military, we can just sic Trump on the threat and he can tweet his fingers off. Yep, I feel safe......sure I do.

blatham
 
  2  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:38 pm
Something to be alert for.

Two days ago, we got this:
Quote:
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Reports by @CNN that I will be working on The Apprentice during my Presidency, even part time, are ridiculous & untrue - FAKE NEWS!


What Trump is doing here is pretty blatant as propaganda. He's conveniently bolded the key element (of course he has, that's the point of what he's trying to do).

"Fake news" is a fairly recent term but it means or points to a range of quite particular phenomena. 1) it is false 2) is is created and disseminated usually through faux news sites, blogs, socialmedia etc with the intention of getting the false data or story into legitimate media.

Trump is conflating such phenomena and propaganda tricks with any/all media that might challenge or criticize him. In other words, the implication here is that mainstream media are the main purveyors of "fake news".

He's not alone and certainly not the first to attempt to degrade the reputation and intentions and honesty of mainstream media. This is a thrust from the right going back three decades or more and it has suckered a LOT of people who attend to right wing media. Here's Gingrich lamenting the NYT reporting on the fake news phenomenon:
Quote:
“The idea of The New York Times being worried about fake news is really weird. The New York Times is fake news.”

This conflation of "fake news" with media that aren't part of the rightwing media universe is now emerging widely across that rightwing universe. We'll be seeing lots more of it. So understand the propaganda game being played when you see it. This is not intended to make you smarter, just the opposite.
Debra Law
 
  2  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:44 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

blatham wrote:

I've just begun reading this review of books and documents detailing how Exxon's scientists have long appreciated the global warming crisis while their PR operations have pretended something quite different.

I think you and the author whose words you post here are likely well over your heads in terms of real understanding on these points. Anticipating the likelihood of increased regulation of CO2 emissions does not require anything more than orfdinary business prudence, and in no way constitutes an embrace of the already discredited forecasts or theories of Al Gore and his self serving (and uninformed) supporters. Reinforcing expensive infrastucture on the North Shore of Alaska doesn't do that either. There is a universe of engineering issues, of which I suspect you know little, likely involved there. I recognize it doesn't take much to stimulate your "vast conspiracy" theories, but this is a bit trivial even by your standards (If all you have is a hammer then every probelm appears to be a nail....)


Georgeob1: I read the words you posted above, but noticed the lack of substance. It appears the only purpose of your post was to aim your personal attack cannon, loaded with dripping condescension, in Blatham's direction. If anyone is deserving of obloquy, it appears to be you. Next time, please identify the substantive point you are making and back it up with bona fide evidentiary support.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:47 pm
@blatham,
The problem for Trump is the simple fact that he was taped. All the media has to do is play back his contradictions.
http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/donald-trump-contradicting-himself-hypocrisy-video
blatham
 
  2  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 03:50 pm
Interesting award this one.
Quote:
In 2013, [ExxonMobil CEO and possible choice for running the State Department Rex Tillerson] was awarded the Order of Friendship by Vladimir Putin, president of the Russian Federation.
buddies

http://static2.politico.com/dims4/default/7188242/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2Faf%2Fb3%2Fb0985b5540b18351ec3ade219b3d%2F161209-tillerson-putin-getty-1160.jpg

You've got a friend in me
You've got a friend in me
When the road looks rough ahead
And you're miles and miles
From your nice warm bed
You just remember what your old pal said
Boy, you've got a friend in me
Yeah, you've got a friend in me
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:03 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
The problem for Trump is the simple fact that he was taped. All the media has to do is play back his contradictions.
http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/donald-trump-contradicting-himself-hypocrisy-video

How much of a problem? Consider: how many people posting here who stand proudly as conservatives and republicans have changed their notions even the slightest bit regarding Trump since he gained the nomination, though their opinions were commonly far more tempered before that, quite regardless of anything he has said or done?

That epistemological isolation and the extremist partisanship which undergirds it is no small problem.

What's positive here is that almost all mainstream media across the country is aware of how uniquely dangerous this man is and they continue, for the most part, to keep pointing out the avalanche of events and instances which further demonstrate the dangers.
blatham
 
  3  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:06 pm
Speaking of avalanches, there's so much Trump has done and said it is easy to forget instances. Like this one:
Quote:
At the last [press] conference, he told reporters that he hoped Russian intelligence agencies had hacked Hillary Clinton’s emails and would publish whatever they found. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
http://fortune.com/2016/12/10/trump-twitter-apprentice-russia/
blatham
 
  2  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:14 pm
Interview from 2012
Quote:
This is FRESH AIR. I'm Terry Gross. My guest, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Steve Coll, has written a new book about ExxonMobil and how it has shaped American policy in the U.S. and around the world. The book is called "Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power."

Coll describes Exxon as one of the most powerful businesses ever produced by American capitalism, a company that now functions as a corporate state within the American state. To get access to oil, it partners with African dictatorships. In America, Coll says Exxon's lobbyists have bent and shaped American foreign policy, as well as economic, climate, chemical and environmental regulation.

Coll is also the author of "The bin Ladens," and "Ghost Wars," about the wars in Afghanistan. He's the president of the Public Policy Institute, the New America Foundation, and is a staff writer for the New Yorker.

