Politics

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-03-27 11:34:06

GW Johnson wrote:

Connections between Team Trump and Russia are long confirmed (for one thing the Russian mafia is one of The Donald's biggest investors). Collusion between Team Trump and Russia to sway voter's opinions with fake news stuff: lots of smoke, no fire. Worth continuing to dig, though, just because of the smoke. As for monkeying with vote tallies, it's scary: they could have done it, but the evidence says they did not. Yet.
The fake news thing is a serious threat, and is partially attributable to the dumbing-down of education in recent decades. Few today could pass a 3rd grade test from a century ago. Stupid people are easier to rule, and to fool with propaganda: that's why the dumbing-down was done. That needs reversal, but it will take generations to fully correct. Until it is corrected, idiotic political ideologies will continue to substitute for practical policy suggestions, and we will continue to be awash in venal politicians, with no statesmen around at all.
Monkeying with vote tallies (by anyone, foreign or domestic) is stopped by using paper ballots. It may be slow and inconvenient, but it cannot be hacked, if no computers are involved. But it has to be done right: no more of that hanging-chad or misprinted butterfly-ballot bullshit. Graphite marks in ovals on paper can be read pretty reliably. There ought to be some sort of national standard for ballot format that the states can use, improve-on, and enforce for themselves.
As for Russian tampering-by-hacking or fake newsdissemination, may "tit for tat" is something we should do.
GW

The connection between Trump and the Russians is fake news, it all stemmed from a single joke Trump told when Hillary Clinton couldn't or wouldn't account for 30,000 missing e-mails, so Trump suggested that Vladimir Putin probably had them, and suggested that he come forward, what happened next was pure McCarthyite tactics by the Media, and they blew up up into a Russian-Trump conspiracy that didn't exist, all from that single joke Trump told! The Democrats have nothing on Donald Trump, all they can do is spread fake news through their control of these media outlets and that is what they are doing!

kbd512 · 2017-03-27 16:18:46

Tom,

White people are not guilty of doing anything more egregious than the things the muslims have done. The liberals think we can appease the muslims with the right words or gestures. They're every bit as wrong as the British were about the Nazis, but they're either too ignorant or too stubborn to admit that some people can't be appeased. More importantly, some people shouldn't be appeased. Anyone who attempts to rape, rob, or murder their neighbors for any reason need not be appeased by anyone else. If any particular religious person or group doesn't demonstrate that they actually accept those basic tenets of civilized society by following them, then we don't need those people in our society.

Liberals have this inclusiveness personality trait that prevents them from acknowledging the fact that Islam is not an inclusive or altruistic religious group and many muslims don't want to assimilate. The muslims who follow the teachings of the Koran will believe and practice the vile nonsense in their book. The cafeteria muslims, who aren't really muslims according to their own book, only share pieces of flair in common with their less civilized adherents. I can't simply look at someone and tell the difference and neither can you or anyone else. Therein lies the problem. I can't condemn someone who truly wants to come here to live a better life. I also can't ignore the fact that the overwhelming majority of the terrorists we import seem to share a particular religion. Ultimately, the muslims will force us to choose between civility and existence. In fact, I think they already have.

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-03-27 20:11:55

Muslims themselves will need to take care of their own terrorist problem, it is their problem, not ours! We need to show the Muslims that terrorism won't work, they won't get what they want from us if they resort to terrorism, thus we should not show weakness.

GW Johnson · 2017-03-28 15:15:55

Well, for the most part, there are no Democratic-controlled media, anymore than there are any Republican-controlled media, but ONLY if you stick with the same outlets we have used since the invention of television. 90+% of internet sites are fake crap. And then there's Faux (Fox) News, which is right wing entertainment, more than any sort of balanced news (with exceptions for certain individual reporters). Rupert Murdoch said so, when he founded it.

Among the mainstream, there are editorial biases: I can see the Democrat-leaning of NBC in their headlines and rhetoric, but the facts in the stories match the other networks. I haven't paid much attention to ABC since Disney bought them, because entertainment dominates over news now there, by and large. CBS and PBS seem reasonably objective, as do AP and UPI. You have to look at more than one to see the facts-in-common, and so read past any editorial content. Lots of folks claim CNN is neutral, but I see both diluted content driven by 24/7 time-filling needs, and a Republican editorial bias in them.

But, opinions can differ.

I never put any faith in the tabloids, and as I said above, most internet sites are far worse yet. These I class right up there in rabble-rousing stir-up-trouble fake news right alongside talk radio, which in the US is 99%+ far right wing extremist crap.

You have to look at multiple sources, including those you don't much like, before you can tell what is true and what is not. Listening only to what you want to hear is self delusion. It will lead you astray. It always has.

GW

SpaceNut · 2017-03-28 18:46:08

Trump seems to be more intent at taring down all vestige of the last president just like in antiquity... taring it all down to remake it in his own image of perfection.....

So when I hear regulations being removed of all types that were put in place to correct the bad behavoiurs of corporate america from harming the people of america. I see that he is not for the people anymore than the congress or house is these days voting along party lines....

President Trump has signed a bill that repeals the Fair Pay And Safe Workplaces rule enacted by Obama, allowing the shady employers who cheated them on wages and ignored safety regulations that protected them from injuries freely once more.

Movement Launched to Charge Jeff Sessions with Perjury on Russian Scandal from 5 different states are formally accusing Attorney General Jeff Sessions of lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee about his involvement with the Russia scandal that is permeating the Trump administration. Sessions gave false testimony during his confirmation hearing for Attorney General in January when he said that he “did not have communications with the Russians.”

