192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
Brandon9000
 
  -2  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 12:12 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:
Swamp-draining news from all over.
Quote:
A conservative doctor-turned-pundit with deep ties to Wall Street and the pharmaceutical industry is President Donald Trump's pick to lead the Food and Drug Administration.

...Gottlieb is a resident fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute and a partner in the venture capital firm New Enterprise Associates. He has spent more than a decade in Washington rotating between the worlds of government, health policy consulting and political think tanks.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/scott-gottlieb-fda-pick

When did Trump say that people in business were part of the swamp? I must have missed that. He talked about lobbyists and professional career politicians who act on their own behalf rather than that of the people.
blatham
 
  4  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 12:32 pm
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
When did Trump say that people in business were part of the swamp? I must have missed that. He talked about lobbyists and professional career politicians who act on their own behalf rather than that of the people.

He did talk about career politicians in this context, yes. This would include people like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell and Reince Preibus and Rick Perry and Jeff Sessions, etc. Yes?

As to lobbyists, they're everywhere around his transition team and administration Business Insider Or Price or Pruitt. Or Flynn or Manafort.

And he talked about how Wall Street was a fundamental aspect of the swamp (using this as a prime attack vehicle re Clinton) and if you aren't aware of the deep presence of Wall Street in his team you really haven't been paying attention.

Re the pharmaceutical industry... you gotta be kidding.
hightor
 
  2  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 12:38 pm
@blatham,
Quote:
He did talk about career politicians in this context, yes.

I seem to remember him mentioning term limits...
izzythepush
 
  4  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 12:38 pm
@Brandon9000,
Who do you think the professional lobbyists are lobbying for if its not businesses? Trump has put a lot of people with vested business interests in a position where they can enrich themselves at the taxpayers' and the planet's expense.

He not draining the swamp he's expanding it.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  5  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 12:46 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
I seem to remember him mentioning term limits...

He likely did. The modern GOP is deeply influenced by one of my least favorite psychopaths, Gingrich, and Trump himself uses a lot of the same kinds of statements and bait/switch deceits.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 12:50 pm
From Adam Gopnik at the New Yorker
Quote:
The Words We Use About Donald Trump
That’s crazy! That is the instant, intuitive, and, one might think, only possible response of a sane person to a week’s worth of tweets from President Donald Trump. Only crazy people make reckless charges, without any plausible foundation, and then simply shrug and sit on them. Take one recent example: “How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!” This charge is mindboggling, not least for being self-exploding. For Obama to have wiretapped Trump (put aside that that’s not, technically speaking, what is done any longer; the President may have been moved by vague memories of how the feds brought down John Gotti), Obama would have needed his own private team of plumbers to break into, or hack the systems of, Trump Tower. And no one in his right mind suggests that Obama ever had such a team. The most obvious alternative would be that it was done by the F.B.I., in response to a court order spurred by genuine suspicion of grave wrongdoing. In that scenario, Trump would be asserting that someone in the Department of Justice had grounds for such suspicion, sufficient to convince a judge. But he couldn’t possibly have intended to say that. All this suggests that he may not be capable of the normal logic of normal people, of any kind of political bent. And that, folks, would be crazy.

Of course, we are quickly counselled never to say this, in part because calling Trump crazy would be, in plain English, an insult to crazy people. Diagnosis should be left to those with expertise in it; mental illness is not a category to be used casually to describe those whose behavior we find squalid or even abhorrent. And calling people crazy, to take it to the next dimension, is what totalitarian societies do when they want to lock dissidents away.

Understood. But it is still important, for the sake of sanity, to assert that there is a meaningful sense of the word “crazy” that doesn’t demand medical diagnosis. It arises, instead, from an intelligent description of the normal workings of human minds and human relationships. And it’s important to preserve that sense for common usage, because we often need to distinguish between normal people we disagree with or even think may be actively doing wrong—say, taking health insurance away from millions of people in blind pursuit of an ideological passion—and people who are dangerous because they have passed beyond the ability to actively reason with evidence about the world...
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-words-we-use-about-donald-trump
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -2  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 01:02 pm
Latest EIR mailout:

Quote:
LaRouche Associate Addresses High-Level Audience on British Coup against Trump
March 8 (EIRNS)—Longtime LaRouche associate Harley Schlanger yesterday addressed an audience of some 100 businessmen and German reserve officers in Frankfurt on the British-orchestrated coup against President Donald Trump. The event had been organized jointly by the International Division of the Wirtschaftsrat der CDU e.V., (the Economic Council) based in Frankfurt and associated with the Christian Democratic Union, and by the Reservisten Kameradschaft Frankfurt am Main, and titled “Who Is Out To Sabotage the ‘Trump Revolution’?” with Schlanger as the featured speaker. Held at the Villa Bonn, a rather exclusive venue for meetings in Frankfurt, there were about 100 guests, half of whom were in uniform.
In his introduction, Col. Axel Ebbecke (res.), introduced many of the more prominent guests, including “A special guest, Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, president of the Schiller Institute, whose husband, Mr. Lyndon LaRouche, who is well-known in the United States for his presidential campaigns and the fact that he served as an advisor to the Ronald Reagan Administration on the policy of the Strategic Defense Initiative.” Schlanger was introduced with a brief review of his background, including the fact that he served as Mr. LaRouche’s official spokesman and bureau chief of EIR in the Southwestern U.S.
Schlanger gave a very hard-hitting presentation detailing the British-orchestrated and George Soros-financed coup effort against President Trump, underscoring that these were the same people who launched the Nazi coup against the elected government of the Ukraine in 2014. Trump’s election, he said, is part of a global rejection of the policies of the last 20 years and that Trump is being attacked because he has vowed to reverse the policies of perpetual war and globalization.
Schlanger especially elaborated Trump’s intention to establish a positive relationship with the leaders of both Russia and China to reverse the Obama/British-led drive for World War III. In this context he also developed the cause of the ongoing financial crisis, the need to implement Glass-Steagall and LaRouche’s Four Laws, and the urgency of the U.S. and Europe joining China, Russia, and the BRICS in China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
Throughout the presentation, many of the guests were gesturing or indicating agreement with many points Schlanger made, especially regarding the coup in Ukraine, the futility of sanctions against Russia, etc. Following the presentation, there was a lively question-and-answer period. One TV reporter explained his theory about the terrible German media coverage of Trump. “Do you think the Germans need an image of an evil enemy so they will accept the status quo?” he asked. In responding, Schlanger elaborated on what he had said earlier about the brainwashing of the Germans around “collective guilt.” He spoke of the role of the Bush-Harriman networks in installing the Nazis, and said it is time for Germans to break free of this continuing occupation of their country. Many people approached him afterwards to thank him for saying that, with one commenting that “we, as Germans, are afraid to tell the truth—it is good you did!”
Another guest thanked Schlanger for his presentation, remarking that “you have shown us that you have a deep understanding of American politics. Perhaps you can help us and tell us what is wrong Chancellor Angela Merkel?”...
blatham
 
  4  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 01:03 pm
Today's winner in our much-heralded "The Trump Crowd Hires Only the Best People. Am I Right or Am I Right?" category.
Quote:
Trump Appointee Who Tweeted About "Some Muslim Piece Of ****" Is Out From Energy Department
A Trump campaign worker appointed to the Energy Department is a former massage therapist with a history of tweeting anti-Muslim remarks.
buzzfeed
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  -2  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 01:08 pm
@blatham,
It's hard to tell here just what is your complaint about the progress of swamp draining. It was very clear that Trump's main focus here with the swamp reference was to the growing body of bureaucratric elements in our government; growing the usurpation of legislative perogatives by the Federal bureaucracy; and the paralysis of our Congress under the former hammers of Obama vetoes, Harry Reid's refusals to bring House passed legislatineven up for debate and also divisions among Republicans in the Congress.

I do believe Trump erred in promising to address Obamacare first. The present structure of this ill-conceived and overly complex law was fast headed for a financial collapse on its own: the next round of annual updates will yield less competition among insurers as they abandon the market, fast rising rates; and immediate needs for added Federal funds to subsidize the mess. That will be the ideal time for repeal and revision.

Beyond that I believe he is making fast progress, despite Democrat hysteria and theatrics, and the mostly invisible resistance of major elements of the Federal Bureaucracy. As Trump's appointees take up the reins of power in the various Federal Departments ther process will accelerate- we have already seen action on the traditional replacement of Federal attorneys across the country ( though Democrat apologists appear to have forgotten that this is merely a routine action) tasken by every administration. Other actions to eliminate bureaucratic regulatory excesses are continuing at a rapid pace.

I suspect we may see some actions relative to the various labor unions now infesting the government. I suspect some actions similar to those taken a few years ago in Wisconsin to weaken and get rid of them. A good start might be to eliminate the "shop stewards" the unions invariably negotiate ( up to about 5% of the workforce) . These are union employees, whose salaries are paid by the government to do union business in Federal offices. Our Civil Service law stipulaated that employee pay, benefits and working conditions are exclusively a government function and responsibility. I have never understood just what Federal unions do for the huge sums they collect (think of about 2.2% of the entire Federal labor budget - and that doesn't even count the billions spent on the salaries of their "shop stewards" ). The next step could be to stop prediscounting union dues from employee pay, and let the unions collect them from their "voluntary" members. (In Wisconsin, given the choice most quit the unions.)
blatham
 
  3  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 01:16 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
It's hard to tell here just what is your complaint about the progress of swamp draining. It was very clear that Trump's main focus here with the swamp reference was to the growing body of bureaucratric elements in our government;

