US Politics Thread

[Bigga]

Gosh. Keep digging with this nonsense if you want. I didn't say anything about Israel-Palestine until you brought it up, the article didn't talk about it besides the quote I supplied for you. It's moronic you still want to go on about it.

Learn to read. You claimed I called you a crank, the other day you claimed I called you a grifter. I haven't, what I have done is call out the people that you quote on a regular basis. If you think associating yourself with Max Blumenthal makes you a crank, I'm not going to argue against you.

Maybe you might want to look up the reasons why America has such a vast military budget and how it is funded.

Even if you assume that you could easily direct funding away from the Department of defence towards housing and healthcare budgets, do you not contemplate that left-wing squad members and other Democrats might find themselves under attack from the big military firms and their lobbyists?

Schiff's constituency is in California, Max Blumenthal isn't there as a civilian asking questions, he is there as an agitator with an agenda. It's just bizarre that you think this kind of crankery is to be respected and admired.

I'm going to wade through the shit conversation here.

Why is being under attack from military firms and lobbyists such an issue if the people come first? Is this your argument...?

I didn't mention Schiff's constituency, you did. I said civilians under his ward, the same under Sanders' ward and Bush's i.e., the gov.

Come back when you have a cogent discussion.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I'm going to wade through the shit conversation here.

Why is being under attack from military firms and lobbyists such an issue if the people come first? Is this your argument...?

I didn't mention Schiff's constituency, you did. I said civilians under his ward, the same under Sanders' ward and Bush's i.e., the gov.

Come back when you have a cogent discussion.

So you are now bastardising language again. Ward actually has a meaning in plain English.

an administrative division of a city or borough that typically elects and is represented by a councillor or councillors.

If you were talking about a different meaning..

Is MB really so stupid that he needs to be a ward of the court?

Schiff isn't there to represent people who aren't eligible to vote for him because he doesn’t live in his constituency. MB isn't a delegate of california lns living in Tent city, he is a halfwit hack playing crank.

If you write a letter to an MP from a constituency that isn't your own, complaining about various issues would you expect a reply?

It's amusing that you find this kind of performative behaviour as something to admire.

Yesterday you talked about splicing people apart.

splice - Wiktionary, the free dictionary

en.m.wiktionary.org

 

[Bigga]

So you are now bastardising language again. Ward actually has a meaning in plain English.

an administrative division of a city or borough that typically elects and is represented by a councillor or councillors.

If you were talking about a different meaning..

Is MB really so stupid that he needs to be a ward of the court?

Schiff isn't there to represent people who aren't eligible to vote for him because he doesn’t live in his constituency. MB isn't a delegate of california lns living in Tent city, he is a halfwit hack playing crank.

If you write a letter to an MP from a constituency that isn't your own, complaining about various issues would you expect a reply?

It's amusing that you find this kind of performative behaviour as something to admire.

Yesterday you talked about splicing people apart.

splice - Wiktionary, the free dictionary

en.m.wiktionary.org

Still nothing cogent, I see?

If you are under someone's care, you are their 'ward'. It's expansive English for those older than 12. So, yes, you can extrapolate that to citizens and politicians as a broader based description, i.e., individuals in government representing people under their "care".

A newscaster can ask an agriculture minister on their opinion on 'taking the knee', so I guess that newscaster would be wrong for doing so?

It's a REALLY silly and myopic straw man argument you want to present to avoid the real discussion on working class struggle.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Still nothing cogent, I see?

If you are under someone's care, you are their 'ward'. It's expansive English for those older than 12. So, yes, you can extrapolate that to citizens and politicians as a broader based description, i.e., individuals in government representing people under their "care".

A newscaster can ask an agriculture minister on their opinion on 'taking the knee', so I guess that newscaster would be wrong for doing so?

It's a REALLY silly and myopic straw man argument you want to present to avoid the real discussion on working class struggle.

Hilarious. You are stretching a legal definition to cover your absurd way of putting your point across by using words and phrases in the wrong context.

If you are acting as a journalist (broadcast or print) it is expected that you behave with a certain amount of decorum and respect if you expect to get an answer.

Obviously there are some circumstances the point is you won't get an answer, Trump or Boris etc, and the purpose is to shine a light on this. But this asshole was being deliberately obnoxious just for the benefit of his audience.

 

[west didsblue]

Hilarious. You are stretching a legal definition to cover your absurd way of putting your point across by using words and phrases in the wrong context.

If you are acting as a journalist (broadcast or print) it is expected that you behave with a certain amount of decorum and respect if you expect to get an answer.

Obviously there are some circumstances the point is you won't get an answer, Trump or Boris etc, and the purpose is to shine a light on this. But this asshole was being deliberately obnoxious just for the benefit of his audience.