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-03-28 18:58:34

GW Johnson wrote:

Well, for the most part, there are no Democratic-controlled media, anymore than there are any Republican-controlled media, but ONLY if you stick with the same outlets we have used since the invention of television. 90+% of internet sites are fake crap. And then there's Faux (Fox) News,

And there you are tryng to discredit Fox News so the Democrats can have their Media monopoly without Fox telling a different story from what they all agree on!

which is right wing entertainment,

So you'd rather just have Democratic Party News telling you what a great job the Democrats are all doing and what a racist Party the PArty of Lincoln is, and then they can enslave is all! Democrats were the "slave party" that the Republicans opposed, now the Democrats want to enslave everybody, not just black people, they want a one-party state, they want one news outlet disguised as many new outlets but all telling the same story!

more than any sort of balanced news (with exceptions for certain individual reporters). Rupert Murdoch said so, when he founded it.
Among the mainstream, there are editorial biases: I can see the Democrat-leaning of NBC in their headlines and rhetoric, but the facts in the stories match the other networks.

Which are also controlled by the Democratic Party

I haven't paid much attention to ABC since Disney bought them, because entertainment dominates over news now there, by and large.

ABC is left leaning, they had to insert their obligatory gay characters in their television programming, this is all the rage in most leftwing entertainment shows

CBS and PBS seem reasonably objective,

You never heard Roger Mudd try to play "Gotcha" with President Bush? Walter Cronkite was left leaning, he started giving left-leaning editorials about the Vietnam War!

as do AP and UPI. You have to look at more than one to see the facts-in-common,

Those are the big "letter networks" they are part of the establishment, they are left leaning. Fox News is not a "letter network", neither is Breitbart News or CRTV

and so read past any editorial content. Lots of folks claim CNN is neutral, but I see both diluted content driven by 24/7 time-filling needs, and a Republican editorial bias in them.

They seem obsessed with reporting on Rumors of a Trump-Russia connection when their is no evidence, so they are reporting on an FBI investigation of it where no evidence as turned up. How about the lost civilization of Atlantis, is that News? No one has discovered it yet, how about reporting on people looking for the Lost Civilization of Atlantis but not finding it yet, should that be reported as News?

But, opinions can differ.
I never put any faith in the tabloids, and as I said above, most internet sites are far worse yet.

When the Media is corrupt and controlled by the Democrats, then in many cases, we are forced to rely on smaller independent tabloids, maybe they will get bigger and provide competition for the "letter networks" and newspapers such as the New York Times.

These I class right up there in rabble-rousing stir-up-trouble fake news right alongside talk radio, which in the US is 99%+ far right wing extremist crap.

Well the economy did pick up steam when Trump got elected, the letter networks failed to report on Donald Trump surging in the polls right before he got elected, and then his election surprised all of them, did they even try to produce accurate poll results, or was it all propaganda designed to help Hillary?

You have to look at multiple sources, including those you don't much like, before you can tell what is true and what is not. Listening only to what you want to hear is self delusion. It will lead you astray. It always has.
GW

Multiple sources that say the same thing and often are equally wrong in the same way. They were wrong about the election, and then they are trying to lie once more to disrupt the Trump Administration, so why should I trust them after they failed to forsee the Trump victory, why should they be right this time if they were all wrong the last time? Its time ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS got replaced with more honest and truthful news reporting organizations that don't insert their editorial opinions in their news stories! We need to get back to basic journalism, "just report the facts!"

kbd512 · 2017-03-28 22:06:58

SpaceNut wrote:

Trump seems to be more intent at taring down all vestige of the last president just like in antiquity... taring it all down to remake it in his own image of perfection.....

The elections decide who has power in this country and, generally speaking, those of us who helped elect President Trump agree with what he's doing, even if we don't always agree with how he goes about doing it. President Obama said he was going to fundamentally change America. You'll discover from actually talking to people who don't share your political beliefs that not all of us agreed with President Obama's changes. President Obama told the Republicans to go out there and win some elections. Well, that's exactly what we did.

SpaceNut wrote:

So when I hear regulations being removed of all types that were put in place to correct the bad behavoiurs of corporate america from harming the people of america. I see that he is not for the people anymore than the congress or house is these days voting along party lines....

The liberal solution to all of life's problems seems to be more government. That Affordable Care Act was great for everyone, too. That's why we're paying nearly three times as much now in premiums, along with substantially higher deductibles, for fewer benefits. With respect to voting along party lines, has the pot come to inform the kettle that it is indeed "black"?

SpaceNut wrote:

President Trump has signed a bill that repeals the Fair Pay And Safe Workplaces rule enacted by Obama, allowing the shady employers who cheated them on wages and ignored safety regulations that protected them from injuries freely once more.

I'm actually quite pleased that this executive order has been rescinded. The Congress and the Senate could have enacted such legislation if they wanted to, but they didn't. Employees can and should contact OSHA if there are workplace safety violations. OSHA can and should enforce workplace safety regulations. Sexual harassment and sexual assault are already illegal. There was never any need to add executive orders to the existing laws prohibiting those practices.

There is also a federally mandated minimum wage, which would be why we're not competitive with other countries. Cleaning toilets is a low skill and low wage job. It's not a career. Fixing toilets is a career because all the adult children that liberals brainwash in college to believe that they're somehow better than everyone else don't seem to ever want to get their hands dirty.

SpaceNut wrote:

Movement Launched to Charge Jeff Sessions with Perjury on Russian Scandal from 5 different states are formally accusing Attorney General Jeff Sessions of lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee about his involvement with the Russia scandal that is permeating the Trump administration. Sessions gave false testimony during his confirmation hearing for Attorney General in January when he said that he “did not have communications with the Russians.”

