|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: U.S. Presidential Election 2016
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Churchill's blunder at Gallipoli must be acknowledged, and the attempts to explain away the disaster as either the fault of those putting the idea into action, and then onto those actually engaged in the battle are just attempts. None has been persuasive.
To whom? You? Obviously they were persuasive to the people making them.
If people want to be persuaded that the Greatest Living Englishman was just that, then they will be thus persuaded.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Churchill's blunder at Gallipoli must be acknowledged, and the attempts to explain away the disaster as either the fault of those putting the idea into action, and then onto those actually engaged in the battle are just attempts. None has been persuasive.
To whom? You? Obviously they were persuasive to the people making them.
If people want to be persuaded that the Greatest Living Englishman was just that, then they will be thus persuaded.
This most clearly does not answer the question posed. One wonders why it was even posted.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Churchill's blunder at Gallipoli must be acknowledged, and the attempts to explain away the disaster as either the fault of those putting the idea into action, and then onto those actually engaged in the battle are just attempts. None has been persuasive.
To whom? You? Obviously they were persuasive to the people making them.
If people want to be persuaded that the Greatest Living Englishman was just that, then they will be thus persuaded.
This most clearly does not answer the question posed. One wonders why it was even posted.
I wonder why I bother too at times.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Churchill's blunder at Gallipoli must be acknowledged, and the attempts to explain away the disaster as either the fault of those putting the idea into action, and then onto those actually engaged in the battle are just attempts. None has been persuasive.
To whom? You? Obviously they were persuasive to the people making them.
Just because people believe things doesn't mean their opinions are persuasive.
Gallipoli was a disaster and attempts were made to blame everybody but the person who made the decision to go there in the first place.
In this way, Churchill does act like Trump.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Very simply Mousethief, those implementing the invasion plans were following orders, the role of a soldier; in the same manner, those killed in dreadful numbers were again following the orders given them. The strategy was what was at fault and that strategy was developed and ordered by Churchill.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Just because people believe things doesn't mean their opinions are persuasive.
Why does this not also apply to yourself and Gee D?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Churchill's blunder at Gallipoli must be acknowledged, and the attempts to explain away the disaster as either the fault of those putting the idea into action, and then onto those actually engaged in the battle are just attempts. None has been persuasive.
The other major blunder of execution was the return to the Gold Standard in 1925. An immediate and major effect of this was to create what we would now call a recession; in the longer term it deepened the depression in the UK with higher levels of unemployment than would otherwise have been the case.
Churchill also had a romantic attachment to the British Empire and in particular to the Indian Empire. Had he been returned to power in 1945 the transition to independence in the sub-continent would have been delayed and even more blood would have been shed. Along the same lines was his failure to understand the real effect of the Statute of Westminster II and flowing from that his belief that he could direct the deployment of the forces of the Dominions. Fortunately for Australia, Curtin did understand the consequences and withdrew Australian forces for home defence.
Very limited relevance to the US election but an interesting tangent.
Curtin only did what he did because Australia couldn't get it together about the Statute of Westminster, you (Australia) expressly gave Churchill the power to direct Australian forces by not adopting the Statute of Westminster in 1931. That has nothing to do with the Dominions and everything to do with Australian politics.
Churchill never even tried to direct Canadian forces as he hadn't a leg to stand on; we had adopted the Statute of Westminster in 1931 and the question was long-settled. Canada's declaration of war was a few days later than Britain's because Mackenzie-King wanted to make that exact point.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Just because people believe things doesn't mean their opinions are persuasive.
Why does this not also apply to yourself and Gee D?
I'm sorry but what is your point? That we shouldn't give out opinions? Or is it just you don't like the opinions discussed.
This is purgatory and opinions are what is done on every single post. If your issue is with the opinions raised, debate it. Otherwise, I'm not going to engage with a line of reasoning along the lines of "you shouldn't have an opinion".
If you think this opinion about Churchill is wrong, just come out and say it. Otherwise....well I don't really care if you don't want to debate the issue cause this is your problem, not mine.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
If you think this opinion about Churchill is wrong, just come out and say it.
I already have. Perhaps you missed it.
quote:
Otherwise....well I don't really care if you don't want to debate the issue cause this is your problem, not mine.
