cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
No. Hillary could spontaneously combust and America STILL doesn't elect the carnival barker...
Will that stop me from bothering to make calls and send money to Hillary? No. Never again.
The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread
- Thread starter CarolKing
- Start date
No. Hillary could spontaneously combust and America STILL doesn't elect the carnival barker...
Will that stop me from bothering to make calls and send money to Hillary? No. Never again.
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
Cruz Fires Back at Boehner After ‘Lucifer’ Remarks
by Bloomberg Video 2:42 mins
April 28 -- While stumping in Indiana, Ted Cruz responded to negative remarks by former Speaker of the House John Boehner, in which he called the Texas senator “Lucifer in the flesh.” Cruz claimed he doesn’t know Boehner and has rarely spoken to him. “What Boehner is angry with is the American people holding him accountable,” he said.
http://finance.yahoo.com/video/cruz-fires-back-boehner-lucifer-174249726.html
by Bloomberg Video 2:42 mins
April 28 -- While stumping in Indiana, Ted Cruz responded to negative remarks by former Speaker of the House John Boehner, in which he called the Texas senator “Lucifer in the flesh.” Cruz claimed he doesn’t know Boehner and has rarely spoken to him. “What Boehner is angry with is the American people holding him accountable,” he said.
http://finance.yahoo.com/video/cruz-fires-back-boehner-lucifer-174249726.html
Nooky72
Dog Marley
I am not a religious man nor am I an American but please God do not let this self-absorbed, power hungry psycho Trump become your President. I had a vivid Nightmare that he brings darkness to the world. And yes, I was heavily vaked at the time.
Actions such as this referenced in the attached article make this perfectly conceivable.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...cb287e-5660-11e5-b8c9-944725fcd3b9_story.html
Actions such as this referenced in the attached article make this perfectly conceivable.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...cb287e-5660-11e5-b8c9-944725fcd3b9_story.html
TeeJay1952
Well-Known Member
howie105
Well-Known Member
Combine the US "us versus them" political system and the modern day media presentation of that political system it almost makes a Trump like figure unavoidable. The real failure is so many people feel like they are caught up in the presentation and they can't find themselves an alternative to it.
TeeJay1952
Well-Known Member
"Us vs them" .
Fun factoid: Back in 2005, I hacked this document titled "Language: A Key Mechanism of Control" with the "google cache" button from Newt G's website and I published it everywhere I could.
It's about pairing certain words together to force people to rally to your side.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4443.htm
Examples: Liberal-elite, Un-American, Pro-life...
In 2006, Geoffrey Nunberg wrote a book about it's uses in current politics.
https://geoffreynunberg.com/talking-right/
It was amazing to me to see so much of these tactics implemented in 2008 and even still today.
Fun factoid: Back in 2005, I hacked this document titled "Language: A Key Mechanism of Control" with the "google cache" button from Newt G's website and I published it everywhere I could.
It's about pairing certain words together to force people to rally to your side.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4443.htm
Examples: Liberal-elite, Un-American, Pro-life...
In 2006, Geoffrey Nunberg wrote a book about it's uses in current politics.
https://geoffreynunberg.com/talking-right/
It was amazing to me to see so much of these tactics implemented in 2008 and even still today.
Last edited:
BD9
Well-Known Member
There's not that much difference between trump and bobby knight really (no caps on purpose because I'm petty). Here in Indiana Knight is considered a god because he was a great basketball coach. But it stopped there. Great coach. Terrible human being. Could quote the bible like nobody's business and people loved that. Unfortunately style over substance reigns. So it was indeed a 'vote getter' by trump to parade bobby knight out in front of Hoosiers who think of knight as a god.
It seems that the one who speaks loudest, says the most inflammatory things, and most ridiculous things, gets sheep to follow him/her. I just don't understand.
We need to use our voices and our votes. Your vote does, and will, make a difference.
It seems that the one who speaks loudest, says the most inflammatory things, and most ridiculous things, gets sheep to follow him/her. I just don't understand.