We can charge Jeff Sessions with lying to Congress right after we charge Hillary Clinton with lying to Congress about her E-Mail server. While we're at it, we might ask Secretary of State Clinton why a Russian company now owns 20% of our Uranium reserves.

"We feel there is probable cause to charge [strike]him[/strike] her with a crime. We want indictments in the case. We want [strike]Attorney General Sessions[/strike] Secretary of State Clinton to be treated just the same as anyone else. We don’t think that just because [strike]he’s the attorney general[/strike] she's the Secretary of State, that there should be a higher standard to bring charges against [strike]him[/strike] her."

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-03-29 07:20:26

SpaceNut wrote:

Donald Trump, his company and partners repeatedly turned to wealthy Russians and oligarchs from former Soviet republics. Trump's business network reached alleged Russian mobsters and all of this is factural not fake news.....With the devil in the details are all hidden in but the House GOP blocks effort by Democrats to obtain Trump's taxes and with ..... hindering the investigative process as the truth is about to be found out... House panel’s Russia probe effectively put on hold effectively shielding Trump.....Devin Nunes Vows To ‘Never’ Reveal Source Of White House Leak
The other day the company showed Trump in a cab after he had made a deal with them but in the end this is the results Layoffs Set To Begin At Indiana Factory Despite Trump Tweet, Promises The president said he would stop this kind of thing from happening. Trump made saving jobs for blue collar workers a centerpiece of his successful campaign and yet all there seems to be are more job losses with each signing of the pen.....

How does it affect us? That is the most important question of all. The Democrats have shown how useful they can be to the Russians and Soviets. The Democrats have cut the Defense budget many times, they have opposed missile defense, they wanted open dialog with Soviet Puppet states in the East Bloc, it was Barack Obama that opened relations with Cuba, all without asking the Cubans for a thing! As for Putin, I think he needs an Enemy in America, not a friend, he needs that Enemy to distract the Russian population from what a terrible job he's doing with the Russian economy, it wants to take over a number of states bordering Russia, but its not so much that he wants the land, but that he wants to stir up a new Cold War, and the Democrats don't make a good Enemy for the Russians, they keep rolling over and playing dead, worse they apologize for America, and Putin doesn't want that, he need someone he could blame as the Aggressor so when he invades some other country, he could tell his people that the United States started it, and that is a hard story o tell when you got someone like Obama running the United States. Putin never really like Obama very much, he doesn't make a respectable adversary, and Putin needed an adversary.
Trump is more likely to be an adversary than Hillary Clinton was, Trump is his own man, if the Russians helped him, he probably considers them suckers, he's going to increase military spending, he's going to insist that our allies pay their fair share of NATO, he's not afraid of cutting the budget.

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-03-29 07:26:21

Terraformer wrote:

As far as I can tell, you can't even greet a Russian person, if you're in the administration, without your name appearing in the papers the following day alongside claims that you're a Russian stooge.

The Democrats did that a lot, and there appear to be different rules for Republicans than for Democrats, this jus shows you how sick the Media has become, and that it needs to be replaced!

GW Johnson · 2017-03-29 14:07:17

There is no "media monopoly", Tom, liberal/democrat or otherwise. There are only editorial biases coming from the owners, some strong, some not so. If you bother to look at multiple sources, you can pretty much discern what is true and what is allegation.

If the Democrats owned the media the way you contend, Rush Limbaugh would never have been allowed to make such a fool of himself on talk radio. You believe far too much of that far right wing fake crap, that much is clear.

Now kbd512 made a good point about headlines without evidence. That's true. You do have to listen close to more than one source to detect it. It comes from the ratings game, and from the fact that over the centuries, bad news sells, while good news does not.

As for the "media barking dogs" nipping at Trump, if he didn't get his facts wrong so often, they wouldn't be biting at him quite so much. We've seen this before, it's not unique to Trump, and it's not unique to Republicans, either. They're doing exactly what they should be doing, although the style is undesirable, in my own opinion.

GW

kbd512 · 2017-03-29 16:34:12

GW,

The media would attack or cheer lead for President Trump no matter what he said or did. He's a Republican, so one major media outlet will be cheerleading for him and the others will spend their time attacking him. The fact, as if the word "fact" still has any meaning in a post-rational thought America, is that the media doesn't have any facts. The media clearly have political agendas, no different from any particular political party, and generally aligned with particular political parties. Partisanship is not a quality I value when I want to obtain accurate information about the world I live in.

Americans need to simply turn it all off until the people who are supposed to be journalists at the major media outlets decide to start acting like journalists again, rather than the political agenda regurgitators they've become. I define "journalists" as people who collect and redistribute independently verifiable information after sufficient evidence has been presented to characterize the content of the evidence.

Whether from the media, President Trump, the Congress, or the Senate, I've never seen such politically motivated nonsense. I voted for President Trump because I thought our country was headed in the wrong direction. The more poor behavior I witness from the charlatans who falsely claim to be tolerant and inclusive, the more certain I become that my concerns are valid.

People who scream and cry like toddlers over one election result, people who smash store windows or set cars on fire or otherwise destroy the community they live in, and people who threaten to kill people and/or actually assault them over who they voted for are not the sort of people whose political beliefs I need to accommodate. I will not quietly accept the agenda of the opposing political party when so many of their followers have demonstrated all the self-control normally associated with the average two year old when they don't get what they want. Neither should President Trump. And he doesn't. And that's one of his best qualities.

