[HoosierDaddy]

Nicodimas, on 02 February 2017 - 01:32 AM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on 01 February 2017 - 11:28 PM, said:

Nicodimas, on 01 February 2017 - 10:15 PM, said:

I like the Supreme Court nominee, someone who is a strict constitutionalist ... Nice!!

Trump should go after term limits next and drain the swamp. He could easily set it at age right ?...so he could stack the Supreme Court with a bunch of different people that are strict constitutionalist's and level the playing field with politics. A bunch of young idealistic Supreme Court nominees sounds like a great thing for the republic really...

I see him going long on this angle.

1. You're messing with bringing out an amendment to article 3 at that point. They are for life barring impeachment.

2. You're anti-government libertarian, correct? You do realize the right to privacy is a judicially interpretive right that doesn't exist in the Constitution?

3. He's doing anything BUT draining the swamp. It's billionaires, Goldman Sachs, and CEO's in his cabinet. If you thought corruption was a problem in the past, well have fun.

amphibian, on 02 February 2017 - 12:19 AM, said:

Nicodimas, on 01 February 2017 - 10:15 PM, said:

I like the Supreme Court nominee, someone who is a strict constitutionalist ... Nice!!

Trump should go after term limits next and drain the swamp. He could easily set it at age right ?...so he could stack the Supreme Court with a bunch of different people that are strict constitutionalist's and level the playing field with politics. A bunch of young idealistic Supreme Court nominees sounds like a great thing for the republic really...

I see him going long on this angle.

Can you explain what the "swamp" is to you?

2) I would argue: I'm sliding into liberalism <or approaching it>. I believe in a middle of line federal government, that remembers the Constitution is it's bible. I believe in government these day's, with state-hoods having more and the federal having less. I think that was the intent that states could check the federal in line, but that's a old old argument. I believe in the federal government keeping out of business, except to punish. Of course if we really wanted to describe this as a X/Y graph in terms of politics...in reality there is a Z tangent too. Socially they should stick out of our lives as religion again is a person choice.... (I think it's really quite frankly personal insecurity if I force my beliefs on others). On the flip-side, government education should produce a strong worker and critical thinking American. Not one that seemingly lives off it's system, seemingly empowering it, which is a such path of misery. We should definitely smash the rackets of government and capitalistic institutions. Liberalism was supposed to be about making sure to go after active ongoing change, seeing what occurred and finding the better and more efficient systems right?? It's We The People! It should be about us versus them, not the federal government as central, the corporations the powerful and us fighting over the scraps. Also we really got to hold people accountable, powerful people, the seemingly untouchable. The interest has been one of the greatest things for civilization, it allows us to share, collude and exchange a great vast amount of information and perception. At our own peril, we should be careful not to become some sort of hive-mind and let mere politic's divide us. Ultimately, reality is a lot more complicated them some tag-line and each person should know where they stand on the issues then merely agreeing with Team A, or Team B.


The Swamp: The global cabal (current globalists/the corruption/whatever you call it). ..Maybe my idealism/utopian-ism, but I am really jaded today. I'm not so much Anti-government these days, but anti-leader...like why do we have to empower these element's. Ever just think back and sit there and realize probably a total of thirty people could just melt the world if they wanted too. I want all the powerful leaders always squabbling for power based off we the people perception and we the people being given the best chance to succeed by the corporations. Whatever enables that..let's aim for that.

I can't be the only one that thinks Trump could be a prime spot. Like really through business interest's <capitalism> we could link up with Russia so easily. Through business he could usher in a profit sharing plan that most politicians might not be able to do for fear of the party politics this could initiate. It would dispel decades of policy and a step closer to peace <from the main holders of nukes>. Equally, more important in dealing business in cold hard money they could go into the middle east and rebuild...The swamp are those that let keeping power to themselve stand in the way of progress. I imagine it's way more complicated that I can picture and navigating this would be a huge undertaking.

