192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
blatham
 
  4  
Sun 21 May, 2017 03:39 pm
@georgeob1,
Sorry george. But not one of you and the others on this particular site who speak from the right bother yourself with any depth or rigor in media studies at all. Few even bother to attend to media which isn't right wing oriented. There's really no reason for me to engage you on these matters.
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Sun 21 May, 2017 04:06 pm
@blatham,
That's OK. This is a broad conversation and I don't want to see your many unsupported, ex cathedra statements go unchallenged. You aren't the professor here ( despite your evident imaginings), and this is not a school.

I reject the implication that your obsessive perusal of contemporary political commentary provides you with any special insight or wisdom in these areas. On the contrary it or something has rendered you rather monotone and very narrow in your apparent interest or understanding of human affairs, and the associated political and economic conflicts that have dominated history for several millennia.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Sun 21 May, 2017 04:30 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
oralloy wrote:
He was just the first to do it with a private team instead of having it done by the FBI.

Exactly. Case closed.

LBJ corrupting a federal agency in order to wiretap his political opponents is at least as bad as (if not far worse than) Nixon having it done by a private team.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Sun 21 May, 2017 04:32 pm
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:
Quote:
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Saturday slammed the $110 billion defense deal President Trump signed with Saudi Arabia, saying the U.S. is relying on a country with "the worst human rights record in the region" to bring peace and security to the Middle East.

It appears the Trump administration is counting on the country with the worst human rights record in the region to enforce peace and security in the Middle East," Murphy wrote in a Huffington Post op-ed criticizing the deal. "The arms sale is a terrible idea."

Murphy, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the Kingdom has repeatedly used U.S.-provided weapons against civilians in the region, citing attacks on Yemen during its civil war.

"Obama withheld precision-guided munitions because the Saudis were using U.S.-provided munitions to repeatedly target civilian and humanitarian sites in their bombing campaign inside Yemen, despite regular protests from the United States," Murphy wrote.

"By selling the Saudis these precision-guided weapons more - not fewer - civilians will be killed because it is Saudi Arabia's strategy to starve Yemenis to death to increase their own leverage at the negotiating table. They couldn't do this without the weapons we are selling them," he continued.

The Hill

Another liberal trying to sabotage civilization's defenses against his terrorist buddies. Sad
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sun 21 May, 2017 04:37 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
in your apparent interest or understanding of human affairs, and the associated political and economic conflicts that have dominated history for several millennia.
Do you feel a sermon coming on?
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Sun 21 May, 2017 06:39 pm
@blatham,
No. It was merely a (fairly compact) statement of observable fact. However, I have seen several sermons of yours on the last few pages, and was responding to the most recent of them.
RABEL222
 
  2  
Sun 21 May, 2017 08:02 pm
@georgeob1,
At least you admit your in no position to give a sermon to anyone.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  3  
Sun 21 May, 2017 09:14 pm
I see your tut, tut, tut and raise you one harrumph
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 21 May, 2017 09:16 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
something has rendered you rather monotone and very narrow in your apparent interest or understanding of human affairs, and the associated political and economic conflicts that have dominated history for several millennia.
You've started your sermon but seemed to think it adequate to merely give the theme. You've announced this theme before, quite a few times, actually but then...you go home.

This is interesting in two ways. First, you seem to have the notion in your noggin that though I have set to a study of media issues over many years that this study provides me with no greater benefits in understanding the subject than you have acquired with no such level of study. Second, you also seem to hold that you've studied something in some greater depth than I (classical studies, I presume) and yet this study of yours benefits your understanding but I am deprived of knowledge and understanding. So that's a tad odd (perhaps particularly because there are few classical writers, Greek or Latin, I didn't study while at university).

But let's get to the meat of things - your titled but unfleshed sermon. The sentence I quoted above suggests that you have hold of some eternal verities. Further, you seem to be suggesting that these are enough to sustain you or anyone in grasping modern affairs like, for example, the content of Fox or Limbaugh's radio show. We don't really know what you mean here because we just have your sermon's title...
Quote:
human affairs, and the associated political and economic conflicts that have dominated history for several millennia

I sense there's some element in here of "things will always be the same, given 'human nature', so only fools might think to improve conditions". Perhaps you deem the US Constitution an act of fools? Perhaps you hold that a social safety net another such foolish goal? Maybe you hold that slavery, a fairly constant arrangement through the classical and later periods, is just the way things work, given human nature?