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-03-30 08:06:56

GW Johnson wrote:

There is no "media monopoly", Tom, liberal/democrat or otherwise. There are only editorial biases coming from the owners, some strong, some not so. If you bother to look at multiple sources, you can pretty much discern what is true and what is allegation.
If the Democrats owned the media the way you contend, Rush Limbaugh would never have been allowed to make such a fool of himself on talk radio. You believe far too much of that far right wing fake crap, that much is clear.
Now kbd512 made a good point about headlines without evidence. That's true. You do have to listen close to more than one source to detect it. It comes from the ratings game, and from the fact that over the centuries, bad news sells, while good news does not.
As for the "media barking dogs" nipping at Trump, if he didn't get his facts wrong so often, they wouldn't be biting at him quite so much. We've seen this before, it's not unique to Trump, and it's not unique to Republicans, either. They're doing exactly what they should be doing, although the style is undesirable, in my own opinion.
GW

So getting one's facts wrong makes one rich? I didn't know that! I guess Trump must have started with $100 trillion and now because of his stupidity, he is merely a billionaire!

SpaceNut · 2017-03-31 19:01:41

Tom do you have an answer to why when you are American that you would go an purposely join a terrorist group?
I can say we are creating them....

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-many-am … ined-isis/
August 22, 2014 U.S. government has positively identified a relatively small number of Americans - fewer than 12 - who have joined ISIS, but precise numbers are unavailable and intelligence assessments, Was arrested teen on his way to join ISIS? October 7, 2014 even when caught it seems that the maximum penalty of 15 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

3 men try to join ISIS: Here's what we know

The number of Americans fighting with ISIS overseas or trying to join the group has more than doubled in just the last year. Deputy Attorney General John Carlin said US officials estimate more than 250 US citizens have joined – or have been trying to join – ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

With this more recent South Carolina man accused of trying to join Islamic Group

SpaceNut · 2017-03-31 20:38:54

Trumps economic growth is negative, Despite Trump promotion — Caterpillar will close plant in Aurora, Illinois, that employs 800 with Fox News trying to help Trump take credit for Obama economy while blaming Obama for Bush’s depression. Trump Promised Job Creation — but His Budget Axes Many Job Creation Programs..
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy … on-n734531

American Jobs Are Headed to Mexico Once Again

Illinois Tool Works Inc. will close an auto-parts plant in Mazon, Illinois, this month and head to Ciudad Juarez. Triumph Group Inc. is reducing the Spokane, Washington, workforce that makes fiber-composite parts for Boeing Co. aircraft and moving production to Zacatecas and Baja California.
TE Connectivity Ltd. is shuttering a pressure-sensor plant in Pennsauken, New Jersey, in favor of a facility in Hermosillo.

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-04-01 06:00:54

SpaceNut wrote:

Tom do you have an answer to why when you are American that you would go an purposely join a terrorist group?
I can say we are creating them....
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-many-am … ined-isis/
August 22, 2014 U.S. government has positively identified a relatively small number of Americans - fewer than 12 - who have joined ISIS, but precise numbers are unavailable and intelligence assessments, Was arrested teen on his way to join ISIS? October 7, 2014 even when caught it seems that the maximum penalty of 15 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
3 men try to join ISIS: Here's what we know
The number of Americans fighting with ISIS overseas or trying to join the group has more than doubled in just the last year. Deputy Attorney General John Carlin said US officials estimate more than 250 US citizens have joined – or have been trying to join – ISIS in Iraq and Syria.
With this more recent South Carolina man accused of trying to join Islamic Group

Its called "freedom of Religion," and their "religion" is a terrorist religion that calls for making human sacrifices of other people that are not part of that religion. Maybe we should be less tolerant of religions that support terrorism. As for ISIS, so long as they are attacking us, we will be fighting them until they are destroyed! We don't really have a choice. Do you propose we just sit here and let the kill us without our doing anything about it? ISIS wants a war, we should make sure the war they asked for is intense enough to destroy them, we should stop pulling our punches with them, that only makes them think they can win. The Vietnam War model of gradual buildup doesn't work, it never did! We need to hit them with everything we have! We need to wage total war on them until they are destroyed! Make any civilian populations that fall for their propaganda and help them out regret it, the same way those Germans who supported Hitler got their homes destroyed in World War II! Do Muslims really want this war that ISIS wants, do they want all the destruction that comes with it, its their choice, they can support ISIS, elect radicals to their government and as a result we will go to war with them and destroy their way of life, or they can choose to live in peace with us! We gave Egypt the opportunity to have elections, and they voted for Islamic Warmongers, I don't know why, do they really know how vulnerable their cities are? Do they want to live amongst ruins if they are so lucky as to survive?

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-04-01 06:07:46

SpaceNut wrote:

Trumps economic growth is negative, Despite Trump promotion — Caterpillar will close plant in Aurora, Illinois, that employs 800 with Fox News trying to help Trump take credit for Obama economy while blaming Obama for Bush’s depression. Trump Promised Job Creation — but His Budget Axes Many Job Creation Programs..
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy … on-n734531
American Jobs Are Headed to Mexico Once Again
Illinois Tool Works Inc. will close an auto-parts plant in Mazon, Illinois, this month and head to Ciudad Juarez. Triumph Group Inc. is reducing the Spokane, Washington, workforce that makes fiber-composite parts for Boeing Co. aircraft and moving production to Zacatecas and Baja California.
TE Connectivity Ltd. is shuttering a pressure-sensor plant in Pennsauken, New Jersey, in favor of a facility in Hermosillo.