We need to use our voices and our votes. Your vote does, and will, make a difference.
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
April 30, 2016 11:30 AM
The Shills Have Eyes
Perhaps the most painful aspect of the Democratic primary has been the transformation of certain progressive online news channels from responsible information outlets to cheerleading sections for Sen. Bernie Sanders—cheerleading sections that spew off-the-charts hatred for the allegedly “corporatist” Hillary Clinton.
As a longtime advocate for these progressive online news channels, it has been heartbreaking to realize that some of the hosts and contributors to these channels have never heard of the old saying: “You don’t make your own candle burn brighter by blowing someone else’s candle out.” Both Clinton and Sanders are highly qualified, highly intelligent candidates with decades of dedication to busting barriers and ensuring equality—but in the world of these online news channels, Sanders is the only one who can save our democracy from death, while Clinton is half-Cruella De Vil and half-Lady Macbeth.
I have previously expressed my disappointment over the fact that a fairly prominent voice in online progressive media tried to suggest that the mainstream media’s alleged refusal to cover the Sanders campaign is somehow responsible for his woes with African-American voters. It was as though it never occurred to this particular commentator to actually ask a few African-American voters for some perspective as to why Sanders was experiencing these difficulties. She did not even have to ask African-American Clinton supporters why they rejected Sanders; she could have just asked African-American Sanders supporters who presumably have Clinton supporters in their social circle for some insight as to why their friends don’t feel the Bern. Does this commentator really believe that African-Americans are still unaware of Sanders and his platform after all these months?
It has been embarrassing to watch many of these progressive online news channels stoop to new depths to advance the narrative that Clinton is corrupt. Clinton is about as corrupt as Sanders—which is to say, not at all. What does it say about these commentators that they cannot praise Sanders without disparaging Clinton?
Last year, the New York Times and Steve Benen noted that right-wing operatives were effectively trying to seduce progressives into launching attacks on Clinton. One can’t help wondering if this tactic has worked beyond the wildest dreams of these right-wing operatives: who would have thought, just one year ago, that online progressive news outlets would brand non-reactionaries Paul Krugman and George Clooney as villains?
Seven years ago, former right-wing operative Frank Schaeffer noted the “changing cast list of villains” in the minds of religious fundamentalists who supported the Republican Party. The bombastic Bernie-backers in online progressive media aren’t that much different: every day seems to bring another “corporatist” who they can demonize as a Clinton apologist.
Did it ever dawn on these commentators that a certain percentage of their viewers actually like both Clinton and Sanders, view neither candidate as corrupt, and are offended when they run segment after segment implying that Clinton is a grotesque, greedy ghoul? Did it ever dawn on these commentators that by promoting the idea that progressives should only trust Sanders and not Clinton, they are inflicting wounds of resentment that may never fully heal?
This chastising of Clinton is both ridiculous and redundant. When I watch progressive online media outlets, I want to hear a perspective I don’t get anywhere else. The Clinton-is-corrupt narrative is a perspective I can get anywhere else. Why would I want to hear a progressive condemn Clinton’s alleged vanity? If I want to hear that sort of stuff, I’ll just turn on Sean Hannity.
UPDATE: George Takei’s commentary on the Democratic primary can certainly be read as a response to the partisanship of vehemently anti-Clinton online progressive news outlets. More from Media Matters.
by D.R. Tucker
The Shills Have Eyes
Perhaps the most painful aspect of the Democratic primary has been the transformation of certain progressive online news channels from responsible information outlets to cheerleading sections for Sen. Bernie Sanders—cheerleading sections that spew off-the-charts hatred for the allegedly “corporatist” Hillary Clinton.