Why is connecting to an autocratic, demonstrably undemocratic, anti-American country a good idea? Seriously, how deep is your head buried in the sand to think this is a good idea?

[Obdigore]

So my response to the SCOTUS pick, as someone who is a firm believer in a separation of church and state, is disgust.

The man is a scalia clone. He claims to be an originalist up until it's something he feels like he wants to side with. My expectation is that he isn't as good at writing bullshit opinions as scalia, so it will be more obvious, but not any more bullshit. He's a man who firmly believes that if you are a white christian, you can do whatever you want and the law should bend to you, and not the other way.

Trump is the figurehead, the Zaphod Beeblebrox to Bannon. Bannon is the cancer of white nationalism, he's a man who wants to destroy the current government, and one who wants another 'holy war' against Islam and anything else not white/christian. He's also stated that he thinks war against china is inevitable and he welcomes it while the US is militarily ahead, regardless of things like nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile with Trump being a fucking moron, the EU is talking about the US being one of their top issues instead of a valued trading partner.

[amphibian]

Nicodimas, on 02 February 2017 - 01:32 AM, said:

2) I would argue: I'm sliding into liberalism <or approaching it>. I believe in a middle of line federal government, that remembers the Constitution is it's bible. I believe in government these day's, with state-hoods having more and the federal having less. I think that was the intent that states could check the federal in line, but that's a old old argument. I believe in the federal government keeping out of business, except to punish. Of course if we really wanted to describe this as a X/Y graph in terms of politics...in reality there is a Z tangent too. Socially they should stick out of our lives as religion again is a person choice.... (I think it's really quite frankly personal insecurity if I force my beliefs on others). On the flip-side, government education should produce a strong worker and critical thinking American. Not one that seemingly lives off it's system, seemingly empowering it, which is a such path of misery. We should definitely smash the rackets of government and capitalistic institutions. Liberalism was supposed to be about making sure to go after active ongoing change, seeing what occurred and finding the better and more efficient systems right?? It's We The People! It should be about us versus them, not the federal government as central, the corporations the powerful and us fighting over the scraps. Also we really got to hold people accountable, powerful people, the seemingly untouchable. The interest has been one of the greatest things for civilization, it allows us to share, collude and exchange a great vast amount of information and perception. At our own peril, we should be careful not to become some sort of hive-mind and let mere politic's divide us. Ultimately, reality is a lot more complicated them some tag-line and each person should know where they stand on the issues then merely agreeing with Team A, or Team B.

You realize that the single biggest example of "states' rights over federal governance" remains the decision of many states to take actions to preserve the institution of human slavery, which led to the Civil War. The continued exercise of states' rights has mostly been regarding policing and taxing people in ways that are mostly anti-brown people.

You are dog whistling so damn hard here.

Quote

The Swamp: The global cabal (current globalists/the corruption/whatever you call it). ..Maybe my idealism/utopian-ism, but I am really jaded today. I'm not so much Anti-government these days, but anti-leader...like why do we have to empower these element's. Ever just think back and sit there and realize probably a total of thirty people could just melt the world if they wanted too. I want all the powerful leaders always squabbling for power based off we the people perception and we the people being given the best chance to succeed by the corporations. Whatever enables that..let's aim for that.

The gridlock in the federal government has been a thing mostly caused by Republicans in Congress. Since the 1970s, they have realized that obstructionism costs them very little. It doesn't cost them elections through losing voter support because they somehow frame this as "fighting for the little guy" when in truth, obstructionism benefits mostly the giant corporations and the extremely wealthy. Mitch McConnell has been consistently bullshitting around and obstructing everything, while spewing out propaganda, for years. He successfully stalled a Supreme Court nominee for 10 months. That is unheard of. It is a sign of how willing the GOP is to do anything and everything to fuck over the Democrats, and since the Democrats stupidly keep saying "Ok, I'll give in to this now if you give me that later" while the Republicans never actually give "that" later. I don't understand how you figure these GOP people are fighting for the little guy. Their direct actions and votes do not line up with anything other than fucking the little guy over as hard as they can. 20+ million children would go hungry if Paul Ryan gets his way and gets to cut school meal programs. TWENTY MILLION PLUS CHILDREN. KIDS.