The Democrats are doing all they can to prevent Trump's economic program from working, they are voting against everything, they are trying to sabotage his cabinet nominations, they don't really care about the American People, they never did, it was all about their careers, their perks and privileges, the American People were just a means to that end. he thing that works in their favor is that there are always more poor people than rich people, so the Democrats tax the rich to pay the poor people to vote for them. The rich are a source of jobs and economic growth, but Democrats are willing to sacrifice long term growth for short term redistribution, and that ends up making the country poor. A lot of countries in the Third World stay poor because their governments have redistributive economic policies.

GW Johnson · 2017-04-01 09:35:31

The Dems are doing to the GOP exactly what the GOP did for 7 years to the Dems: obstruct everything. Why would you expect otherwise in an overhyped environment? Is not turnabout fair play?

As for the GOP, it is amazing to me that they think they are fit to govern at all. A minority within them seems to either control them or block the rest from governing properly. That would be the "Freedom Caucus" or "Tea Party" or whatever name applies these days.

You can add to that the 7-year lie that they had a viable plan that could replace Obamacare. They so clearly did not.

As long as they are so divided, and so prone to egregious lying, they really are unfit to govern.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2017-04-01 09:35:52)

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-04-01 10:53:27

GW Johnson wrote:

The Dems are doing to the GOP exactly what the GOP did for 7 years to the Dems: obstruct everything. Why would you expect otherwise in an overhyped environment? Is not turnabout fair play?

What did Donald Trump do for the last seven years?

As for the GOP, it is amazing to me that they think they are fit to govern at all.

This is the founder of the Freedom Caucus.

A minority within them seems to either control them or block the rest from governing properly. That would be the "Freedom Caucus" or "Tea Party" or whatever name applies these days.
You can add to that the 7-year lie that they had a viable plan that could replace Obamacare. They so clearly did not.
As long as they are so divided, and so prone to egregious lying, they really are unfit to govern.
GW

So you are saying that if you can sabotage them, they are unfit to govern and to Hell with the American People! Is that what you're saying? This is all about who has the power and who does not, never mind what the people sent them to Congress to do!

SpaceNut · 2017-04-02 09:04:32

Popular Japanese fashion chain Uniqlo has a message for President Trump: We'll leave the U.S. if you insist we make all of our clothes in America.

The complete reason for no tarrifs is the companies make a specific level of product with in the US which creates american jobs....

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-04-02 09:25:38

SpaceNut wrote:

Popular Japanese fashion chain Uniqlo has a message for President Trump: We'll leave the U.S. if you insist we make all of our clothes in America.

The complete reason for no tarrifs is the companies make a specific level of product with in the US which creates american jobs....

Don't look at me, I wanted Ted Cruz to be President, but the Media wanted Donald Trump to be the Republican candidate and they got their wish, they just didn't want him to beat Hillary! I viewed Trump as a better candidate than deceitful Hillary, so I voted for him with the understanding that he wasn't going to be perfect. Now as far as trade goes, I believe in free trade, Donald Trump is more of a protectionist, he has to get those protectionist measures past Congress however, so maybe the Democrats will help him out if they end their senseless political war against him! If they insist on resisting Trump tooth and nail, then many of their constituents will lose their jobs to foreign competition, tsk tsk tsk. Trump is also more of a moderate when it comes to replacing Obamacare, too bad the Democrats wouldn't help him out and vote for the American Care Act! Those stupid Democrats were too busy trying to Impeach Trump over a joke he said about the Russians and those missing 30,000 e-mails that Clinton erased, while he was a candidate. The Democrats are a bunch of "Frown Clowns" with no sense of humor, you make a joke about the Russians, and they want to impeach you!

SpaceNut · 2017-04-02 13:07:18

Tom protectionism is equal to lossing jobs as we are no longer a sole source nation that we were back on the early 1900's as all other nations lagged in technology which changed in the early 60's maybe late 50's but we are now a world or global economy of corporate greed and that is driving the jobs out of the US. You need to figure out how to work in this new situation as crawling back into a hole will accomplish nothing under protectionist goals.

When I can buy a cellphone power sync cable for a Dollar but can not buy the replacement pieces to manufacture them for less than a $10 there is a problem. Fix that and you fix the american manufacturing job loss....

I say make the product to which is sold must have a manufacturing in the US for a given % of what business to which the corporation from oversea exports to the US. That creates jobs......

GW Johnson · 2017-04-02 13:48:25

Lincoln has nothing to do with today's Freedom Caucus, Tom.

That movement got started under a different name by Newt Gingrich, Cantor, Ryan, and some others. It picked up on earlier Gingrich-led far-right Republican minority efforts, among all the other factors in the so-called Reagan Revolution. Even that was 120+ years post Civil War.

As for your contention that the GOP is still the "Party of Lincoln", and by implication (or direct statement) the Democrats are still the party of slavery and continuing oppression, that hasn't been true for a very long time now. The so-called "southern conservative Democrats" were the very Jim Crow abusers whose political heritage traces to Civil War-era slavers that you refer to. They deserted the Democrats and became Republicans in the decade following the 1965 Civil Right act! A matter of the public record! Verified fact!

The truth is far uglier (and you won't like it). Both parties completely sold out to corporate lobby money long ago, selling most of us down the river in doing so. The Republicans did this big time by the 1890's, and the Democrats did it during WW2. Both sell-outs are long-ago history now. The proof is in our ridiculously-complex and riddled-with-loopholes-for-only-the-super-rich IRS tax code, and in the fact that only the rich or their backed candidates can run for office. This has been known for decades, and has gotten worse with every single Congress, irrespective of which party controls.