I do want to debate. For that reason, I asked for names of historians who agreed with you. None were given, only "well it's possible to think it's Churchill's fault." Well clearly. But that's not debate.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Curtin only did what he did because Australia couldn't get it together about the Statute of Westminster, you (Australia) expressly gave Churchill the power to direct Australian forces by not adopting the Statute of Westminster in 1931. That has nothing to do with the Dominions and everything to do with Australian politics.
Churchill never even tried to direct Canadian forces as he hadn't a leg to stand on; we had adopted the Statute of Westminster in 1931 and the question was long-settled. Canada's declaration of war was a few days later than Britain's because Mackenzie-King wanted to make that exact point.
As opposed to which, Menzies announcement was that the UK was at war and that "therefore Australia is also at war". Now that was Menzies, but his comments represented the views of many Australians at the time, and the general theory, clearly misunderstood, of the unity of the Crown. Why did not Australia not adopt the Statute of Westminster earlier? A range of reasons, one being a strong sentimental attachment to the UK - still called the Old Country and home by many. Then, the Australian population in 1939 was still under 7 million, while the Canadian was probably over 11 million by then; a small country with no large and generally friendly neighbours to speak of.
Mousethief, start with the Official History of WW I under Bean's general editorship. For an official history, the criticism of Churchill is totally unexpected. Then read Serle's biography of Monash, and from there to works such as Jeffrey Grey's work on the war with Turkey. If you want something pretty easy to read, Les Carlyon's book is recent and non-academic.
Don't forget that Australia had recorded victories over Germany in the Pacific, with the capture of all German territory there by the end of September 1914.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Mousethief, start with the Official History of WW I under Bean's general editorship. For an official history, the criticism of Churchill is totally unexpected. Then read Serle's biography of Monash, and from there to works such as Jeffrey Grey's work on the war with Turkey. If you want something pretty easy to read, Les Carlyon's book is recent and non-academic.
Thank you.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Look I hate to be a PITA but Bean's history is 12 volumes long and if 2 thru 12 average the 660 pages of the first volume, that's about 8,000 pages. I love reading about ww1, it's my favorite period in history (I'm not being facetious there), but golly that's a lot of reading. Can you point me to a chapter or two?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
I have an excellent memory, but even with that can't point you in the direction of a chapter or 2. Is there an online index? Maybe the Aust War Memorial site may have something.
OTOH, I commend the entire history to you. It is a remarkable piece of work and well worth reading.
[ 23. August 2016, 07:30: Message edited by: Gee D ]
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tukai
Shipmate
# 12960
|
Posted
One whole volume of Bean's history is about Gallipoli - I sold my set years ago so can't remember if it is vol 1 or vol 2.
--------------------
A government that panders to the worst instincts of its people degrades the whole country for years to come.
Posts: 594 | From: Oz | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tukai:
One whole volume of Bean's history is about Gallipoli - I sold my set years ago so can't remember if it is vol 1 or vol 2.
I thought Mousethief was after chapters dealing with the conception of the idea and its subsequent development, submission for approval and then the tactical planning rather than a full description of the débacle.
Really a tangent, but it does help place the idiocy of Trump in some context.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
More accurately we are talking about the idiocy of Jerry Falwell Jr., the Trump minion and author of the original comparison. (I knew he was a dolt, but wanted to confirm it.)
I doubt if Trump himself could name any historical prime minister of Britain.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
Something one might expect in the election campaign would be a discussion of female national leaders such as Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi (and others). How does Hilary Clinton fit in among them? Notice that some of them definitely have detractors as well as admirers.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
Something one might expect in the election campaign would be a discussion of female national leaders such as Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi (and others). How does Hilary Clinton fit in among them? Notice that some of them definitely have detractors as well as admirers.
I'm having a hard time seeing how this is or should be relevant, unless one thinks all women leaders somehow have leadership traits not shared by males, or lack leadership traits shared by males. ISTM she should be compared to other leaders, male or female, governing under (roughly) similar conditions. She is not running as a representative of her sex.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
Yes, we never have earnest discussions about how the penises of prime ministers and presidents has an impact upon their governance. Or at least, not until candidates themselves bring it up, in which case it's fair game. (Tiny hands!)
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Yes, we never have earnest discussions about how the penises of prime ministers and presidents has an impact upon their governance.
Although it can affect pole vaulters.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Curtin only did what he did because Australia couldn't get it together about the Statute of Westminster, you (Australia) expressly gave Churchill the power to direct Australian forces by not adopting the Statute of Westminster in 1931. That has nothing to do with the Dominions and everything to do with Australian politics.
