|
Post by rabid on Mar 21, 2018 10:38:50 GMT -7
/rant.exe:
on the other hand I think anyone involved in that russia conspiracy crap should be fired.
So...DNC Funds "OPPOSITION RESEARCH", quoted by FBI Director james comey to be "Unverified and salacious" and Sessions talks to a russian diplomat in a crowded lobby for 2 minutes and we have "trump colluded with russia". It's mind-blowingly circular. Your opposition funds the research to justify the grand jury, the FBI just rolls along with it. It's a got dang embarrassment and I'm no fan of trump. But if this is the standard...probably already has been, right? What's to stop the next republican from doing the same thing? There we go from first world power to banana republic. The only thing separating us from Somalia at that point is the quality of the carpets and drapery.
For all intents and purposes we HAVE no democracy when the FBI can be prompted into action by the party that lost the election. To think if hilldog got elected we'd never have heard of any of this (And trump would probably be in jail...think about it.).
At least McArthy was facing actual communists at the time.
Russians will always interfere with our elections, but the most interference they have called out so far are russian paid ads popping up on facebook, generally selected to the people that most wanted to hear them anyway, and like facebook is going to turn down money.
I don't think Mueller is the sharpened shiv the democrats wanted him to be, but if 1/2 the stuff between strock and his horsefaced girlfriend texted is true, it implies the whole thing could have been planned out in advance.
I think that's why he's only gigging people on procedural issues i.e. "Lying" to the FBI. He's trying to cover his butt. Did you know that Strock, the same agent who nailed General Flynn is the *SAME AGENT* who interviewed hillary over her homebaked illegal server? Why would he take NO notes for hillary but get a full recording from flynn? For purely partisan reasons, that's why.
because the FBI is a political hand-puppet theatre, that's why.
My prediction: Mueller clears trump of any wrong doing then Trump shit cans him. It will be hilarious. I don't think trump will get impeached. They already tried that and it didn't even get a vote on the floor, just like when Kuccinich wrote up articles of impeachment on bush.
The political tide has turned in favor of trump, it's nothing to to with right or wrong i think.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 11:47:33 GMT -7
He's not a politician, he's a CEO. He's not a Conservative or a Liberal, he's a Pragmatist. Basically he just wants to get some shit done. But I think too many focus on the man and not the moment. Had Mrs. Clinton been elected, we would not have learned of the rather impressive levels of corruption in her campaign or (apparently) in the Obama administration. rabid: gimme a link to the ivory trade thing.
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Mar 25, 2018 6:40:59 GMT -7
I read that on Washington Post...Fake news?
So his supporters were disappointed re: the omnibus bill. It looked like a victory for democrats...but he got one over on them again.
Congress authorizes spending and allocates money. The executive branch spends it...so he's just not spending the allocated funds on parts of the bill he doesn't like.
I have to admit it's a canny strategy, tantamount to a line item Veto. No one else has used that technique that I could find. Shit made me laugh because he just stuck a middle finger to the house minority.
For discussion I wonder if that approach violates the intent of separation of powers...the people are supposed to lobby lawmakers for bills and then the executive branch delivers on them. Sounds fair, but Obama bypassed that process with DACA and other programs via his executive orders. Instantly invalidated when Trump took office.
On the one hand you have a president who usurps the lawmaking powers of the legislative branch by grossly abusing executive privilege. On the other hand you have a president who usurps the lawmaking power of the executive branch by refusing to pay for programs congress authorized.
On the other hand I doubt most people in hometown, USA had any idea what was on the omnibus. So I'm not sure which is worse.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2018 15:56:50 GMT -7
I dunno if it's fake news. I just had not read that. I'll keep prodding "Duck Duck Go" for a while. It's bound to turn up eventually.
LOL!!! So he's just not going to spend the cash on stuff he does not like... Wow! We'll he's creative and knows how to exploit a loop-hole. Gonna be a crazy couple of years.
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Apr 20, 2018 12:06:30 GMT -7
Peace in the North Korean peninsula! Looks like it might actually happen.
It's got me thinking about the nature of war, a perennial topic for me considering I've fought in 2 of them (so far). I think our country has been thinking about war the wrong way.
Previous foreign policy seemed to be that war was to be avoided at all costs, the change is dramatic as it is recent, nowadays foreign policy seems to be "hey, you want to go to the mattress? Fine by me." Funny how it all changed after an unprecedented sudden mobilization. The average citizenry didn't even notice. It wasn't even covered by most media! So I like being able to accomplish the objective without the war. Pretty fucking cool if you ask me.
Look at the changes it wrought, Kim Jong Un's primary objective is to stay in power, previously under "peace first" foreign policy, then belligerence was his most likely recourse to stay in power. After all no one wants a war. Now the best way to stay in power is cooperation. Previously peace was assured, now war is assured.