I'd say "fill in the blanks" but that overstates what's missing.

glitterbag
 
  3  
Sun 21 May, 2017 09:30 pm
@blatham,
I admire your patience, seariously, I do.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -3  
Mon 22 May, 2017 12:35 am
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/breaking-complete-panic-set-highest-levels-dnc-seth-rich-murder-investigation/

discussion on glp:
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message3531983/pg1
Olivier5
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2017 12:40 am
@Blickers,
Le Petit Journal, a French daily show, has made great comedy out of FAUX news' faux journalism about the no go zones in Paris.

https://youtu.be/jCZymrWxP_Q
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2017 12:47 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
if you come down on the side of heavily weighing a potential strategic partner's human rights record, then you are aligned more closely with neocons than those promoting real politik.

Is that why the neocunts tortured so many people? To teach them human rights?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Mon 22 May, 2017 01:44 am
@Debra Law,
Great question, and I wish I had a good answer.

The cancerous tumor that has grown on our healthy and vital system needs to be destroyed. That is for certain.

The problem is that modest, incremental procedures to control and retard the cancer seem to have been entirely ineffective. It is spreading and reaching a point where the system is on the verge of dying. By taking more radical measures, we might kill the tumor but lose the patient.

In addition, while we all might agree on much of what ails the system: political careerism and corruption, crony capitalism, the strategy of division etc we don't agree on what symptoms might be a sign of worsening illness or the start of recovery, and we seem entirely unable to break free of the tribal instincts that nourish the tumor.

The latter is the gravest danger because unless it changes, efforts to combat the tumor will always be bifurcated. Each half of the populace will only want to cure half of the tumor based on the perverse notion that the other half is either not really malignant or must be fed to combat the truly harmful other half.

Somehow we need to suspend our ideological conflict and recognize the real danger is underlying corruption. Unless that corruption is rooted out it won't matter which ideology wins, because it will inevitably lead to a victory that is merely a manifestation of the worst excesses of either ideology.

I've no clue on how that is accomplished and particularly because I haven't been able to personally do it.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Mon 22 May, 2017 01:50 am
@blatham,
Hey, knock yourself out hating conservatives. It seems to give you the reason you need for getting out of bed in the morning.
hightor
 
  2  
Mon 22 May, 2017 03:03 am
@gungasnake,
Well, no — not really.
Quote:
Dotcom, who is facing extradition from New Zealand to America, and who has personally blamed Barack Obama for his legal trouble, claims in May 2017 that he knew crucial details about a political murder from July 2016. Why would he have sat on that during a hotly contested election, one that looked until the last minute to be queuing up Obama's chosen successor?

WP
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  4  
Mon 22 May, 2017 03:29 am
Some reaction to Trump's speech.

Quote:
He singled out Iran for criticism, accusing it of fuelling sectarian conflict and supporting "unspeakable crimes" by the government of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

Responding on Twitter, Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif mockingly called Saudi Arabia "that bastion of democracy and moderation" and suggested that the US was milking the country for billions of dollars in newly-signed arms deals worth more than $350bn (£270bn).
Behind the lavish praise heaped on his hosts, President Trump used this speech to deliver a tough message to Arab and Muslim governments: deal with the ideology that fuels terrorism now or live with it for generations to come.

He went out of his way to avoid the sort of inflammatory language he's more usually known for. His repeated condemnation of Saudi Arabia's regional rival Iran will have pleased the Gulf Arab leaders listening.

Unlike his predecessor, Barack Obama, this US president made no mention of human rights or democracy. But he did condemn the oppression of women.

And amongst several cynical reactions to the speech from around the region on social media, some have pointed out that here in Saudi Arabia women are forbidden to drive and there are no parliamentary elections. In Iran, the country accused by Mr Trump of being behind much of the current terrorism across the Middle East, they have just had a free election and women are free to drive.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39989548

With regard to Iranian meddling, they're no different from the Saudis, both are interfering in Yemen, Syria and Iraq. The Saudis support the Sunnis and the Iranians support the Shia. The main difference is that Sunni terror groups, (al Qaida, IS) commit acts of violence outside the ME whilst Shia groups, (Hezbollah) pretty much stay within its borders.

I case anyone missed it, Iran just re-elected the reformist president by a landslide while Trump licks the arse of autocratic monarchs in order to secure arms contracts.

Quote:
Iran's re-elected moderate President Hassan Rouhani has received a further boost after reformists won key council elections in the capital, Tehran.

The pro-Rouhani reformist group Omid (Hope) won all 21 seats, ousting their conservative rivals who had been in power for 14 years.

Mr Rouhani won Friday's presidential election in the first round.

He promised voters a moderate and outward-looking Iran and criticised the conservative-dominated judiciary.

Council elections were held alongside the presidential vote and the results were announced on Sunday.
The new city council must convene within 45 days when it will elect a new mayor to oversee services for Tehran's nine million residents.