Churchill never even tried to direct Canadian forces as he hadn't a leg to stand on; we had adopted the Statute of Westminster in 1931 and the question was long-settled. Canada's declaration of war was a few days later than Britain's because Mackenzie-King wanted to make that exact point.
As opposed to which, Menzies announcement was that the UK was at war and that "therefore Australia is also at war". Now that was Menzies, but his comments represented the views of many Australians at the time, and the general theory, clearly misunderstood, of the unity of the Crown. Why did not Australia not adopt the Statute of Westminster earlier? A range of reasons, one being a strong sentimental attachment to the UK - still called the Old Country and home by many. Then, the Australian population in 1939 was still under 7 million, while the Canadian was probably over 11 million by then; a small country with no large and generally friendly neighbours to speak of.
Mousethief, start with the Official History of WW I under Bean's general editorship. For an official history, the criticism of Churchill is totally unexpected. Then read Serle's biography of Monash, and from there to works such as Jeffrey Grey's work on the war with Turkey. If you want something pretty easy to read, Les Carlyon's book is recent and non-academic.
Don't forget that Australia had recorded victories over Germany in the Pacific, with the capture of all German territory there by the end of September 1914.
And Churchill can be faulted for exercising the powers Australia gave him in WWII how?
Again, that's a reflection of Australia, not Churchill.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
The consent previously given to the UK Government to exercise those powers having been withdrawn, Churchill no longer had any authority to exercise them. The giving of consent in the first instance and then the subsequent withdrawal did not, strictly speaking, depend upon the Statute. As the adopting Act says, it was passed to avoid any uncertainty in the application of various UK laws in Australia. The Balfour Declaration amply covered what Curtin did and took away what Churchill sought to do.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Surely, as a lawyer you realize the difference between a non-binding motion (the Balfour Declaration) and a statute enabling Dominions to override the Colonial Laws Validity Act.
And nice fast one, GeeD. The Australian adoption of the Statute of Westminster was backdated, so it had to and did contain ex-post-facto enactments and validating clauses. Which is what the title you cited was in fact about.
Again, it's all about Oz, not about Churchill.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
It is idle to complain that Churchill was a racist. You might as well accuse him of not having a Twitter account.
Rubbish. He was derided in his day for his attitudes.
So he was a democrat?
If this were fencing, that would be a definite hit. Nice one Romanlion.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by simontoad:
I'm finally working out my impression of Trump, viz.
Look at audience, place right hand on pate, wiggle hand up and down.
An addition: While waggling hand on pate, repeatedly attempt to turn on one foot, and fall over.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
None of what you say is very convincing SPK. The backdating etc was primarily to deal with the conviction and subsequent death penalties passed upon a couple of Australian servicemen; by and large, Labor governments here were opposed to the death penalty and it was normally commuted.
As to the distinction between the Statute and the Balfour Declaration: George V was sufficiently persuaded by the argument that the Declaration meant that he had to follow advice from his Aust PM to appoint Sir Isaac Isaacs as GG, rather than any advice from UK politicians.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
Meanwhile, in a valiant but perhaps doomed attempt to turn the thread back to the upcoming U.S. Presidential election:
The latest scandal involving Hillary Clinton makes it harder and harder to justify voting for her. Not that there is any viable alternative (sigh). ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif)
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
She only met with 185 people while Sec of State?
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Meanwhile, in a valiant but perhaps doomed attempt to turn the thread back to the upcoming U.S. Presidential election:
The latest scandal involving Hillary Clinton makes it harder and harder to justify voting for her. Not that there is any viable alternative (sigh).
If people didn't hold their noses when voting how many would vote?
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
Oh, here you go.
Vox rebuttal to the AP report here.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Prester John
Shipmate
# 5502
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Meanwhile, in a valiant but perhaps doomed attempt to turn the thread back to the upcoming U.S. Presidential election:
The latest scandal involving Hillary Clinton makes it harder and harder to justify voting for her. Not that there is any viable alternative (sigh).
Well, that seems vaguely familiar.
Posts: 884 | From: SF Bay Area | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
Mrs Clinton has never been easier to vote for or like - her opponent gives her a winning allure.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Yet another really good reason for not voting Trump. Not just for abstaining, but for voting for the only person, however much it might go against the grain, who can stop him.
US citizens probably won't have heard of Nigel Farrage, but he was until very recently the leader of UKIP and is really bad news. in temper and manner, he and Trump are natural bedfellows.