Steve Coll, welcome to FRESH AIR. So you usually write about Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Taliban. Why did you write such a huge book about oil, and why specifically ExxonMobil?
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=151842205

Not sure how many of you might recall George W Bush's comment from the period where he was Pres in a discussion with India's PM asking Bush to intervene with Exxon, Bush said, "Nobody tells those guys what to do"
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:24 pm
From the NPR interview noted and linked above:
Quote:
GROSS: And so under the CEO Lee Raymond, who was there from 1993 to the end of 2005, Exxon started a public policy campaign to raise skepticism about the science that concluded fossil fuels were a cause of global warming. And it basically tried to create an alternate science, an alternate pool of experts. What did it do to create that?

COLL: Well, remember, 1997 is when the Kyoto Accords come into being. And that is what really galvanizes Exxon and the oil industry. There were a lot of people who objected to the Kyoto Accords on economic grounds or fairness grounds because they required the industrialized countries to reduce their emissions but not the developing world and so on.

But Exxon's campaign was unique or distinctive because of its attack on science in the way that you describe. So they started, both themselves and through the American Petroleum Institute, to fund free-market communications groups and campaigns, some of them small, some of them larger, who developed a strategy for challenging the validity of emerging science about global climate change, and not just the fact that there was lots of evidence that industrial activity was contributing to global warming but also the finding that there was a warming trend.

And this not only borrowed from some of the tactics that the tobacco industry had used to delay public understanding of the dangers of smoking, in some cases there were even overlaps of the individuals and groups that were engaged in this communications campaign
.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:38 pm
@glitterbag,
I'm not celebrating, but I am rather pleased with the way things have evolved so far. I try to avoid pre or preemptive judgments and deal with the facts as they emerge. You do however, have my permission to continue in your hysterical depression, anger and gloom.

I don't claim to know exactly what my buddies believe to be true and even less what others really believe. Perhaps you have (or believe you have) added gifts for such insight.

Trump is likely to do more do build up the military operational forces and the integrity of the command structure than we have seen in the past eight years. The survival rate of General officers with either balls or integrity has been very low these past eight years. What remains now is largely worthless bureaucrats and toadies. You appear to be oddly unaware of the salient facts here.

I'm not aware of any Trump "clash" with the CIA. Please enlighten me. Did you notice Obama's recent statements blaming the intelligence community for not putting the dangers and potential conquests ISIS "on his radar". What do you think of that? Evidently Obama dodn't read either the book his former SECDEF wrote after he retired, the testimony before Congress of Lt Gen Flynn for which he had him fired, or many of his daily intelligence briefings.

Unfortunately much of our government has been thoroughly politicized by the hapless and inept Obama Administration. It started with the Eric Holder appointment as AG ( Recall that Holder was the rationalizer of Bill Clinton's paid pardon for the now deceased,and infamous, Marc Rich -- Holder, then Assist AG, testified before Congress that with respect to the pardon he was "neutral, leaning for..." but the fact is he passed on it) . The Justice Department was and remains thoroughly politicized, and the FBI with it as well. FBI Director Comey made a feeble effort to cover his ass but ended up pissing everyone off for his misguided effort. Is that what you mean by "suss" it out - I believe the right word here is "wuss".

Interestingly it was a disgruntled FBI officer in Phoenix who alerted a friend in the press to the impending "accidental" meeting of Bill Clinton and AG Lynch in their private aircraft on adjacent spots on the tarmac of the Phoenix airport. (Perhaps he had looked on a chart - Lynch was on a flight from Washington to Aspen CO) . I believe this event is likely suggestive of pervasive, widespread venality, and reaction to it, within in our government.

Neither you nor I knows just what Trump reads.
0 Replies
 
Frugal1
 
  -2  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:47 pm
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
Trump is far and away in the lead to become America's all-time worst president.


Your comment is based only on the fact that he has a penis.
Frugal1
 
  -1  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:49 pm
@tony5732,
Quote:
It doesn't hurt the business to raise minimum wage, they simply charge customers more to pay the higher labor costs.

It does hurt everybody if the business is forced to raise MW.
georgeob1
 
  2  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:50 pm
@Debra Law,
Debra Law wrote:

Georgeob1: I read the words you posted above, but noticed the lack of substance. It appears the only purpose of your post was to aim your personal attack cannon, loaded with dripping condescension, in Blatham's direction. If anyone is deserving of obloquy, it appears to be you. Next time, please identify the substantive point you are making and back it up with bona fide evidentiary support.


Read my post. The substance is there. The cited EXXON official referred explicitly to the likelihood of forthcoming government regulation of CO2 emissions. While you may not understand it, that is not the same thing as the acceptance of various thories of accelerating global warming. With respect to the inference about some unstated connection between belief in global warming theories and the decision to upgrade some expensive infrastructure on the north slope of Alaska, nothing whatever was noted in either Blatham's post or the quoted material he pasted here to establish any connection with what EXXON officials believe about AGW. I merely pointed out that there are a host of likely Engineering reasons for such action - I have overseen construction work ( at nearby former Air Force sites) on the North Slope, and, unlike you, know what I am talking about.
0 Replies
 
Frugal1
 
  -1  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:52 pm
@georgeob1,
Trump's Thank You tour is superior to 0bama's international "we're sorry tour".
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  4  
Sat 10 Dec, 2016 04:53 pm
@Frugal1,
Frugal1 wrote:

Quote:
Trump is far and away in the lead to become America's all-time worst president.


Your comment is based only on the fact that he has a penis.


Because none of his predecessors had one?
 

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 0.78 seconds on 11/16/2024 at 09:56:40