As a longtime advocate for these progressive online news channels, it has been heartbreaking to realize that some of the hosts and contributors to these channels have never heard of the old saying: “You don’t make your own candle burn brighter by blowing someone else’s candle out.” Both Clinton and Sanders are highly qualified, highly intelligent candidates with decades of dedication to busting barriers and ensuring equality—but in the world of these online news channels, Sanders is the only one who can save our democracy from death, while Clinton is half-Cruella De Vil and half-Lady Macbeth.
I have previously expressed my disappointment over the fact that a fairly prominent voice in online progressive media tried to suggest that the mainstream media’s alleged refusal to cover the Sanders campaign is somehow responsible for his woes with African-American voters. It was as though it never occurred to this particular commentator to actually ask a few African-American voters for some perspective as to why Sanders was experiencing these difficulties. She did not even have to ask African-American Clinton supporters why they rejected Sanders; she could have just asked African-American Sanders supporters who presumably have Clinton supporters in their social circle for some insight as to why their friends don’t feel the Bern. Does this commentator really believe that African-Americans are still unaware of Sanders and his platform after all these months?
It has been embarrassing to watch many of these progressive online news channels stoop to new depths to advance the narrative that Clinton is corrupt. Clinton is about as corrupt as Sanders—which is to say, not at all. What does it say about these commentators that they cannot praise Sanders without disparaging Clinton?
Last year, the New York Times and Steve Benen noted that right-wing operatives were effectively trying to seduce progressives into launching attacks on Clinton. One can’t help wondering if this tactic has worked beyond the wildest dreams of these right-wing operatives: who would have thought, just one year ago, that online progressive news outlets would brand non-reactionaries Paul Krugman and George Clooney as villains?
Seven years ago, former right-wing operative Frank Schaeffer noted the “changing cast list of villains” in the minds of religious fundamentalists who supported the Republican Party. The bombastic Bernie-backers in online progressive media aren’t that much different: every day seems to bring another “corporatist” who they can demonize as a Clinton apologist.
Did it ever dawn on these commentators that a certain percentage of their viewers actually like both Clinton and Sanders, view neither candidate as corrupt, and are offended when they run segment after segment implying that Clinton is a grotesque, greedy ghoul? Did it ever dawn on these commentators that by promoting the idea that progressives should only trust Sanders and not Clinton, they are inflicting wounds of resentment that may never fully heal?
This chastising of Clinton is both ridiculous and redundant. When I watch progressive online media outlets, I want to hear a perspective I don’t get anywhere else. The Clinton-is-corrupt narrative is a perspective I can get anywhere else. Why would I want to hear a progressive condemn Clinton’s alleged vanity? If I want to hear that sort of stuff, I’ll just turn on Sean Hannity.
UPDATE: George Takei’s commentary on the Democratic primary can certainly be read as a response to the partisanship of vehemently anti-Clinton online progressive news outlets. More from Media Matters.
by D.R. Tucker
neverforget711
Well-Known Member
Trump is rather masterful at this, all those decades talking like a salesman and as playboy made for fine practice. Scott Adams, the Dilbert creator, has been blogging about Trump's Hypnosis/NLP aptitude as an explanation for his competitiveness.
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
I love Bernie but it's time for him to unite the Democratic Party. I notice that I'm not seeing much of him in the media. That could be the media. He layed off 200 or so staff so he realizes the end is near. Last Saturday really was the last stand.
I wish he hadn't said so much bad stuff about his democratic opponent. I realize it gets nasty in an election.
It's sad but we have to go on and make sure Trump is not the next president. Go Hillary!!
I wish he hadn't said so much bad stuff about his democratic opponent. I realize it gets nasty in an election.
It's sad but we have to go on and make sure Trump is not the next president. Go Hillary!!
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
When We Forget
Donald Trump will rise, and keep rising, until we remember what came before.