Furthermore, Trump has picked a group of people around him who are multi-millionaires or even multi-billionaires. Many are ex-Goldman Sachs. Many have strong ties to Putin's Russia, a non-democratic dictatorship. And you think these people are not part of the "cabal" and are "fighting for the little guy"?

What the literal fuck am I reading?

Quote

I can't be the only one that thinks Trump could be a prime spot. Like really through business interest's <capitalism> we could link up with Russia so easily. Through business he could usher in a profit sharing plan that most politicians might not be able to do for fear of the party politics this could initiate. It would dispel decades of policy and a step closer to peace <from the main holders of nukes>. Equally, more important in dealing business in cold hard money they could go into the middle east and rebuild...The swamp are those that let keeping power to themselve stand in the way of progress. I imagine it's way more complicated that I can picture and navigating this would be a huge undertaking.

So... you want America to become a nation of jostling oligarchs currying favor with a dictator? Because that's what the Russians are and what the Sauds have imposed in much of the Middle East.

Your series of posts is the least American thing I have ever seen and it's because you have bought so hard into propaganda that you ignore real events, real votes, real legislature, and more to continue pinning the hopes and dreams you have onto a very rich con man and his 21st century Nazi advisors. If given his way, Trump and his "friends" will crash the country like the GOP did to Kansas and Louisiana. They will get rich from this while everyone else gets poorer, sicker, and/or dies in a mountain of debt and suffering. This is not hyperbole. The sad fucking thing is that you are not alone in this.

This post has been edited by amphibian: 02 February 2017 - 04:02 AM

[Primateus]

I think what Amphibian is saying is that the GOP is...

Spoiler

an old white guy fucking you in the ass all the while telling you it's a good thing and like a chump, you believe him, give him your money and the keys to the car all while you're thanking him profusely for fucking you in the ass. Because he has convinced you that it's a good thing.

And the, for you and us, worst part (but the best part for him) is that you just don't want accept it because "You're nobody's bitch!"

Here's the sad truth though: Yes, yes you are!

I apologize for my language but I believe it to be necessary to get my point across.

[Gorefest]

death rattle, on 02 February 2017 - 12:55 AM, said:

EmperorMagus, on 01 February 2017 - 10:36 PM, said:

https://www.theguard...flynn-on-notice

*Stream of profanities*

Are they crazy or just incompetent? This has made me have a weird feeling in the pit of stomach.

Jeez Louise! He's also apparently antagonizing Australia: https://www.washingt...e05d_story.html

and Mexico: http://www.businessi...eatening-2017-2

Yeah, but he likes the UK, so it's all fine really.

[Gorefest]

On a side note, anyone mention the ominous reverberations to Plato's 'Republic' yet?

According to Socrates and Plato, government goes through five key phases:

1. Aristocracy (rule of the capable and virtuous)
2. Timocracy (rule of the famous, the admired)
3. Oligarchy (rule of the insiders, the clique)
4. Democracy (rule by the people)
5. Tyranny



The rise of democracy:

"From the least cause, or with none at all, the city falls ill and fights a battle for life or death. And democracy comes into power when the poor are the victors, killing some and exiling some, and giving equal shares in the government to all the rest..."

The manner of life in such a State is that of democrats; there is freedom and plainness of speech, and every man does what is right in his own eyes, and has his own way of life."

"The great charm is, that you may do as you like; you may govern if you like, let it alone if you like; go to war and make peace if you feel disposed, and all quite irrespective of anybody else."

"The State is not one but many, like a bazaar at which you can buy anything."