Don’t know why you’re bothering having a discussion with someone who creates his own definition of commonly used words such that he can never be wrong.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Don’t know why you’re bothering having a discussion with someone who creates his own definition of commonly used words such that he can never be wrong.

I'm not going to bother anymore, it's pointless and futile and I was aware when I first replied to him. Not really much you can get out of a discussion with someone who just makes up stuff (Israel-Palestine above) and uses words like he does. It's fine to borrow words and use them in a different context if it makes sense and you have explained yourself, but he rarely makes any sense and struggles with the idea that sometimes he hasn't actually articulated himself properly.

 

[Bigga]

Hilarious. You are stretching a legal definition to cover your absurd way of putting your point across by using words and phrases in the wrong context.

If you are acting as a journalist (broadcast or print) it is expected that you behave with a certain amount of decorum and respect if you expect to get an answer.

Obviously there are some circumstances the point is you won't get an answer, Trump or Boris etc, and the purpose is to shine a light on this. But this asshole was being deliberately obnoxious just for the benefit of his audience.

*yawn*

"speech allows for colloquialism and slang". That's fact or you'd be wrong in almost every single delivery of argument.

To your silly point of a taxpaying civilian asking questions, can you show me where he lacked decorum? Did he shout aggressively in Schiff's face? Did he lack respect by screaming to the crowd he was a murderer?

Or did he just ask hard questions?

I wonder if this sought after level of 'decorum' and 'respect' from you, if you supported Matt Gaetz being drowned out by whistles, the other week?

I wonder if I looked if you or your cohorts may have 'liked' that incident over than just being asked civilised questions?

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

*yawn*

"speech allows for colloquialism and slang". That's fact or you'd be wrong in almost every single delivery of argument.

To your silly point of a taxpaying civilian asking questions, can you show me where he lacked decorum? Did he shout aggressively in Schiff's face? Did he lack respect by screaming to the crowd he was a murderer?

Or did he just ask hard questions?

I wonder if this sought after level of 'decorum' and 'respect' from you, if you supported Matt Gaetz being drowned out by whistles, the other week?

I wonder if I looked if you or your cohorts may have 'liked' that incident over than just being asked civilised questions?

I'm not bothering anymore, but I'll close off with this.

Just a few words from that clip: "Putin", "Russia", "DNC Hard drive", "Cuba", "Venezuela" and "Economic war". Lots of irrelevant nonsense when people were coming out to drum up support for the eviction moratorium. This guy already has connections because of his father, if he wasn't such a fruitcake, he probably wouldn't have a problem getting sit-down interviews with some of the people he is abusing.

If you honestly can't see that what this arsehole was doing, I can't help you. It actually confused me the first time I watched it because I didn't expect a trained journalist to behave like a drunken heckler, I thought he was using a clip from someone else.

It’s quite simple. You can have a protest or you can have an interview. You can't do both at the same time.

Journalists that carry out these kind of protests during the day job on a regular basis, probably aren't people worth paying much attention to for information or serious analysis.

 

[Bigga]

Wow, you can't walk and chew gum at the same time...??

I wonder if Blumenthal, precisely because of what he knew through his father, is the way he is because of such knowledge. After all, he's been closer to that political world than you could EVER dream of breathing on.

Now that the Dems are in power, have you noticed how much the Putin/ Russia screaming has quelled to a barely audible noise?

Since our dialogue is closing, I note how each ACTUAL point you railed against, you've offered no tangible evidence to argue against.

That's a concession I'll take.

Have a good night.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I mean “close” is relative. There would have been no support from the core higher ups in the military. Clearly none in the deeper bureaucracy. There would have been mass protests, walk-outs, all over the nation and in the blue states especially. And Donald Trump is intellectually deficient and an incredible coward so it could never have been managed. Look what the bulk of his “revolutionaries” did — they took selfies to “own the libs” like the fucking idiots (albeit in some cases violent and dangerous fucking idiots) they are. Not arguing it wasn’t as close as we’ve come, but beyond a declarative statement of who is in charge, effecting a permanent transition wasn’t really going to happen IMO.

Permanent transition maybe not, but they were close to having control of power at the DOJ, plus high ranking military and law enforcement officials in their pocket (Mike Flynn's brother for sure and potentially others yet to be uncovered). There were also others in the top echelons of the Trump Administration who could have run interference at every level.

Basically winning the election was their primary goal. Unfortunately for them they failed to deal with Biden due to the collapse of their Ukraine plan, but they were only a whistle-blower away from getting away with that. The illegal power grab was their backup plan, and it was 4 years in the making.

If they had have pulled this off it would have been uncharted territory for any modern Western democracy, and ANYTHING could have happened. In reality it was just a small series of chance occurrences that prevented Trump and his backers from pulling this off, but if the Trump clowns had been a bit more competent, who knows...