Getty Scott Olson
By Charles P. Pierce
Apr 29, 2016
In Lenin's Tomb, his lucid account of the end of Soviet Russia, David Remnick uses as an epigraph a famous quote from Czech author Milan Kundera. "The struggle of man against power," Kundera wrote, "is the struggle of memory against forgetting." The philosophy was central to Remnick's contention throughout the book that one of the critical weaknesses of the Soviet state, and of all of its satellite governments in Eastern Europe, including Kundera's Czechoslovakia, was that it required its citizens to fight against their own memory, to unknow what they clearly knew. Sooner or later, the effort to forget and to unknow becomes too much of a burden for too many people and they force the collapse of the system. Humans are driven to remember. Humans can crack from the effort it takes to deny and to forget. The consequences can be therapeutic or they can be catastrophic, for people and for the political societies into which they organize themselves.
This is as true of liberal democracies as it is true of authoritarian states. In fact, the effects of forgetting can be worse in the former, because citizens of authoritarian states see the effects of forgetting and unknowing in every transaction in their daily lives. In liberal democracies, and especially in this one, there are so many distractions and so many options and so much media that the corrosive effects of the loss of the power of memory can elude anyone's notice until something important comes apart all at once.
Language and memory must work together not only to preserve the past but to illuminate the present and to build a future.
LIVE: Protesters Are Disrupting Donald Trump's...
Requiem for a Chair Throw
Stephen Colbert Knows Why Ted Cruz Picked Carly...
Bernie Sanders as George Costanza Will Not Make...
The 2016 presidential campaign—and the success of Donald Trump on the Republican side—has been a triumph of how easily memory can lose the struggle against forgetting and, therefore, how easily society can lose the struggle against power. There is so much that we have forgotten in this country. We've forgotten, over and over again, how easily we can be stampeded into action that is contrary to the national interest and to our own individual self-interest. We have forgotten McCarthy and Nixon. We have forgotten how easily we can be lied to. We have forgotten the U-2 incident and the Bay of Pigs and the sale of missiles to the mullahs. And along comes someone like Trump, and he tells us that forgetting is our actual power and that memory is the enemy.
The first decade of the twenty-first century gave us a great deal to forget. It began with an extended mess of a presidential election that ended with the unprecedented interference of a politicized Supreme Court. It was marked early on by an unthinkable attack on the American mainland. At this point, we forgot everything we already knew. We knew from our long involvement in the Middle East where the sources of the rage were. We forgot. We knew from Vietnam the perils of involving the country in a land war in Asia. We forgot. We knew from Nuremberg and from Tokyo what were war crimes and what were not. We forgot that we had virtually invented the concept of a war crime. We forgot. In all cases, we forgot because we chose to forget. We chose to believe that forgetting gave us real power and that memory made us weak. We even forgot how well we knew that was a lie.
Twenty-odd years ago, at the urging of a great editor, I wrote a long piece at another magazine about my family's experience with Alzheimer's disease, which eventually took my father and all of his siblings. It is a terrifying disease for a writer because it attacks those aspects of the individual that are so crucial to the act of writing—namely memory and language. Without memory, there can be no connection with the world, nothing salvaged or brought forward. Without language, memory is orphaned. Without both of them, history is mute.
That story, and the experience of writing it, has bled into parts of my work in a hundred different ways, but the main points remain the same. Language and memory must work together not only to preserve the past but to illuminate the present and to build a future. The disease robbed my father of both language and memory, and thus it robbed him of his past, his present, and his future. He spent his last years as a kind of vagabond, a stranger to himself, a permanent refugee in an unmoored life. I watch the presidential campaign this year, and I watch how the country has abandoned self-government and the idea of a political commonwealth, and I see a country that is voluntarily taking upon itself my father's disease. A vagabond country, making itself a stranger to itself, a permanent refugee country, unmoored from its history.
A country that remembers, a country with an empowered memory that acts as a check on the dangerous excesses of power itself, does not produce a Donald Trump. It was the very first Republican president who said the most memorable thing about memory, and its mystic chords, and how he hoped, one day, those chords once again would be touched by the better angels of our nature. That was Abraham Lincoln's First Inaugural Address. By the time he came to deliver his second, in which he appealed to the country to remember how it had torn itself apart, six hundred thousand Americans had slaughtered one another in a war that was only then beginning to come to an end:
Fondly do we hope—fervently do we pray—that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether."