"Hence arise the most various developments of character; the State is like a piece of embroidery of which the colors and figures are the manners of men..."

"There will be the greatest variety of human natures...being an embroidered robe which is spangled with every sort of flower..."

"Observe, too, how grandly Democracy sets her foot upon all our fine theories of education,--how little she cares for the training of her statesmen!"

"Such is democracy; --a pleasing, lawless, various sort of government, distributing equality to equals and unequals alike..."

"Democracy...is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike..."

"Freedom...as they tell you in a democracy, is the glory of the State..."

Then the warning that 'unrestrained freedom would eventually lead to licentiousness':


"Can liberty have any limit? Certainly not...By degrees the anarchy finds a way into private houses...The son is on a level with his father, he having no respect or reverence for either of his parents; and this is his freedom...Citizens chafe impatiently at the least touch of authority... they will have no one over them...Such is the fair and glorious beginning out of which springs tyranny...Liberty overmasters democracy...the excessive increase of anything often causes a reaction in the opposite direction...The excess of liberty, whether in States or individuals, seems only to pass into excess of slavery...And so tyranny naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme form of liberty... "


According to Plato, because the citizens have no experience running a government they will vote to spread the wealth around until the treasury is empty. Then they will vote to take the money from the rich. Until finally there is no more money to go around. This leads to chaos and anarchy.

"Last of all comes the tyrant...

In the early days of his power, he is full of smiles, and he salutes every one whom he meets...making promises in public and also in private, liberating debtors, and distributing land to the people and his followers, and wanting to be so kind and good to every one...This is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears above ground he is a protector...Hinting at the abolition of debts and partition of lands... he begins to make a party against the rich..that they may be impoverished by payment of taxes, and thus compelled to devote themselves to their daily wants and therefore less likely to conspire against him?...And when a man who is wealthy and is also accused of being an enemy of the people sees...he flees...and is not ashamed to be a coward..."

"How then does a protector begin to change into a tyrant?...He begins to grow unpopular. Then comes the famous request for a bodyguard, which is the device of all those who have got thus far in their tyrannical career -'Let not the people's friend,' as they say, 'be lost to them.'... The people readily assent; all their fears are for him --they have none for themselves...And the protector of whom we spoke, is to be seen the overthrower of many, standing up in the chariot of State with the reins in his hand, no longer protector, but tyrant absolute..."



"The lion and serpent element in them disproportionately grows and gains strength. The tyrant must be always getting up a war. He is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader."





"Then some of those who joined in setting him up, and who are in power, speak their minds to him and to one another, and the more courageous of them cast in his teeth what is being done. And the tyrant, if he means to rule, must get rid of them; he cannot stop while he has a friend or an enemy who is good for anything. Some he kills and others he banishes."

"And therefore he must look about him and see who is valiant, who is high-minded, who is wise, who is wealthy; happy man, he is the enemy of them all, and must seek occasion against them whether he will or no, until he has made a purgation of the State. Yes, I said, not the sort of purgation which the physicians make of the body; for they take away the worse and leave the better part, but he does the reverse. And the more detestable his actions are to the citizens the more satellites and the greater devotion in them will he require? And who are the devoted band, and where will he procure them? He will rob the citizens of their slaves; he will then set them free and enroll them in his bodyguard. To be sure he will be able to trust them best of all. What a blessed creature must this tyrant be; he has put to death the others and has these for his trusted friends."

"These are the new citizens whom he has called into existence, who admire him and are his companions, while the good hate and avoid him. But they will attract mobs, and hire voices fair and loud and persuasive, and draw the cities over to tyrannies. Moreover, they are paid for this and receive honor --the greatest honor, as might be expected, from tyrants."

[Vengeance]

Read these two. It will blow you away. One is able to construct sentences and the other barely able to speak. You won't believe who...

http://www.sfgate.co...vs-10901062.php



Sorry couldn't resist the click bate lead.