You need not try to maintain that giving away the store to the rich is a good thing. There is NO SUCH THING as "trickle-down economics" that actually works, there never was, and any professional economist can tell you that. They quite often do, in guest columns in newspapers all over America, even today.

That "trickle-down" nonsense is nothing but a political fiction designed to deflect attention away from the fact that the giants just pocket the money Congress gives them in return for their political jobs. It's getting more than a bit worn-out as an excuse. THAT is where Trump’s blue-collar support comes from: people tired of being left behind, by both parties.

“Trickle-down” is just plain BS. THAT is why the recovery after the 2008 crash was so slow, and THAT is why the Great Depression came roaring back in 1937 when the GOP forced FDR to curtail some of his spending on the common folk. We need a simpler code with lower tax rates and ZERO loopholes.

As for the GOP alternative to Obamacare, it was certainly no better than Obamacare, and probably not as good, according to virtually all of the experts who should probably know. It was pathetically-obviously a rushed deal, which is to be expected, if they never actually had a worked-out plan during all those years that they claimed they had one. So they lied, for 7 years, egregiously.

What I see in your responses to things you don't like is (1) trying to divert attention with fake political facts like your "Lincoln = freedom caucus", and (2) trying to divert attention with false claims that I (or others) said something that we most certainly did not say.

This is a pretty common response that I (and many others) see in someone who lives only in his own echo chamber, where incessant reinforcing repetition leads him to believe only his own fake facts. It is known among the social scientists that confronting such echo-chamber types with actual facts almost never changes their false belief systems, so my post here is probably pointless. But I feel compelled to at least try.

As for Trump, he will stand or fall on his own record. Like all, he will do both good and bad. They all do! It will be the judgement of history some years hence, not you, not me, whether Trump does more good than bad, or more bad than good. (My opinion is only my opinion: it appears to me that he will do more bad than good, but not deliberately so.) I also thought it would have been about the same with HRC. I didn't like either one of them.

As for the Democrats, I certainly do hope they will obstruct (such as on that botch-up of a GOP healthcare plan), especially on stuff that hurts the poor just to give the store away to the rich. But I also hope they have the maturity, and the sense of civic duty, to work with the GOP on things that really would benefit the country. They used to. Not long ago, in fact.

But for the last 8 years I have seen very little sign out of the GOP that they have the maturity to govern for the common good. For much longer than that I have seen precisely ZERO indication of that same maturity to govern for the common good out of the so-called "freedom caucus" right-wing extremist minority within them. But I have seen that minority exert political control over the rest of the party!

Put those three things together, and THAT is why I said what I said about them not being fit to govern. I and a lot of others (roughly half the voting population) said so at the polls last November.

Extremism in politics gets you needless government shutdowns, at the very least. At the worst, it gets you the Nazis, the Bolsheviks, Pol Pot, and all the rest of the mass-murderer states. Extremism in religion kills people, and it always has. Sometimes by the millions. Very often by the thousands.

Extremism is bad. Very evil. In any venue.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2017-04-02 13:57:39)

GW Johnson · 2017-04-02 16:11:56

Spacenut:

Give Trump a chance to hoist himself on his own petard. My opinion: he will, and before finishing 1 term.

Meanwhile, like all of them, he will do both good and bad. You and I understand what the "bad" may turn out to be. Let's see what the "good" might prove to be. Change is always interesting, if nothing else.

I did see a very amusing Trump bumper sticker the other day. Essentially a Trump caricature profile, with the enormous comb-over hair. Caption read (and I quote): "There will be hell toupee".

GW

kbd512 · 2017-04-03 07:25:10

SpaceNut,

While you're trying to figure out which states are givers vs takers, why don't you consider their history of giving and taking?

Perhaps a somewhat better indicator of how well particular states are doing, financially, is what total state and local debts amount to, what a state contributes as far as inter-state commerce is concerned, and what a state exports to foreign countries.

If our federal government never took money from states to redistribute to other states, then we wouldn't need to concern ourselves with who is giving vs taking. Keep tax dollars local and prevent creation of national level bureaucracies to steal money to later be given or withheld from specific states. I get the feeling that that makes way too much sense.

The numbers in this link entitled "Which States Are Givers and Which Are Takers? And is that even the correct way to frame the question?" are suspect. One year of federal tax money against a population from four years earlier is an invalid data point. I suspect the populations of all states grew or contracted over a four year time period. Do a little more homework on this issue.

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-04-03 09:28:11

GW Johnson wrote:

Lincoln has nothing to do with today's Freedom Caucus, Tom.

Freedom is freedom, the Republican Party has always stood for freedom, that is why the party exists, just look it up in your history books! The Republican Party arose out of the Abolitionist movement to free the slaves, since the slaves were freed, other people have invented other types of slavery such as Communism, and big central governments, the Republican Party has stood for freedom against those as well.

That movement got started under a different name by Newt Gingrich, Cantor, Ryan, and some others. It picked up on earlier Gingrich-led far-right Republican minority efforts, among all the other factors in the so-called Reagan Revolution. Even that was 120+ years post Civil War.

If I recall correctly, the United States wasn't in such great shape under Jimmy Carter, or do you think he was a great President? If your objective was the decline of America, then I suppose Jimmy Carter was great for you! Did you enjoy double digit inflation? Did you enjoy th Iranian hostage crises. Did you enjoy the Space Program during the Carter years? The Soviets were building space stations in orbit, what was the United States doing from 1977 to 1980?