Remember, this passage said to the people of a tattered and bleeding nation. Bind up the wounds. Take care of him who has borne the battle, and his widow and orphan, too. Achieve a just and lasting peace between yourselves and all nations. But first, remember how this misery came to pass. Remember what we are capable of doing to one another if we lose faith in every institution of self-government, especially those into which we are supposed to channel our passions to constructive purpose. Remember, Lincoln said in this speech, which was his last warning to the nation he'd preserved. Remember that we can be killers. Remember that, and you can be strong and powerful enough to not allow it to happen again.
The late historian Michael Kammen likened even the newest Americans to Fortinbras in Hamlet, who declares that he has "some rights of memory in this kingdom." Even the immigrants most lately arrived can, Kammen argued, "have an imaginative and meaningful relationship to the determinative aspects of American history." In the campaign now ongoing, we see successful candidates running against the very notion of what Kammen was talking about. When Trump chants his mantra—"Make America Great Again"—the rest of the slogan is unsaid but obvious. The implied conclusion is "…Before All of Them Wrecked It." And that is what has been selling, all year long, because while the struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting, there is no guarantee that either struggle will end in triumph.
Donald Trump will rise, and keep rising, until we remember what came before.
Getty Scott Olson
By Charles P. Pierce
Apr 29, 2016
In Lenin's Tomb, his lucid account of the end of Soviet Russia, David Remnick uses as an epigraph a famous quote from Czech author Milan Kundera. "The struggle of man against power," Kundera wrote, "is the struggle of memory against forgetting." The philosophy was central to Remnick's contention throughout the book that one of the critical weaknesses of the Soviet state, and of all of its satellite governments in Eastern Europe, including Kundera's Czechoslovakia, was that it required its citizens to fight against their own memory, to unknow what they clearly knew. Sooner or later, the effort to forget and to unknow becomes too much of a burden for too many people and they force the collapse of the system. Humans are driven to remember. Humans can crack from the effort it takes to deny and to forget. The consequences can be therapeutic or they can be catastrophic, for people and for the political societies into which they organize themselves.
This is as true of liberal democracies as it is true of authoritarian states. In fact, the effects of forgetting can be worse in the former, because citizens of authoritarian states see the effects of forgetting and unknowing in every transaction in their daily lives. In liberal democracies, and especially in this one, there are so many distractions and so many options and so much media that the corrosive effects of the loss of the power of memory can elude anyone's notice until something important comes apart all at once.
Language and memory must work together not only to preserve the past but to illuminate the present and to build a future.
LIVE: Protesters Are Disrupting Donald Trump's...
Requiem for a Chair Throw
Stephen Colbert Knows Why Ted Cruz Picked Carly...
Bernie Sanders as George Costanza Will Not Make...
The 2016 presidential campaign—and the success of Donald Trump on the Republican side—has been a triumph of how easily memory can lose the struggle against forgetting and, therefore, how easily society can lose the struggle against power. There is so much that we have forgotten in this country. We've forgotten, over and over again, how easily we can be stampeded into action that is contrary to the national interest and to our own individual self-interest. We have forgotten McCarthy and Nixon. We have forgotten how easily we can be lied to. We have forgotten the U-2 incident and the Bay of Pigs and the sale of missiles to the mullahs. And along comes someone like Trump, and he tells us that forgetting is our actual power and that memory is the enemy.
The first decade of the twenty-first century gave us a great deal to forget. It began with an extended mess of a presidential election that ended with the unprecedented interference of a politicized Supreme Court. It was marked early on by an unthinkable attack on the American mainland. At this point, we forgot everything we already knew. We knew from our long involvement in the Middle East where the sources of the rage were. We forgot. We knew from Vietnam the perils of involving the country in a land war in Asia. We forgot. We knew from Nuremberg and from Tokyo what were war crimes and what were not. We forgot that we had virtually invented the concept of a war crime. We forgot. In all cases, we forgot because we chose to forget. We chose to believe that forgetting gave us real power and that memory made us weak. We even forgot how well we knew that was a lie.