[Abyss]

Vengeance, on 02 February 2017 - 02:31 PM, said:

Read these two. It will blow you away. One is able to construct sentences and the other barely able to speak. You won't believe who...

http://www.sfgate.co...vs-10901062.php
...

That is painful on multiple levels.

[QuickTidal]

Abyss, on 02 February 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

Vengeance, on 02 February 2017 - 02:31 PM, said:

Read these two. It will blow you away. One is able to construct sentences and the other barely able to speak. You won't believe who...

http://www.sfgate.co...vs-10901062.php
...

That is painful on multiple levels.

Holy hells.

The blatant uninformed nature of Trumps speech is baffling. Like he literally talks about himself and all the little "toddler-esque" shit he's angry about...throws the most prominent Black History names out into the ether that he knows (which was what? Like 4-5 names?) and doesn't say anything about them at all ...like "Fredrick Douglass...he was good. Huge! Important guy!" and then just tipping his hat to people there...like fuck....the difference is astonishing.

I mean Obama was already an eloquent speaker, but the difference between them makes him look Shakespearean, and Trump sound like he's Nelson holding court on The Simpsons at recess at the Elementary School.

And this guy is in charge? I mean wot?

[amphibian]

What it means is that he didn't think these people (the brown skinned ones) were worthy of a prepared speech or the consideration that goes into a respectful appearance.

[Abyss]

Look at all the money he's saving on speechwriters tho'. HUGE money!

[EmperorMagus]

amphibian, on 02 February 2017 - 06:10 PM, said:

What it means is that he didn't think these people (the brown skinned ones) were worthy of a prepared speech or the consideration that goes into a respectful appearance.

To be honest, I don't think it's a "brown people thing". It looks more like typical Trump rambling on about crap. Kinda like his CIA speech.

[QuickTidal]

EmperorMagus, on 02 February 2017 - 07:20 PM, said:

amphibian, on 02 February 2017 - 06:10 PM, said:

What it means is that he didn't think these people (the brown skinned ones) were worthy of a prepared speech or the consideration that goes into a respectful appearance.

To be honest, I don't think it's a "brown people thing". It looks more like typical Trump rambling on about crap. Kinda like his CIA speech.

If he doesn't care enough in his Black History Month speech to ...you know...ACTUALLY talk about Black History...then it's ABSOLUTELY a POC thing. There's no way around that. You don't give a speech about an important topic like that and half ass it if you care even in the slightest.

[EmperorMagus]

QuickTidal, on 02 February 2017 - 07:24 PM, said:

EmperorMagus, on 02 February 2017 - 07:20 PM, said:

amphibian, on 02 February 2017 - 06:10 PM, said:

What it means is that he didn't think these people (the brown skinned ones) were worthy of a prepared speech or the consideration that goes into a respectful appearance.

To be honest, I don't think it's a "brown people thing". It looks more like typical Trump rambling on about crap. Kinda like his CIA speech.

If he doesn't care enough in his Black History Month speech to ...you know...ACTUALLY talk about Black History...then it's ABSOLUTELY a POC thing. There's no way around that. You don't give a speech about an important topic like that and half ass it if you care even in the slightest.

Oh I'm not saying he cares at all, he obviously doesn't. But Trump has never shown that he cares for anything except complimenting himself.

[QuickTidal]

And here's the Nation Prayer Breakfast speech....and .....jeezus....

https://www.washingt...m=.0ee64e587f90

[Mentalist]

Abyss, on 02 February 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

Vengeance, on 02 February 2017 - 02:31 PM, said:

Read these two. It will blow you away. One is able to construct sentences and the other barely able to speak. You won't believe who...

http://www.sfgate.co...vs-10901062.php
...

That is painful on multiple levels.

It totally is. But.

I hate to be the devil's advocate guy, but objectively, we are comparing Obama's speech after 8 years of presidency with Trump's "I just got inaugurated" speech.