As for your contention that the GOP is still the "Party of Lincoln", and by implication (or direct statement) the Democrats are still the party of slavery and continuing oppression, that hasn't been true for a very long time now. The so-called "southern conservative Democrats" were the very Jim Crow abusers whose political heritage traces to Civil War-era slavers that you refer to. They deserted the Democrats and became Republicans in the decade following the 1965 Civil Right act! A matter of the public record! Verified fact!

Was there long lines at the voter registration office as millions and millions of voters decided to switch parties because Richard Nixon told them too? You know most of the Republicans supported the voters rights act, most of the Democrats did not! So your saying all those Southern Democrats woke up one day and decided to become Republicans? Why? Did Richard Nixon promise to reimpose slavery, send the blacks back down to the plantations to pick cotton? I don't recall that ever happening. What was the issue that got millions of voters to switch parties?

The truth is far uglier (and you won't like it). Both parties completely sold out to corporate lobby money long ago, selling most of us down the river in doing so. The Republicans did this big time by the 1890's, and the Democrats did it during WW2. Both sell-outs are long-ago history now. The proof is in our ridiculously-complex and riddled-with-loopholes-for-only-the-super-rich IRS tax code, and in the fact that only the rich or their backed candidates can run for office. This has been known for decades, and has gotten worse with every single Congress, irrespective of which party controls.

Some politicians forgot what their parties stand for, the Republican Party is the party of Freedom, it is the party of Lincoln. The Democratic Party is the Party of Andrew Jackson, now both parties have wandered around since their founding, but which party has stayed truer to its roots? Is the Democratic Party still the Party of Andrew Jackson? Andrew Jackson was a slave owner who believed in a small minimal Federal Government, and in States Rights, which Democratic politicians adhere to Jackson's philosophy today? Would you want today's Democratic Party to adhere to what Andrew Jackson believed in? Abraham Lincoln on the other hand had a philosophy that is more in line with modern times. Republicans aren't ashamed to call their party the party of Lincoln, can you say the same about the Democratic Party?

You need not try to maintain that giving away the store to the rich is a good thing.

The rich already own the store, we aren't giving away anything to them, we are letting them keep more of what they own, rather than trying to redistribute it.

There is NO SUCH THING as "trickle-down economics" that actually works, there never was, and any professional economist can tell you that. They quite often do, in guest columns in newspapers all over America, even today.

My father was an Economist, not a professor, he did Economic forecasting for Chase Bank and New York Life, he actually practiced economics rather than just taught it, as many professors do. His professor was Milton Friedman, at the University of Chicago, before that school was taken over by Socialist-Leftists who said big government spending was good!

That "trickle-down" nonsense is nothing but a political fiction designed to deflect attention away from the fact that the giants just pocket the money Congress gives them in return for their political jobs. It's getting more than a bit worn-out as an excuse. THAT is where Trump’s blue-collar support comes from: people tired of being left behind, by both parties.

There is a difference between government spending and letting people keep the money they earned, what you described above is a government contractor, the government decides to pay Boeing to build a rocket under a cost plus contract, in that case Boeing does decide to pocket the money and give the government as little as they can get away with for what they've been paid to do, that is not the same as taxing rich people less! People work hard for the most part for the money they earn, it is their money before the government takes some of it away from them, it is not money that the government gives them. If you want an example of the government giving away money, look up the Earned Income Tax Credit.

“Trickle-down” is just plain BS. THAT is why the recovery after the 2008 crash was so slow,

Maybe it had something to do with Barack Obama's economic policies, and you are just making excuses for his failures, so if the Economy comes roaring back during the Trump Administration, are you going to say that was just a coincidence?

and THAT is why the Great Depression came roaring back in 1937 when the GOP forced FDR to curtail some of his spending on the common folk. We need a simpler code with lower tax rates and ZERO loopholes.

If FDR's policies were such a success, then how come the Republicans were in any position to do that? FDR assumed office in 1933, if his policies were such a success, the Congress should have been full of Democrats, but as you stated it was not. If the voters were satisfied with what FDR did during his first term, how come they elected Republicans in 1936? The United States might have been better off if FDR was a one term President instead of a three term president that got elected for a fourth term.

As for the GOP alternative to Obamacare, it was certainly no better than Obamacare, and probably not as good, according to virtually all of the experts who should probably know.

It was called "Obamacare light" by those in the Freedom Caucus that did not support it.

It was pathetically-obviously a rushed deal, which is to be expected, if they never actually had a worked-out plan during all those years that they claimed they had one. So they lied, for 7 years, egregiously.

There are a lot of "Mush Republicans" in the Republican Party, because the Left Wing Media allowed them to stay in office in their Red States. These are Republicans that are in office just so they can stay in power, they don't have firm political beliefs for which they are willing to sacrifice their jobs for, when they media blows against them, they are good and camouflaging themselves, they didn't really oppose Obamacare in the first place, they let it pass when they could have stopped it, by defunding it, but they were afraid of the media blaming them for "shutting down the government" when it was actually Obama that was shutting down the government and holding it hostage. These Mush Republicans are only interested in keeping their jobs, these aren't the Republicans I'm talking about. Unlike the Democrats where everyone is an "Obama Zombie" and willing to walk off the cliff for their master, republicans are individuals with many different viewpoints, it is hard for them to compete with a Zombie Party where all act in unison and do whatever their master tells them to.

What I see in your responses to things you don't like is (1) trying to divert attention with fake political facts like your "Lincoln = freedom caucus", and (2) trying to divert attention with false claims that I (or others) said something that we most certainly did not say.