Twenty-odd years ago, at the urging of a great editor, I wrote a long piece at another magazine about my family's experience with Alzheimer's disease, which eventually took my father and all of his siblings. It is a terrifying disease for a writer because it attacks those aspects of the individual that are so crucial to the act of writing—namely memory and language. Without memory, there can be no connection with the world, nothing salvaged or brought forward. Without language, memory is orphaned. Without both of them, history is mute.
That story, and the experience of writing it, has bled into parts of my work in a hundred different ways, but the main points remain the same. Language and memory must work together not only to preserve the past but to illuminate the present and to build a future. The disease robbed my father of both language and memory, and thus it robbed him of his past, his present, and his future. He spent his last years as a kind of vagabond, a stranger to himself, a permanent refugee in an unmoored life. I watch the presidential campaign this year, and I watch how the country has abandoned self-government and the idea of a political commonwealth, and I see a country that is voluntarily taking upon itself my father's disease. A vagabond country, making itself a stranger to itself, a permanent refugee country, unmoored from its history.
A country that remembers, a country with an empowered memory that acts as a check on the dangerous excesses of power itself, does not produce a Donald Trump. It was the very first Republican president who said the most memorable thing about memory, and its mystic chords, and how he hoped, one day, those chords once again would be touched by the better angels of our nature. That was Abraham Lincoln's First Inaugural Address. By the time he came to deliver his second, in which he appealed to the country to remember how it had torn itself apart, six hundred thousand Americans had slaughtered one another in a war that was only then beginning to come to an end:
Fondly do we hope—fervently do we pray—that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether."
Remember, this passage said to the people of a tattered and bleeding nation. Bind up the wounds. Take care of him who has borne the battle, and his widow and orphan, too. Achieve a just and lasting peace between yourselves and all nations. But first, remember how this misery came to pass. Remember what we are capable of doing to one another if we lose faith in every institution of self-government, especially those into which we are supposed to channel our passions to constructive purpose. Remember, Lincoln said in this speech, which was his last warning to the nation he'd preserved. Remember that we can be killers. Remember that, and you can be strong and powerful enough to not allow it to happen again.
The late historian Michael Kammen likened even the newest Americans to Fortinbras in Hamlet, who declares that he has "some rights of memory in this kingdom." Even the immigrants most lately arrived can, Kammen argued, "have an imaginative and meaningful relationship to the determinative aspects of American history." In the campaign now ongoing, we see successful candidates running against the very notion of what Kammen was talking about. When Trump chants his mantra—"Make America Great Again"—the rest of the slogan is unsaid but obvious. The implied conclusion is "…Before All of Them Wrecked It." And that is what has been selling, all year long, because while the struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting, there is no guarantee that either struggle will end in triumph.
GetLeft
Well-Known Member
Creative collection of ideas. Nicely written. But what's the message? Don't vote for Trump?
To do away with the forgetting we gotta do a lot more than that. Starting with not voting for Hillary too.
When we take an honest look and ask who over the course of the current election cycle represents our closest hope of remembering and of 'striking those mystic angelical chords,' it's Sanders. And look where we are with him.
Reality check. Our glorious fictional american harp strings are corroded beyond repair. We aren't what we 'were.' What we 'were' is nothing but what self interested people reinvent 'us' as anyway. And no one creates a good piece of fiction without a reason.
So what't the reason for that piece?
Not asking beligerently. Just wondering.
To do away with the forgetting we gotta do a lot more than that. Starting with not voting for Hillary too.
When we take an honest look and ask who over the course of the current election cycle represents our closest hope of remembering and of 'striking those mystic angelical chords,' it's Sanders. And look where we are with him.