 

[BlueHammer85]

Just a reminder that it’s nice not to see that fat orange ugly **** on the news 24/7 making incoherent hateful embarrassing speeches. That’s all. Carry on.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Just a reminder that it’s nice not to see that fat orange ugly **** on the news 24/7 making incoherent hateful embarrassing speeches. That’s all. Carry on.

Not seen, yet, but has anything changed?

Did he do it in his baby suit?

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Permanent transition maybe not, but they were close to having control of power at the DOJ, plus high ranking military and law enforcement officials in their pocket (Mike Flynn's brother for sure and potentially others yet to be uncovered). There were also others in the top echelons of the Trump Administration who could have run interference at every level.

Basically winning the election was their primary goal. Unfortunately for them they failed to deal with Biden due to the collapse of their Ukraine plan, but they were only a whistle-blower away from getting away with that. The illegal power grab was their backup plan, and it was 4 years in the making.

If they had have pulled this off it would have been uncharted territory for any modern Western democracy, and ANYTHING could have happened. In reality it was just a small series of chance occurrences that prevented Trump and his backers from pulling this off, but if the Trump clowns had been a bit more competent, who knows...

You're right that a random outcome generator was prevented from starting up -- it could have gone anywhere, including all the way to the wholesale transformation of the nation to an authoritarian regime. But as noted I think the chances of this going whole hog were pretty small. Let's just say neither of us ever want to have to think about this conversation again, although I suspect at some point we're going to have to at some level given the desperation with which the Cult members are pursuing the curtailing of voting rights and snatching the mechanics of the election process away from independents and moderate, pragmatic partisans.

Biden has, so far, played this quite well by being above the fray, too busy to engage in petty politicking, too smart to get into the kind of scraps that would result in nothing but being dragged into the mud to be kneed in the groin. And he's riding the pandemic-recovery improvement wave, with his bigger issues being increasing the supply of goods and workers than demand for them. That's actually good because the private sector will solve those problems for him, eventually, assuming he and the Fed don't run into an inflation maelstrom. He doesn't need to worry about the Cult relative to the Presidency for now -- there aren't enough of them to do him damage and he has three and a half years -- but he does need to keep his party active, unified and together as much as he can, and keep control of the Senate and House. It's one day at a time here.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

You're right that a random outcome generator was prevented from starting up -- it could have gone anywhere, including all the way to the wholesale transformation of the nation to an authoritarian regime. But as noted I think the chances of this going whole hog were pretty small. Let's just say neither of us ever want to have to think about this conversation again, although I suspect at some point we're going to have to at some level given the desperation with which the Cult members are pursuing the curtailing of voting rights and snatching the mechanics of the election process away from independents and moderate, pragmatic partisans.

Biden has, so far, played this quite well by being above the fray, too busy to engage in petty politicking, too smart to get into the kind of scraps that would result in nothing but being dragged into the mud to be kneed in the groin. And he's riding the pandemic-recovery improvement wave, with his bigger issues being increasing the supply of goods and workers than demand for them. That's actually good because the private sector will solve those problems for him, eventually, assuming he and the Fed don't run into an inflation maelstrom. He doesn't need to worry about the Cult relative to the Presidency for now -- there aren't enough of them to do him damage and he has three and a half years -- but he does need to keep his party active, unified and together as much as he can, and keep control of the Senate and House. It's one day at a time here.

Aside from the inflation risk the only thing that can really derail the Biden/Harris agenda is if the progressives get too ambitious and end up splitting the vote in the midterms. Without the House and/or Senate Biden is absolutely f*cked.

 

[SWP's back]

Don’t know why you’re bothering having a discussion with someone who creates his own definition of commonly used words such that he can never be wrong.

You’re just being photosynthesis.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

You’re just being photosynthesis.

that's a paraxodical conundrum of the tallest magnanimity.

 

[super_city_si]

Wow, you can't walk and chew gum at the same time...??

I wonder if Blumenthal, precisely because of what he knew through his father, is the way he is because of such knowledge. After all, he's been closer to that political world than you could EVER dream of breathing on.

Now that the Dems are in power, have you noticed how much the Putin/ Russia screaming has quelled to a barely audible noise?

Since our dialogue is closing, I note how each ACTUAL point you railed against, you've offered no tangible evidence to argue against.

That's a concession I'll take.

Have a good night.

Hahah concession you’ll take, you got your arse handed to you....again.

 

[west didsblue]

Hahah concession you’ll take, you got your arse handed to you....again.

Not if you use biggtionary definitions.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

that's a paraxodical conundrum of the tallest magnanimity.

He's completely hat-stand!!!

 

[Bigga]

Hahah concession you’ll take, you got your arse handed to you....again.

Hey WML.

I didn't realise taxpayers should suffer with homelessness, healthcare, rent etc., whilst their own money goes elsewhere without consent.

If that's your pathetic win, cool.

That'll be my 'arse handed' to me.

Crack open a wife beater and celebrate with your stedhead mate.