It's the fact that 52% of my fellow countrymen voted moron, driven either by gut emotion of the worst sort, or by 'we'll show 'em', both of which underlie Trump's rhetoric, that is the reason why I - and many others over here - are so fearful that in November, your electors will do the same.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Oh, here you go.
Vox rebuttal to the AP report here.
Pretty much what I thought. You'd almost think that because Trump has almost killed himself as a credible candidate, AP were trying to find something to keep the competitive game alive. A dead cert presidential candidate doesn't have nearly as much media value as a close run thing.
Some strange sense of "balance" exists in the media these days. We got some of that over here during the Brexit campaign.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
Kinda weird that a country where kids don't get educated due to a lack of laundry facilities has spent a lot of time discussing the hand size of one candidate.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
We take an extremely dim view of unilateral swipes at an entire country by the inhabitant of another country. Desist.
/hosting
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Yet another really good reason for not voting Trump. Not just for abstaining, but for voting for the only person, however much it might go against the grain, who can stop him.
Will someone not lock the bastard up? He is not content with damaging one country so he must do a road show? quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Oh, here you go.
Vox rebuttal to the AP report here.
The media are reluctant to give up the ratings gained by feeding the beast. And now that he appears to be losing ground, they are desperate to keep him alive.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lawrence
Ship's Grill Master
# 4913
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Meanwhile, in a valiant but perhaps doomed attempt to turn the thread back to the upcoming U.S. Presidential election:
The latest scandal involving Hillary Clinton makes it harder and harder to justify voting for her. Not that there is any viable alternative (sigh).
To paraphrase Captain Renault: I am shocked, shocked to find politics going on here.
Billions of dollars are given each election cycle to elect candidates in the US. I dare say that a vast amount of it is not truly given altruistically but is given instead to promote self-interest, curry favor and seek access. Some amount is outright bribery up and down the line, local to federal. Some much smaller portion is given in love and charity for the common good.
The Clintons are not the virtuous statesmen we would all seem to want, but are instead practical politicians who know the game and play it. If one wanted as a viable alternative the virtuous statesman, there wasn't one viable candidate this entire process for anyone to vote for. They never would have had a chance. The Clinton Foundation is a philanthropic organization that apparently has spent its money on many good efforts and there is no real evidence that the Clintons gained financially from all the money given it. There is no real evidence, yet, that the Clintons enriched someone or some organization through the State Department in return for a donation to their charity. I readily concede that the Clintons are earning their rewards on earth for their good works, but this whole email "scandal" is pure politics. Yes, I am upset with them for being careless and sloppy when the stakes are so high and when Hillary is the line in the sand to keep Mr. Trump from possessing such a powerful and consequential office. But the Republicans screwed their chances up big time and she is no worse ethically and morally than the other possible candidates who ran this year, and probably better than several of them who ran. And she is certainly miles ahead of Mr.Trump. And, she is also actually qualified to do the job, which Mr. Trump is most certainly not qualified to do.
Posts: 199 | From: Where once you could get a decent Brain Sandwich | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
If you are willing to view POST articles, this one is a hoot. Alexandra Petri is their funniest columnist by a country mile.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Off Centre View
Shipmate
# 4254
|
Posted
I wonder how many people will end up voting for Trump for similar reasons they voted for Ahnold to be California Governor simply for the novelty of it all?
--------------------
Looking for Authenticity in the Corporate Abyss? Change Your Self, Change Your Workplace, Change Your World: www.corporateabyss.com
Posts: 1685 | From: wherever I may wander | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
Oh now that's a scary thought, Off Centre View!
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Off Centre View
Shipmate
# 4254
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemr:
Oh now that's a scary thought, Off Centre View!
Certainly scary for Hillary!
--------------------
Looking for Authenticity in the Corporate Abyss? Change Your Self, Change Your Workplace, Change Your World: www.corporateabyss.com
Posts: 1685 | From: wherever I may wander | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Prester John
Shipmate
# 5502
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Off Centre View:
I wonder how many people will end up voting for Trump for similar reasons they voted for Ahnold to be California Governor simply for the novelty of it all?
Speaking as someone who voted in that election I can attest this is waaaayyyyy different. The level of craziness this time around is significantly higher. I voted "no" on the recall and voted for Arnold because he looked like the most sane option. He actually turned out to be a decent governor. He served as a check on our legislative branch and his appointment for the head of the Department of Motor Vehicles significantly improved services there.