Do you have evidence that Lincoln would not have supported the Freedom Caucus, well lets have it if you do? The Freedom Caucus is more in line with Lincoln than Obama was ever with Andrew Jackson. Do you know any "Andrew Jackson Democrats" by any chance? Why do you suppose the Democrats wanted to remove the image of their founder from the $20 bill?

This is a pretty common response that I (and many others) see in someone who lives only in his own echo chamber, where incessant reinforcing repetition leads him to believe only his own fake facts. It is known among the social scientists that confronting such echo-chamber types with actual facts almost never changes their false belief systems, so my post here is probably pointless. But I feel compelled to at least try.

Well, what did Lincoln stand for, and how is the modern Republican Party not following his principles?

As for Trump, he will stand or fall on his own record. Like all, he will do both good and bad. They all do! It will be the judgement of history some years hence, not you, not me, whether Trump does more good than bad, or more bad than good. (My opinion is only my opinion: it appears to me that he will do more bad than good, but not deliberately so.) I also thought it would have been about the same with HRC. I didn't like either one of them.

A lot of Democrats however seem willing to judge him from day one, before he has actually done anything! They have not even given him a chance to do anything they could legitimately criticize, they declared war on him from the moment he was sworn in office. I have to say Donald Trump has faced more prejudice as President than Obama ever has, and that is despite the fact that Obama is black, and that he calls this nation that elected him President "racist!"

As for the Democrats, I certainly do hope they will obstruct (such as on that botch-up of a GOP healthcare plan), especially on stuff that hurts the poor just to give the store away to the rich. But I also hope they have the maturity, and the sense of civic duty, to work with the GOP on things that really would benefit the country. They used to. Not long ago, in fact.

Seems to be they would have done better to let them pass it and let it fail, if they really thought it wouldn't work. If the Republicans replaced Obamacare with something that doesn't work, then the Republicans would get the blame. If the Democrats just get in the way and prevent the Republicans from doing anything, I don't see how they get the blame for anything that fails. The Republicans can just blame the Democrats for being obstructionists and for being the "party of no!"

But for the last 8 years I have seen very little sign out of the GOP that they have the maturity to govern for the common good.

That is because for the past 8 years Obama was President, majorities in Congress don't govern, Presidents do!

For much longer than that I have seen precisely ZERO indication of that same maturity to govern for the common good out of the so-called "freedom caucus" right-wing extremist minority within them. But I have seen that minority exert political control over the rest of the party!

You know Lincoln was called an "Extremist" by Democrats in his day too! I don't see what has changed! The Democrats have never really been he party of freedom, they did not free the slaves after all, they have not stood up for freedom in the World either, you know about Obama's trip to the plantation called "Cuba" don't you, where he met with the master of all the slaves living there. Did Obama give a damn about Cuba's lack of freedom? No he did not. Remember the escaped fugitive slave named Elian Gonzales? What did the Clinton Administration do with him? Why return him to his master, Fidel Castro. The United States had good relations with that slave owning nation in the Caribbean under Obama.

Put those three things together, and THAT is why I said what I said about them not being fit to govern. I and a lot of others (roughly half the voting population) said so at the polls last November.

You sure are very judgemental of a President that has only been in office for a couple of months, is he the Fascist you said he was? Doesn't look like it!

Extremism in politics gets you needless government shutdowns, at the very least. At the worst, it gets you the Nazis, the Bolsheviks, Pol Pot, and all the rest of the mass-murderer states. Extremism in religion kills people, and it always has. Sometimes by the millions. Very often by the thousands.

And add to that Donald Trump, really! is the Freedom Caucus Extremist? All they really want to do is follow the Constitution, unlike some of those others you listed above. The Nazis, the Bolsheviks, and Pol Pot were all leaders of one-party states, they had eliminate their competition and were in a position to do those murderous deeds, because there was no one left in their country in a position to hold them in check. The Democrats had come very close to establishing a one-party state of their own with their control of the media, that I why they are angry with Trump for spoiling their chance to become the next "Pol Pot" or whatever they wanted to do with the American people without opposition.

Extremism is bad. Very evil. In any venue.
GW

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2017-04-03 09:34:58)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#601 2017-03-27 11:34:06

Re: Politics

#602 2017-03-27 16:18:46

Re: Politics

#603 2017-03-27 20:11:55

Re: Politics

#604 2017-03-28 15:15:55

Re: Politics

#605 2017-03-28 18:46:08

Re: Politics

#606 2017-03-28 18:58:34

Re: Politics

#607 2017-03-28 22:06:58

Re: Politics

#608 2017-03-29 07:20:26

Re: Politics

#609 2017-03-29 07:26:21

Re: Politics

#610 2017-03-29 14:07:17

Re: Politics

#611 2017-03-29 16:34:12

Re: Politics

#612 2017-03-30 08:06:56

Re: Politics

#613 2017-03-31 19:01:41

Re: Politics

#614 2017-03-31 20:38:54

Re: Politics

#615 2017-04-01 06:00:54

Re: Politics

#616 2017-04-01 06:07:46

Re: Politics

#617 2017-04-01 09:35:31

Re: Politics

#618 2017-04-01 10:53:27

Re: Politics

#619 2017-04-02 09:04:32

Re: Politics

#620 2017-04-02 09:25:38

Re: Politics

#621 2017-04-02 13:07:18

Re: Politics

#622 2017-04-02 13:48:25

Re: Politics

#623 2017-04-02 16:11:56

Re: Politics

#624 2017-04-03 07:25:10

Re: Politics

#625 2017-04-03 09:28:11

Re: Politics

Board footer