In order to be objective, we need Obama's 2009 speech. Which I'm sure was still tons better, but then at least you have objective reasons to bash Trump.

Obama's speech is full of listing his accomplishments, which is on-topic, but also promotes his "agenda" .
Trump's only accomplishment to date is getting elected. That's literally the only context he'll have.

Once again, not to say Trump doesn't deserve the bashing, but let's not get caught up in the other side's expert manipulation, shall we?

[QuickTidal]

Mentalist, on 02 February 2017 - 07:50 PM, said:

Abyss, on 02 February 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

Vengeance, on 02 February 2017 - 02:31 PM, said:

Read these two. It will blow you away. One is able to construct sentences and the other barely able to speak. You won't believe who...

http://www.sfgate.co...vs-10901062.php
...

That is painful on multiple levels.

It totally is. But.

I hate to be the devil's advocate guy, but objectively, we are comparing Obama's speech after 8 years of presidency with Trump's "I just got inaugurated" speech.

In order to be objective, we need Obama's 2009 speech. Which I'm sure was still tons better, but then at least you have objective reasons to bash Trump.

no we don't.

1. It's CLEAR Trump has forgone "speech writers" which Obama had from Day damned 1. SO instead of writers penning an coherent and on topic speech...he's just talking out of his ass for 10 minutes.

2. We know this is not a one-off where he didn't use speech writers...because his Prayer Breakfast speech is similarly WAY off topic and self-aggrandizing.

So no...he doesn't get the benefit of doubt of "time in the job" from me. Not even an inch.

[Vengeance]

QuickTidal, on 02 February 2017 - 07:54 PM, said:

Mentalist, on 02 February 2017 - 07:50 PM, said:

Abyss, on 02 February 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

Vengeance, on 02 February 2017 - 02:31 PM, said:

Read these two. It will blow you away. One is able to construct sentences and the other barely able to speak. You won't believe who...

http://www.sfgate.co...vs-10901062.php
...

That is painful on multiple levels.

It totally is. But.

I hate to be the devil's advocate guy, but objectively, we are comparing Obama's speech after 8 years of presidency with Trump's "I just got inaugurated" speech.

In order to be objective, we need Obama's 2009 speech. Which I'm sure was still tons better, but then at least you have objective reasons to bash Trump.

no we don't.

1. It's CLEAR Trump has forgone "speech writers" which Obama had from Day damned 1. SO instead of writers penning an coherent and on topic speech...he's just talking out of his ass for 10 minutes.

2. We know this is not a one-off where he didn't use speech writers...because his Prayer Breakfast speech is similarly WAY off topic and self-aggrandizing.

So no...he doesn't get the benefit of doubt of "time in the job" from me. Not even an inch.

We are comparing someone who is able to think about others then themselves and compose or have composed a speech about the situation and subject that they are attending with someone is in capable of doing any of that. The fact that he response as if Franklin Douglas is alive and "doing great things" demonstrates his in ability to even both trying.

If he had any graciousness in his hateful little soul he would have mentioned the struggle that African Americans have had in this country and how far we have came as a nation to have had a African American as a previous president. That would have been bullshit but at least it would have been gracious bullshit. Instead he talks about Franklin Douglas as if he is alive and how great a person Omarosa's actually is.

[Abyss]

Mentalist, on 02 February 2017 - 07:50 PM, said:

...
Trump's only accomplishment to date is getting elected. That's literally the only context he'll have.
...

That must be why he opened a Black History Month speech with 'So, the election went well.'.

Very on point.

[Cause]

Vengeance, on 02 February 2017 - 02:31 PM, said:

Read these two. It will blow you away. One is able to construct sentences and the other barely able to speak. You won't believe who...

http://www.sfgate.co...vs-10901062.php



Sorry couldn't resist the click bate lead.

The Alzheimer theory is growing on me