Incumbent Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf was a candidate in the early stages of the presidential election but dropped out to back hardliner Ebrahim Raisi.

Mr Raisi only received 38.5% of the vote, which was not enough to take the election to a second round.

President Rouhani, 68, said his resounding victory showed that voters rejected extremism and wanted more links with the outside world.

Analysts say he is in a strong position to seek reforms and to revive Iran's ailing economy.

After his re-election there were celebrations in the capital, Tehran, with crowds of young people singing and dancing in the central Vali Asr Square.

In his first speech after the result was announced Mr Rouhani said: "The Iranian nation has chosen the path of interaction with the world, a path which is distant from extremism and violence."

Mr Rouhani supports the landmark deal with world powers to curb Iran's nuclear programme.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-39992416

Trump continues to back the wrong horse, this will do nothing to counter terrorism, if anything it will have the opposite effect.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  4  
Mon 22 May, 2017 04:42 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Interesting thoughts...
Quote:
The problem is that modest, incremental procedures to control and retard the cancer seem to have been entirely ineffective. It is spreading and reaching a point where the system is on the verge of dying.

What if the cancer is truly inoperable? And, as conditions develop over time, what if our current situation is not some warning symptom but the initial indication that the disease has indeed metastasized?
Quote:
In addition, while we all might agree on much of what ails the system: political careerism and corruption, crony capitalism, the strategy of division etc we don't agree on what symptoms might be a sign of worsening illness or the start of recovery, and we seem entirely unable to break free of the tribal instincts that nourish the tumor.

One thing you didn't mention — the power of the wealthy to secure political policies which safeguard and increase their wealth. I understand that, for many conservatives (and Calvinists), there is nothing wrong with this. But I see it as deeply destructive to the social order. Income disparity is one thing — but the idea that the laws are custom-tailored by and for the economically powerful and that the practice is enshrined in our constitution as an outgrowth of "freedom of speech" is deeply troubling to many. If I had more time I'd expand on this but damn, I've got to go to work, that curse of the drinking class.

blatham
 
  2  
Mon 22 May, 2017 05:07 am
Politico has a very good piece up on Mueller and Comey
Quote:
What Donald Trump Needs to Know About Bob Mueller and Jim Comey
...Yet even amid the stress of that time, Comey didn’t hesitate to force the issue of STELLAR WIND, standing up to the vice president. During one White House meeting, Comey said he couldn’t find a legal basis for the program.

“Others see it differently,” a scowling Cheney replied.

“The analysis is flawed—in fact, fatally flawed. No lawyer reading that could reasonably rely on it,” Comey said, his hand sweeping across the table dismissively.

Cheney’s counsel, the famously aggressive David Addington, standing in the back of the room, spoke up: “Well, I’m a lawyer,” he snapped, “and I did.”

Comey shot back, “No good lawyer.”

The room went silent.

What concerned Comey and the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel was that the NSA program appeared to go far beyond what was allowed for domestic surveillance—and without radical changes, they thought it was both unconstitutional and illegal. Ultimately, though, it wasn’t Comey’s arguments, legal or political, that stopped the Bush White House in its tracks on STELLAR WIND.

It was Bob Mueller.

Politico
That's an anecdote I'd not heard before. Addington was (and surely still is) a real bastard who bullied anyone standing in his path and not many people stood up to him. Jane Mayer wrote about Addington and you can dig that up if you like. Here's a brief interview with her on him Cheney's Cheney

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Mon 22 May, 2017 05:58 am
This is more than a little disgusting
Quote:
The Trump administration, in a significant escalation of its clash with the government’s top ethics watchdog, has moved to block an effort to disclose the names of former lobbyists who have been granted waivers to work in the White House or federal agencies.

The latest conflict came in recent days when the White House, in a highly unusual move, sent a letter to Walter M. Shaub Jr., the head of the Office of Government Ethics, asking him to withdraw a request he had sent to every federal agency for copies of the waivers. In the letter, the administration challenged his legal authority to demand the information.

Dozens of former lobbyists and industry lawyers are working in the Trump administration, which has hired them at a much higher rate than the previous administration. Keeping the waivers confidential would make it impossible to know whether any such officials are violating federal ethics rules or have been given a pass to ignore them.

Mr. Schaub, who is in the final year of a five-year term after being appointed by President Barack Obama, said he had no intention of backing down. “It is an extraordinary thing,” Mr. Shaub said of the White House request. “I have never seen anything like it.”

Marilyn L. Glynn, who served as general counsel and acting director of the agency during the George W. Bush administration, called the move by the Trump White House “unprecedented and extremely troubling.”..
NYT
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 0.44 seconds on 12/27/2024 at 02:49:36