Posts: 884 | From: SF Bay Area | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Off Centre View:
I wonder how many people will end up voting for Trump for similar reasons they voted for Ahnold to be California Governor simply for the novelty of it all?
?
We were presented with a ballot that had two choices: 1. Vote for or against a recall of Gov. Grey Davis. 2. Regardless of your choice on part 1, choose 1 of the 32 people running to replace him.
32. You think Nader yanked the vote around in 2000? 32 candidates. It completely watered down the vote.
The Dems largely voted down the recall, and were divided or indifferent or baffled about the second part. This left the Republicans to rally behind both the recall and Arnie. Arnie was not voted in for his novelty, but because he backed a very pro- big business, socially conservative Republican ticket.
[ 25. August 2016, 23:43: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Prester John:
quote:
Originally posted by Off Centre View:
I wonder how many people will end up voting for Trump for similar reasons they voted for Ahnold to be California Governor simply for the novelty of it all?
Speaking as someone who voted in that election I can attest this is waaaayyyyy different. The level of craziness this time around is significantly higher. I voted "no" on the recall and voted for Arnold because he looked like the most sane option. He actually turned out to be a decent governor. He served as a check on our legislative branch and his appointment for the head of the Department of Motor Vehicles significantly improved services there.
Yeah? Look up his record on education. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
As a fellow Californian, I concur with Prester and Kelly's analysis. The recall was ridiculous-- the central issue, to the extent that there really was one at all-- was later (after the election) proven not to be Gov. Grey's fault but actually the result of illegal misrepresentation on the part of oil companies. But by then the damage was done.
Arnie had a mixed record as governor. He started out governing a bit like Trump-- loud, boorish, I'm gonna do things my way, I'm huge, I know I'm doing, just listen to me. Nothing as extreme as Trump, but similar in his alpha-warrior way of attempting to get things done. This, of course, went over like a lead balloon, he got precisely nothing done, and was slapped down hard by the electorate. To his credit, he reversed tactics at that point, figured out how to work with a understandably hostile at this point legislature, and get things done. He was quite far from the best governor we had but wasn't the disaster he could have been if he hadn't listened and shifted gears.
Based on this experience, we can see what a Trump presidency would look like, even if he dialed down some of his more egregious positions/statements: he'll bumble in like the gubernator did, thinking he's the star of an action hero movie, throwing stuff around and barking orders. The difference being we don't have any evidence that Trump is able to listen to correction and manage a course correction.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
hosting/
We take an extremely dim view of unilateral swipes at an entire country by the inhabitant of another country. Desist.
/hosting
Apologies
The wording was off.
More accurate wording would have been
Weird election going on when there is poverty like (insert example here) and the discussion is about one aspect of a major candidate's physique - something that could be said of many an election around the world actually.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Re the election that gave us Arnold as CA governor:
And those other candidates were a motley crew, indeed. Emerged from the woodwork, fringes, and possibly sci-fi.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
However, the voter's pamphlet made for an interesting read!
Oh, and Prester John (?) said Arnold was a good governor. Opinions vary on that. He did some good things (IIRC, his daughter convinced him to do something for animals) and he was entertaining. But, overall, meh and blech.
I'm just glad that the move to get the Constitution changed so he could be president didn't work.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
hosting/
We take an extremely dim view of unilateral swipes at an entire country by the inhabitant of another country. Desist.
/hosting
Apologies
The wording was off.
More accurate wording would have been
Weird election going on when there is poverty like (insert example here) and the discussion is about one aspect of a major candidate's physique - something that could be said of many an election around the world actually.
The thing is, a careful read of the thread would probably tell you that the hand thing is just a shorthand for (1.) how worryingly paranoid Trump seems to be* and (2.) how anti-trumpeters are more than happy to express their contempt for him by ridiculing his areas of over sensitivity. To correct Freud, sometimes tiny little hands are not just tiny little hands.
And if this guy gets elected, you'd better believe marginalized kids looking for social support from their schools are gonna be a helluvalot worse off.
* To recap, his hands are a perfectly normal size. He gets hand comments because one columnist, decades ago, said they were small, and Trump kept pelting him with photographic evidence of his normalness for years after. The joke is not his physique, the joke is that one of the richest men in the world would give such an abundance of fucks about a one off comment in some lifestyle mag, or whatever it was.
[ 26. August 2016, 03:28: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