No, that's your re-interpretation of what he said when he was campaigning. You've adopted here notions that derive from Bannon or that derive from long-held GOP ideological premises. He was labeled as, and celebrated himself as, a "populist". But more to the point, you're making a claim or supposition here that Trump had a coherent political philosophy that he voiced coherently when he was running and both of those presumptions or claims are preposterous.
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 01:26 pm
@blatham,
Trump did have a coherent plan on Trumpcare, but he even lied about that. 16 million more Americans will lose health insurance under his plan. It pretty much takes away the government subsidy for the middle class and poor.
According to Politifact, Trump lies over 70% of the time. People who trust him must have a screw loose.
http://americannewsx.com/hot-off-the-press/friendly-reminder-trumps-lies-holding-steady-70-percent/

Some people just can't handle the truth. LOL
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 01:31 pm
@blatham,
Are you speaking 'ex cathedra' or merely postulating stuff you obviously can't know?

I do recognize that you create your theories first and then select and bend the evidence to fit them, but that isn't how most of the rest of us do these thigs.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 01:33 pm
@georgeob1,
https://www.google.com/amp/www.teenvogue.com/story/fact-check-trumps-administration-lies-this-week/amp
Even teens know better.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  5  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 01:40 pm
@georgeob1,
As to what he said during the campaign, that's easily available to anyone who wants to review it (particularly if they've somehow forgotten). What he said about the influences of Wall St, for just one obvious example.

As to me suggesting he had no coherent political philosophy, if you deem that a claim without evidentiary support, you're really a lost cause, george. But of course, when he said a week ago, "Nobody knew that healthcare was so complex", that certainly would argue for a description of an individual who had a massive familiarity and comfort with political matters. He possibly knew there were two Koreas, that's uncertain. And when he speaks of John Rawls, well that's just the icing combed over the top of the cake.
hightor
 
  3  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 02:00 pm
@gungasnake,
Good to see wholesome and widely-respected intellectuals like Lyndon LaRouche stepping up to bat for the Trump team. How's that "Energy Flux Density" workin' out for ya?
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 02:20 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
It was very clear that Trump's main focus here with the swamp reference was to the growing body of bureaucratric elements in our government...

I don't know if mouthing a well-worn and totally unoriginal political cliche really amounts to a coherent and focused policy. What was very clear to me is that the guy really loved adulation and relied on stock applause lines to work the crowd.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 02:21 pm
Once again, if reality actually matters anymore, Media Matters has a long list of quotes from Trump (usually on Fox) claiming how the job-numbers (when Obama was in office) were "totally phony" etc. It's a fun read if you are the sort not prone to depression at the sight of a nation heading into the toilet.
MM
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 02:29 pm
You've got your Einstein and you've got your Newton and you've got your John Shimkus.
Quote:
At a hearing markup on Wednesday, Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) suggested that one reason Republicans object to Obamacare is that men have to pay for plans that cover maternity services, such as prenatal care.

The heated exchange happened during a lengthy markup session for the GOP’s Obamacare replacement bill in the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Shimkus was responding to a question from Rep. Michael Doyle (D-PA), who asked a different colleague which mandates in Obamacare he took issue with.

“What mandate in the Obamacare bill does he take issue with?” Doyle asked. “Certainly not with pre-existing conditions, or caps on benefits or letting your child stay on the policy until 26, so I’m curious what is it we’re mandating?”

“What about men having to purchase prenatal care?” Shimkus butted in. “Is that not correct? And should they?”
Think Progress
Also, why the hell should the male have to cover some of the cost of his wife or girlfriend's temporary stay at the motel when she's in menses?
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 02:39 pm
Donald Trump hard at work draining the swamp:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/11/us/politics/preet-bharara-us-attorney.html

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sat 11 Mar, 2017 02:40 pm
Bait And Switch: a primer for the ambitious Republican warriors of tomorrow.
Quote:
Donald Trump’s embrace of the American Health Care Act, authored by Paul Ryan and other House Republicans seemingly in collaboration with establishment-minded members of his administration, represents a massive betrayal of his own clear and repeated promises to the American people.

To an extent, sophisticated political journalists always knew Trump was likely to break those promises. And his embrace of conventional, conservative House Republicans such as Mick Mulvaney to run the Office of Management and Budget and Tom Price to run the Department of Health and Human Services was a clear indication that he intended to break them. But it would be a mistake to simply gloss over this breach of faith.

Trump’s embrace of more centrist positions on health care and retirement security was a crucial aspect of his campaign, and there was enough campaign-season tension between Trump and the GOP leadership that a voter could be forgiven for assuming Trump meant what he was saying.

He did not. Trump ran and won promising to cover everyone, avoid Medicaid cuts, and boost funding for opioid abuse treatment. He is now lobbying Congress to pass a bill that does none of those things. Instead, millions will lose insurance and Medicaid spending will be sacrificed on the altar of tax cuts for the rich...
This is actually a link to the Vox piece but I was tempted to send you to that Chinese factory where children produce those "Make America Great" hats
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.52 seconds on 07/10/2025 at 11:19:29