Reality check. Our glorious fictional american harp strings are corroded beyond repair. We aren't what we 'were.' What we 'were' is nothing but what self interested people reinvent 'us' as anyway. And no one creates a good piece of fiction without a reason.
So what't the reason for that piece?
Not asking beligerently. Just wondering.
grokit
well-worn member
This is definitely fiorina's playbook
It seems that ben carson should have been louder
Yup, too bad we're ADHD Nation; we don't remember jackshit
We can't even seem to focus on what's right in front of us:
http://books.simonandschuster.com/A-D-H-D-Nation/Alan-Schwarz/9781501105913
Last edited:
I've always liked George Takei. He hits the nail right on the head in this video:
Farid
Well-Known Member
The issues that Takei brings up as issues Clinton and Sanders agree on, are all issues I think are not pressing when compared with the issues the candidates disagree with. The fact is if a candidate won who made disastrous policy here in the US (maybe he lowered the minimum wage and somehow managed to make gay marriage illegal again) those problems could be undone. See how easy it was for Obama to undo some of Bush's social policy by legalizing gay marriage and implementing different domestic programs.
But you cannot un-invade a country. It will be decades before Libya is even close to as prosperous as it was prior to the invasion. In fact if things continue the country might end up being fractured into 2 states and the low intensity war that has been going on could erupt into a full blown civil war.
Syria and Iraq are just other examples. Iran is in their sights as well, judging by speeches by Clinton (and previously George W. Bush)
I can't help but feel those who vote on party lines without question are validating the divide an conquer strategy that created the 2 party system in the first place. The ultra wealthy don't care about Democrats or Republicans. They don't care if there's peace or war overseas, or if gay marriage is legal or illegal. They care about maintaining their ability to avoid paying taxes, and the way to do that is to keep the middle class divided.
But you cannot un-invade a country. It will be decades before Libya is even close to as prosperous as it was prior to the invasion. In fact if things continue the country might end up being fractured into 2 states and the low intensity war that has been going on could erupt into a full blown civil war.
Syria and Iraq are just other examples. Iran is in their sights as well, judging by speeches by Clinton (and previously George W. Bush)
I can't help but feel those who vote on party lines without question are validating the divide an conquer strategy that created the 2 party system in the first place. The ultra wealthy don't care about Democrats or Republicans. They don't care if there's peace or war overseas, or if gay marriage is legal or illegal. They care about maintaining their ability to avoid paying taxes, and the way to do that is to keep the middle class divided.
howie105
Well-Known Member
The real shot callers are not bound by the same laws and national boundaries as a citizen. They are international by nature and beyond the reach of those they manipulate. In an age when wealth and influence move with ease from optimized labor pool to optimized labor pool a national tie makes very little sense.
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
I think Bernie isn't going away quickly because he wants to keep his issues out there. It keeps his ideas on the democratic table - the debate keeps going. He's not saying as many negative things about Hillary I've noticed.
He probably wants to get Hillary to promise to implement a few of his ideas and feels he owes something to his followers.
Edit
Bill Maher had me laughing on his show last Friday, he was listing things that we didn't know about Bernie. One of them was he uses a balloon to comb his hair.
It's interesting listening to some of these Trump supporters, the regular people. Some of them really are lacking in IQ points and don't have a clue about what's going on and the actual issues.
Those are the folks Trump has been counting on. There's a lot of stupid people in America, that's what worries me.
More attention to the fact that Trump hasn't given enough of his tax info. He keeps saying he's being audited. Why isn't that done yet?
He probably wants to get Hillary to promise to implement a few of his ideas and feels he owes something to his followers.
Edit
Bill Maher had me laughing on his show last Friday, he was listing things that we didn't know about Bernie. One of them was he uses a balloon to comb his hair.
It's interesting listening to some of these Trump supporters, the regular people. Some of them really are lacking in IQ points and don't have a clue about what's going on and the actual issues.