Seems to me since war is an inevitable and persistent state of human affairs, we may as well embrace the utility of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 16:21:57 GMT -7
[ LINK] That's a pretty massive course change for Mr. Kim. I was stationed in the R.O.K. for a while and really enjoyed it. I am guardedly hopeful that Mr. Kim will come to his senses and join us in the 21st century.
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Apr 20, 2018 18:52:14 GMT -7
Agreed. Sometimes a little backbone is needed...also I think even China is getting tired of his shit. I just wonder what was the bigger influence...did he fear china more than he respected the US? Or does he really want to be a reformer?
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Apr 20, 2018 20:46:25 GMT -7
Remember, "Young Leader" was educated outside of North Korea. He may have a ...little... bit more sense than his father did.
There was some hope in the west, when he took over, that he would be a reformer. It didn't look like that at all. For all we know, he may have been fighting against the powers that be within North Korea (Generals, the party etc.).
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on May 4, 2018 8:09:25 GMT -7
Allowing any modernization into NK will depose and lower the mythological crap they claim about Kim. It seems strange someone enjoying thanatocracy (aptly named so by Christopher Hitchens,) would allow more and more xeno influence into his closed country.
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on May 4, 2018 9:45:36 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on May 4, 2018 16:18:11 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on May 4, 2018 17:51:11 GMT -7
Boy, Hitchens nailed that one on the head!
(With a railroad spike...)
|
|
|
Post by rabid on May 4, 2018 21:20:43 GMT -7
Allowing any modernization into NK will depose and lower the mythological crap they claim about Kim. It seems strange someone enjoying thanatocracy (aptly named so by Christopher Hitchens,) would allow more and more xeno influence into his closed country. Want to check it out but the article won't load. Can you post another link? If not I can pass, he was most likely drunk when he wrote it.
Kim Jong's main goal is to stay in power and keep his family as the central cultural touch stone. I think he may be hoping for a hybrid state like China (and also not to give starving peasants a chance to mutilate his corpse fresh off the scaffold). I'm surprised/impressed with trump's grasp on foreign policy in this case.
But as weird as all this is, we may have Dennis Rodman to thank for it. If a Nobel prize is handed out he should get it. When he first when there I was like...really? But it worked. I doubt it though since most of the Nobel foundation are ridiculously hypocritical liberals who'll award a war mongering, bomb-happy president the prize just 'cuz. Conversely I think ending 60 odd years of hostility will escape their notice because republican. We'll see, but I digress...apparently Rodman gave Kim a copy of "art of the deal" which convinced him that mediation was the best option. That and Trump signaled *WAR* on all fronts. See my earlier post.
Good thing, they have enough artillery to obliterate every square inch of the peninsula down to Seoul for almost 2 weeks straight.
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on May 5, 2018 20:00:57 GMT -7
Yes, Hitchens said he was often drunk when writing. He'd drink enough to "stun a mule", and it showed in excellent writing. Just like Hemingway, and just like King.
|
|
|
Post by rabid on May 6, 2018 9:06:42 GMT -7
Certainly liberates the wits, but it makes him prone to a lot of inconsistencies though. Fortunately for him, most of his opponents weren't well read enough to call him out on them. He's a formidable debater drunk or sober.
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on May 17, 2018 18:05:21 GMT -7
It seems you mean when he was giving singular presentations? If you charge Hitchens with inconsistencies, please demonstrate them. I see nothing other than the changes in stance that often occurs over years as people grow older and wiser. I never once heard him speak without eloquence, drunk or otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by rabid on May 23, 2018 16:44:54 GMT -7
Sorry have I trodden on his grave? Lol Funny how his acolytes keep dusting him off.
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on Aug 30, 2018 17:31:55 GMT -7
No, you've said things that are demonstrably wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Ianoffline on Sept 4, 2018 21:01:14 GMT -7
Mike Huckabee today called for protesters at the Kavenaugh kangaroo hearing to be beaten.
If that doesn't tell you what the regime that has usurped our nation is like I don't know what will.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2018 8:57:14 GMT -7
Mike Huckabee today called for protesters at the Kavenaugh kangaroo hearing to be beaten. If that doesn't tell you what the regime that has usurped our nation is like I don't know what will. I would like to see a link to that News Story or Video. If true, it compares well with Ms. Waters calls for similar treatment for people with whom she disagrees. I don't think there was any usurpation, I just think that Mrs. Clinton lost. Mr. Obama stated quite clearly that "rigging an election" just wasn't possible because they are decentralized. Our Electoral College actually helps protect our election process (for the President anyway). In the unlikely event that the Russians did hack the election, then it happened while President Obama had the reigns, and that rather obvious point makes me think that there was no hacking. I honestly don't think Mr. Obama would allow his political ally and former Secretary of State to get cheated like that, especially with his Presidential Legacy on the line (something else he mentioned [ LINK], and which was painfully obvious). It was important enough that Mr. Obama actually told Mr. Putin to stop meddling in our elections face-to-face back in September of 2016 at the G20 summit in China. So clearly he was aware of the issue and was taking active steps to prevent it. It's not like Obama is stupid; he's a very smart guy who wants the best for his country and it's people, so it just does not make sense to me that he would not take the steps necessary to ensure a fair election (or get outsmarted by Mr. Putin or Mr. Trump - not likely...). I'm certain that the Russians (and many others) tried to hack our election, but that Mr. Obama's administration prevented it. Had we elected a Republican President and a bunch of Democratic Senators and Representatives, I would be more likely to entertain the usurpation narrative. I just don't see the evidence I would expect to see. I know I'll take some crap for this position, but really think that "Russian Collusion" is basically "Birther 2.0". We do know that Mrs. Clinton and the DNC completely rigged the Primaries in order to prevent Mr. Sanders (who I believe would have won vs Mr. Trump) from getting the Democrat Party nomination. Neither Mrs. Clinton, anyone involved with her campaign or the DNC has ever denied this, and I file it under "Politics 101". I admit to a modicum of respect for someone with the clout and testicular fortitude to rig the primaries like she did, I just think it was rather short-sighted. Against any normal Republican candidate, Mrs' Clinton would have won pretty easily. Mr. Trump is far from normal.
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Sept 5, 2018 17:05:34 GMT -7
Trump...normal? Definitely not!
I'll try to avoid getting too personal but, he's quite probably the least competent President this country has ever had. We'd be better off with Pence in the White House (and I'm not a big fan of his either). At least he's stable and doesn't keep flying off the handle at any and every slight provocation. He's also not addicted to Twitter, as far as I can tell.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2018 4:13:22 GMT -7
Trump...normal? Definitely not! I'll try to avoid getting too personal but, he's quite probably the least competent President this country has ever had. We'd be better off with Pence in the White House (and I'm not a big fan of his either). At least he's stable and doesn't keep flying off the handle at any and every slight provocation. He's also not addicted to Twitter, as far as I can tell. Unfortunately, this is where a reasonable discussion between Liberals and Conservatives usually ends, and is replaced by a screaming poop fight. In America, you are either all one, or all the other.
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Sept 7, 2018 17:05:52 GMT -7
I know... And the way things are right now, it's going to be a long road out of purgatory...
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Sept 22, 2018 19:59:25 GMT -7
It's funny how looking back at my earlier rant, I've been proven right about almost everything. Be prepared for trumpslide 2020?
Also is Trump Competent? Objectively, he is. The GDP is skyrocketing and more importantly we aren't at war. He has facilitated dialogue between north and south korea, this a monumental accomplishment. But we don't give him proper credit because he was voted in by the flea-market velvet-elvis crowd. It's a pity.
For a proper contrast imagine the hullabaloo if Obama had done the same thing. I counter that Obama wasn't competent because he couldn't diplomatically secure the release of one American, Trump got them to release 3 basketball players and all of our Korean war dead. Hate trump or not, he's competent. He's highlighting the stupidity of his republican compatriots every day, who don't know how to govern, only to be the ball-gagged but loyal opposition. He's taking names and they are trying on the zipper mouthed Gimp suit from Pulp Fiction. Lol anyone need more disturbing imagery?
Anyway that's all I got to say about that for now.
about hitchens, I'm sorry, but people who can't name a logical inconsistency of Hitchens aren't trying hard enough (or at all). That and it requires considerable lack of self awareness to dust off Hitchens without any critical examination, then complain about the malign influence of cults of personality. That gave me a chuckle so thanks for that.
It's easy for someone to say claims of Hitchens's inconsistencies are "demonstrably wrong" if they refuse to examine his arguments in depth. There's a snippet online of him debating whether or not the big bang could be considered "miraculous". As usual it's not Hitchens's besotted brilliance that wins this argument, it's his opponents ineptness. But I have to give hitchens proper credit, he's ruthless and had the momentum, and luckily for him, his opponent is a chump who let him make this argument without an objection. Clip is worth a look, all the evidence is there for anyone sharp enough to see it. I'll leave it at that. It's one of many examples I could cite.
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on Sept 24, 2018 19:42:43 GMT -7
It's easy for someone to say claims of "Hitchens's inconsistencies" without providing a single one. Name one. Is this the video snip you mean? www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwxZXa8ASxg 1:45 religious guy assumes Universe requires a designer or mover, comparing it to a typewriter being designed. Same old argument, yet again. Looks like religious guy can't tolerate that evidence proves, to the E9 decimal place, that the Universe arose out of nothing. I found no inconsistency in there on Hitchen's part. Nor on the religious guy's intellectual dishonesty, for that matter.
|
|