Those are the folks Trump has been counting on. There's a lot of stupid people in America, that's what worries me.
More attention to the fact that Trump hasn't given enough of his tax info. He keeps saying he's being audited. Why isn't that done yet?
Last edited:
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
No offense, Farid, but you seem to be confused about what the President's job actually is. Foreign policy is only a portion, and a relatively smaller portion of the President's job. The reason there are cabinet posts for Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and now Secretary of homeland security, is to keep the President from being consumed by international affairs.
The Presidents primary job is a domestic one, yes protecting citizens from foreign threats, but maybe more importantly protecting Americans from domestic ones like corporations who only care about their own success, and wall street who cares only about their own pockets, and insurance companies and oil companies, etc.
He is responsible for managing the general health, not only of his citizenry but also of their economy and their social milieu. He, along with the Supreme Court, is the chief arbiter of fairness in America, and not every president has done his best to recognize and actualize that responsibility. At least this President has tried. Can you imagine how Donald Trump would manage fairness in America?
I don't mean to diminish the importance or criticality of America's relationship to the world. I believe it to be hugely important and sometimes uncomfortably influential. As the only remaining superpower we have responsibilities beyond those of many other nations and we don't have the option to remain on the sidelines. But it is a huge mistake to imply that domestic policy is either less important or easily instituted and changed in our form of government, or that how the President deals with the rest of the world is all that's important in choosing her/him.
How they see America is a great deal MORE important, it seems to me.
Added: And I must add how Donald Trump sees America scares the bejesus out of me...
Last edited:
I'm not a big fan of Hillary's foreign policy either. I much prefer Bernie's ideas. But, sadly, it doesn't look like he's going to win the nomination. That leaves us with Hillary. As @cybrguy pointed out, there's more to being prez than just foreign policy. And, come November, if Bernie supporters decide to either stay home or to vote for a third party, it'll split the Democratic base and make it easier for the Republican candidate to win.
I, for one, really don't want that to happen.
I, for one, really don't want that to happen.
grokit
well-worn member
If hillary wins and is unsuccessful for any reason, like if she has no mandate from the lack of election momentum and congress won't work with her and she is a one-term president, for example, then the pendulum could swing in favor of a disastrous conservative agenda. Would it be better for trump to be the ineffective one, allowing the pendulum to swing back to a more progressive rule? Probably not, but it's an interesting proposition. The ends are important, if the means doesn't kill us off beforehand.
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
If hillary wins and is unsuccessful for any reason, like if she has no mandate from the lack of election momentum and congress won't work with her and she is a one-term president, for example, then the pendulum could swing in favor of a disastrous conservative agenda. Would it be better for trump to be the ineffective one, allowing the pendulum to swing back to a more progressive rule? Probably not, but it's an interesting proposition. The ends are important, if the means doesn't kill us off beforehand.
grokit...I didn't see that one coming.....Now that I've recovered consciousness......my answer to the question posed is 'No, uh-uh, nyet, nine, nay'.
Farid
Well-Known Member
I don't think I'm confused at all about the president being commander and Chief of the Armed forces. If Hillary had won the election instead of Obama we would be dealing with an Iraq circa 2005 situation in Syria right now.
And my original point is that every domestic change can be undone because we live in the greatest country in the world, and because the public outcry will not stop. That cannot be said for foreign policy disasters which get forgotten as soon the American public's amnesia kicks in.
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
So, you have a way to bring back to life all the lives lost to gun violence. Great.
And the children born to rape and incest. You will make sure they have a great life. Thanks.
And the people who lost their homes and their jobs to wall street run amuck. I assume you have a solution for them. And those who lost homes to flooding and fire. And those who die for lack of health care, and those choking to death on pollution, or being poisoned by their water, or getting earthquakes where they have never occurred before etc etc...
A country is much more than its military, and its leaders have a lot more to do than to manage it. What we do inside our country's borders is just as important, no more important, than what we do outside them.